Australasian Plant Conservation
Originally published in Australasian Plant Conservation 18(3) December 2009 - February 2010, p 5-6
Planning and implementing conservation
networks in Sutherland Shire,
New South Wales
Ian N. Drinnan
Sutherland Shire Council,
Sutherland. Email: idrinnan@ssc.nsw.gov.au

Council and
students undertake habitat restoration works as part of the Schools in Greenweb
Program, Sutherland Shire. Photo: Geoff Doret. |
Introduction
Sutherland Shire encompasses an area of 370 km2 on the
southern outskirts of Sydney. The area contains significant areas of national
parks and nature reserves, along with large remnants of urban bushland. The
area is predominantly Hawkesbury sandstone, with minor overlying areas of sand
and shale. The vegetation beyond the formal reserve system is found on both
public and private lands, in remnants ranging in size from 0.1 ha to over 100
ha. These remnants experience varying degrees of isolation, ranging from
reserves connected by corridors more than 100 m wide to small isolated reserves
separated by several kilometres. Remnants also contain a variety of vegetation
types from well represented gully forest occupying substantial areas, to
endangered ecological communities and threatened species found in only small
remnants. The challenge for Council has been to design a conservation network
to assist in managing biodiversity in such a fragmented and diverse
environment.
Researching design
parameters
After searching the literature to find specific design parameters
for conservation networks in urban areas and finding very little, I commenced a
study to identify if fragmentation thresholds existed for biodiversity within
our area (Drinnan, 2005). I selected several reserves of varying sizes and
degrees of connectivity and isolation, and examined the biodiversity within
them, specifically the species richness of plants, birds, frogs and fungi. The
results from this study, along with the general principles identified in
extensive literature searches, were used to develop a series of design
guidelines for our conservation network.
Conservation network
design guidelines
My research found a threshold in reserve size of approximately 3.5
ha, below which species richness declined rapidly. A further threshold of 50 ha
was also noted, above which species composition changed with significantly more
forest interior and rarer species present compared to generalist or urban
tolerant species. Therefore remnants of these sizes and above were seen as
keystones in our conservation network. Other fragmentation parameters such as
corridor width and distance to reserves were found to have a linear
relationship, with species richness decreasing with separation distance and
richness increasing with increased corridor width, but no thresholds were
identified. Accordingly within the network larger reserves were ideally
connected by wider corridors
(Table 1).
Table 1.
Corridor width guidelines for remnants of
different size.
Remnant size |
Desirable minimum corridor width |
100 ha |
200 m |
50–100
ha |
80–100
m |
5–50
ha |
30–80
m |
2–5
ha |
15–30
m |
2 ha |
Continuous
canopy |
Conservation network—from
theory to practice
Once the basic guidelines for the design of the network had been
developed, the on-ground works commenced. The vegetation of the Shire was
mapped, utilising existing databases, aerial photographs and field surveys as
required. Identified remnants of vegetation then formed the building blocks of
a Greenweb Conservation Network (Greenweb) for Sutherland Shire.
Within the Greenweb, remnants and sites were identified as
follows.
- Core areas—areas of high
significance to the sustainability of the Greenweb as they contain key habitat
areas, key linkages and threatened species or endangered ecological
communities. These key habitats are of a size that maintains their viability
and are generally larger than 3.5 hectares.
- Support areas—areas that provide
ancillary habitat or secondary linkages between habitats. They also contain
lands that form a buffer between developments adjacent to key habitats and
corridors.
- Restoration areas—areas that provide
opportunities for the establishment and revegetation of corridors between core
areas.
Figure 1. A
portion of the Sutherland Shire Greenweb Network.
Key: Dark = Core areas, Mid = Support areas, Light = Restoration areas. |
Core areas comprise the key elements of the Greenweb. However
these core areas are not sustainable in isolation and corridors are necessary
to connect them. In some instances these corridors already existed and were
identified as support areas. Where there was a need to create corridors these
were identified as restoration areas (Figure 1).
In addition to a site’s ability to fulfil a particular
conservation role, preference was also given to sites that may play a role in
water quality improvement, particularly riparian areas, and sites which may
facilitate pedestrian as well as fauna movement. This enabled Council to obtain
multiple benefits from some areas within the Greenweb.
From development to
implementation
Once developed, the Greenweb provided the basis for conservation
action in three key areas: development controls; prioritising Council natural
resource management actions; and opportunities to support biodiversity
conservation on private property.
Greenweb development controls
Specific planning controls relating to areas identified within the
Greenweb have been incorporated into the Sutherland Shire Development
Control Plan 2006. The development controls aim to:
- maintain habitats in a size and
configuration that ensures their ongoing viability and sustainability
- ensure connectivity between remnants is
maintained with corridor widths commensurate to the size of habitats they
connect
- minimise off-site impacts to adjoining
bushland from weed invasion, stormwater and pollutant runoff
- landscape with appropriate indigenous
species to maintain and enhance core habitats and vegetated linkages.
Greenweb and Council natural resource management
Sutherland Shire Council has a range of programs that support and
enhance the natural environment of the local government area. These include
tree issue programs, community bushcare, street tree planting, Council bush
regenerators, noxious weed officers and pest species officers. While the
operations of staff and operational work units are governed by annual work
programs, they are often historically based or reactionary in nature. The
Greenweb creates a new framework by which works can be prioritised and
approached in a more strategic manner. This ensures that valuable Council and
community resources are allocated to areas where they will have the greatest
conservation benefit.
Greenweb community support program
While many of the key areas of the Greenweb are located on public
lands, many other areas—in particular corridors and linkages—are located on
private property. In recognition of the significant role these lands play in
the overall conservation of biodiversity within Sutherland Shire, Council
offers residents within these areas support and assistance in managing
biodiversity assets on their land. Support under the program includes:
- vouchers for trees and shrubs from the
Council nursery
- supply and collection of weed bags
- advice on weed
control, plant selection and habitat creation
- additional greenwaste collection service
- regular information, newsletters and fact
sheets
- small grants (up to $2000) to undertake
habitat restoration works on their property.
The Greenweb program has proven very popular within the community
with 12 schools and more than 350 residents currently participating in it.
Conclusion
The development of the Greenweb Conservation Network has been a
key step in the effective identification and management of biodiversity within
Sutherland Shire. The Network has enabled Council to strategically manage its
natural resources and to prioritise traditional work programs to obtain maximum
conservation benefits. In basing the development of the Network on sound
scientific principles, Council is also in a strong position for its external
operations, such as defending conservation based planning decisions in the New
South Wales Land & Environment Court and attracting external grant funding.
Reference
Drinnan,
I.N. (2005). The search for fragmentation thresholds in a Southern Sydney
suburb. Biological Conservation 124: 339-49.
|