Approved NSW & National Recovery Plan Uromyrtus …...Department of Environment and Conservation...

Uromyrtus australis(Peach Myrtle)

August 2005

Approved NSW & National

Recovery Plan

© Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW), 2005.This work is copyright. However, material presented in this plan may be copied for personal use or publishedfor educational purposes, providing that any extracts are fully acknowledged. Apart from this and any other useas permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced without prior written permission fromthe Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW).

Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW)59-61 Goulbourn Street(PO Box A290)Sydney South NSW 1232

Phone: (02) 9995 5000 (switchboard)Phone: 131 555 (information & publications requests)TTY: (02) 9211 4723Fax: (02) 9995 5999Email: [email protected]: www.environment.nsw.gov.au

Requests for information or comments regarding the recovery program for the Peach Myrtle (Uromyrtusaustralis) are best directed to:

The Uromyrtus australis Recovery Co-ordinatorThreatened Species Unit, North East BranchDepartment of Environment and Conservation (NSW)Locked Bag 914Coffs Harbour NSW 2450

Phone: 02 6651 5946

Cover illustrator: Adam Gill

This plan should be cited as follows:

Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW) 2005, Approved Recovery Plan for the Peach Myrtle(Uromyrtus australis), Department of Environment and Conservation(NSW), Sydney.

ISBN 1 74137 387 5August 2005DEC 2005/238

Printed on recycled paper

D e p a r t m e n t o f E n v i r o n m e n t a n d C o n s e r v a t i o n ( N S W ) P a g e i

Approved Recovery Plan Uromyrtus australis

Recovery Plan for the Peach Myrtle(Uromyrtus australis)

Foreword

The New South Wales Government established a new environment agency on 24 September 2003, theDepartment of Environment and Conservation (DEC), which incorporates the NSW National Parks andWildlife Service. Responsibility for the preparation of Recovery Plans now rests with this new department.

This document constitutes the formal National and New South Wales State Recovery Plan for Uromyrtusaustralis and, as such, considers the conservation requirements of the species across its known range. Itidentifies the actions to be taken to ensure the long-term viability of Uromyrtus australis in nature and theparties who will undertake these actions.

Uromyrtus australis is included as Endangered on the Commonwealth Environment Protection and BiodiversityConservation Act 1999, and Endangered on the New South Wales Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995.Uromyrtus australis (Family Myrtaceae) is a tree of warm temperate rainforest from the Nightcap Range innorth east NSW, where it mainly occurs in National Parks and State Conservation Areas with one record forprivate land.

The future recovery actions detailed in this Recovery Plan include: (i) monitoring to detect trends in thepopulation, (ii) research into genetics, such as the extent of clonality, inbreeding depression and differentiationacross the population and (iii) surveys of under-sampled habitat.

It is intended that this Recovery Plan will be implemented over a five year period. Actions will be undertakenby the DEC.

LISA CORBYN

Director General

BOB DEBUS MP

Minister for the Environment

D e p a r t m e n t o f E n v i r o n m e n t a n d C o n s e r v a t i o n ( N S W ) P a g e i i


Acknowledgments

The DEC has prepared this plan in consultation with specialist plant ecologists. The Plan is largely based on adraft Recovery Plan prepared by consultant botanist Nick Wilson under contract to the NSW National Parksand Wildlife Service (now DEC) Threatened Species Unit, Northern Directorate. Nigel Cotsell, NickSheppard, Maria Matthes, John Hunter and Lynn Baker of the Threatened Species Unit, contributed to thepreparation of the Plan and Dianne Mackey and Katrina McKay contributed to Plan preparation and finalisedthe Plan.

The consultant wishes to thank numerous people who provided information about Uromyrtus australisincluding John Hunter (DEC), Robert Kooyman (Earth Process Ecological Services), Gordon Guymer(Queensland Herbarium) and Peter Wilson (National Herbarium of NSW). Maurizio Rossetto (Royal BotanicGardens, Sydney) provided information on the genetic study of threatened plants.

Robert Kooyman (at times with associates) undertook much of the survey work that forms the basis for thecurrent distribution and population knowledge underpinning this Recovery Plan.

D e p a r t m e n t o f E n v i r o n m e n t a n d C o n s e r v a t i o n ( N S W ) P a g e i i i


Table of Contents

Foreword ............................................................................................................................... iAcknowledgments ................................................................................................................ ii1 Introduction................................................................................................................... 12 Legislative Context......................................................................................................... 1

2.1 Legal Status ...................................................................................................................................... 1

2.2 Responsibilities under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 ............................................. 1

2.3 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999........................................................ 2

2.4 Relationship to other legislation ...................................................................................................... 2

3 Species Information ....................................................................................................... 23.1 Description and taxonomy ............................................................................................................... 2

3.2 Distribution....................................................................................................................................... 4

3.3 Land tenure ...................................................................................................................................... 7

3.4 Life history and ecology.................................................................................................................... 7

3.5 Ability of species to recover ............................................................................................................. 9

4 Threats and Management Issues .................................................................................... 94.1 Current threats ................................................................................................................................. 9

4.2 Potential threats ............................................................................................................................. 10

5 Previous Recovery Actions .......................................................................................... 106 Proposed Recovery Objectives, Actions and Performance Criteria .............................. 107 Implementation............................................................................................................ 148 Social and economic consequences .............................................................................. 149 Biodiversity Benefits .................................................................................................... 1410 Preparation Details ...................................................................................................... 1511 Review Date................................................................................................................. 1512 References ................................................................................................................... 1513 Acronyms Used in this Document ............................................................................... 16Appendix 1: Summary of advice from the NSW Scientific Committee............................... 18

D e p a r t m e n t o f E n v i r o n m e n t a n d C o n s e r v a t i o n ( N S W ) P a g e i v


Figures

Figure 1 The fruit, flowers and foliage of Uromyrtus australis.......................................................................... 3

Figure 2 The distribution of Uromyrtus australis in north east NSW.............................................................. 5

Tables

Table 1 Some diagnostic characteristics separating Uromyrtus australis from superficially similarMyrtaceous shrubs and small trees. ................................................................................................... 4

Table 2 General location data for Uromyrtus australis, estimates of population sizes and reservation statusof the land concerned. ....................................................................................................................... 6

Table 3 Estimated costs of implementing the actions identified in the recovery plan................................. 17

D e p a r t m e n t o f E n v i r o n m e n t a n d C o n s e r v a t i o n ( N S W ) P a g e 1


1 Introduction

Uromyrtus australis A.J.Scott is found only in northeast New South Wales (NSW) on the NightcapRange where an estimated 800–1000 plants occuracross 46 locations. The species was first recorded in1953 and is typically located in warm temperaterainforest.

This document constitutes the formal National andState Recovery Plan for Uromyrtus australis and, assuch, considers the requirements of the speciesacross its known range. It identifies the actions to betaken to ensure the long-term viability of Uromyrtusaustralis in nature and the parties who will undertakethese actions. Attainment of the objectives of thisRecovery Plan is subject to budgetary and otherconstraints affecting the parties involved. Theinformation in this Recovery Plan is accurate toAugust 2005.

The NSW Department of Environment andConservation (DEC) has prepared this plan inconsultation with specialist plant ecologists. ThePlan is largely based on a draft Recovery Planprepared by consultant botanist Nick Wilson.

2 Legislative Context

2.1 Legal Status

Uromyrtus australis is listed as Endangered onSchedule 1 of the NSW Threatened SpeciesConservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) and under theCommonwealth Environment Protection andBiodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).

2.2 Responsibilities under the ThreatenedSpecies Conservation Act 1995 and ThreatenedSpecies Legislation Amendment Act 2004

Recovery plan preparation, exhibition andimplementation

The TSC Act provides a legislative framework toprotect and encourage the recovery of Endangeredand Vulnerable Species, Endangered Populationsand Endangered Ecological Communities in NSW.The TSC Act includes specific requirements for boththe matters to be addressed by Recovery Plans andthe process for preparing Recovery Plans. ThisRecovery Plan satisfies these provisions.

This Recovery Plan was placed on public exhibitionfrom 22 December 2003 to 2 February 2004.

The Threatened Species Legislation Amendment Act2004 states that an approved Recovery Plan mustinclude a summary of advice given by the NSW

Scientific Committee with respect to the plan,details of any amendments made to the plan to takeaccount of that advice, and a statement of thereasons for any departure from that advice. Thissummary is provided in Appendix 1.

The TSC Act requires that a government agencymust not undertake actions inconsistent with aRecovery Plan. The actions identified in this planfor the recovery of Uromyrtus australis in NSW arethe responsibility of the DEC. Other publicauthorities may have statutory responsibilitiesrelevant to the conservation and protection ofUromyrtus australis.

Consultation with indigenous people

Local Aboriginal Land Councils, Elders and othergroups representing indigenous people in the areaswhere the Uromyrtus australis occurs have beenidentified and copies of the Recovery Plan sent tothem. Their comments on the draft of this RecoveryPlan were sought. It is the intention of the DEC toconsider the role and interests of these indigenouscommunities in the implementation of the actionsidentified in this plan.

Critical Habitat

The TSC Act makes provision for the identificationand declaration of Critical Habitat for species,populations and ecological communities listed asEndangered. Once declared, it becomes an offenceto damage Critical Habitat (unless the TSC Actspecifically exempts the action) and a Species ImpactStatement (SIS) is mandatory for all developmentsand activities proposed within Critical Habitat.

The declaration of Critical Habitat in NSW is notconsidered to be a priority for this species at thisstage, as other mechanisms provide for its protection.

Key Threatening Processes

As of June 2005 there are 25 Key ThreateningProcesses listed on the TSC Act. Of theseanthropogenic climate change, clearing of nativevegetation and high frequency fire are relevant toUromyrtus australis. In addition to these KeyThreatening Processes, a range of other processes isrecognised as threatening the survival of the speciesin NSW.

Threat Abatement Plans (TAPs) must now beprepared to address the threats posed by these KeyThreatening Processes to a range of animals andplants. As these Plans are developed and theRecovery Plan reviewed, recommendations of theTAPs will be incorporated into the Recovery Planwhere appropriate to this species.



Licensing

Any activity not requiring development consentunder the NSW Environmental Planning andAssessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) or the NSWNative Vegetation Act 2003, which is likely to resultin Uromyrtus australis being picked, or in damage toits habitat, requires a licence from the DEC underthe provisions of the TSC Act or the NSW NationalParks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NPW Act). If theimpact is likely to be significant, a SIS is required.

Other conservation measures

The TSC Act includes provision for other measuresthat may be taken to conserve Uromyrtus australisand its habitat, including the making of a Stop WorkOrder or Joint Management Agreement.

2.3 Environment Protection and BiodiversityConservation Act 1999

The EPBC Act provides a legislative framework forthe protection of threatened species across Australia.An important role of the EPBC Act is to facilitatethe preparation and implementation of RecoveryPlans for species listed under the Act in cooperationwith the States in which populations of listed speciesoccur. In preparing a Commonwealth Recovery Plan,consideration must be given to the role and interestsof indigenous people in the conservation ofAustralia's biodiversity. The Act also seeks to imposethe obligation (arising from the listing) forresponsible agencies (particularly Commonwealth)to adopt protective measures. This Recovery Planwill be submitted to the Commonwealth for approvalunder the EPBC Act.

Under the EPBC Act, Critical Habitat may beregistered for any Nationally listed threatenedspecies or ecological community. When adopting aRecovery Plan the Australian Government Ministerfor the Environment must consider whether to listhabitat identified in the Recovery Plan as beingcritical to the survival of the species or ecologicalcommunity. It is an offence under the EPBC Act fora person to knowingly take an action that willsignificantly damage Critical Habitat (unless theEPBC Act specifically exempts the action). Thisoffence only applies to Commonwealth areas.However, an action that is likely to have asignificant impact on a listed species is still subject toreferral and approval under the EPBC Act.

As Uromyrtus australis is listed Nationally under theEPBC Act, any person proposing to undertakeactions likely to have a significant impact on thisspecies should refer the action to the AustralianGovernment Minister for the Environment andHeritage for consideration. The Minister will then

decide whether the action requires EPBC Actapproval. This is in addition to any State or LocalGovernment approval requirement specified for theEP&A Act or NV Act.

Administrative guidelines are available from theAustralian Government Department ofEnvironment and Heritage to assist proponents indetermining whether their action is likely to have asignificant impact.

2.4 Relationship to other legislation

Additional legislation relevant to the conservationand recovery of Uromyrtus australis in NSW includesthe following:

• National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974;• Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979;

• Local Government Act 1993;

• Native Vegetation Act 2003;

• Forestry and National Park Estate Act 1998;

• Plantations and Reafforestation Act 1999;

• Rural Fires Act 1997; and

• Rural Fires and Environmental AssessmentLegislation Amendment Act 2002.

3 Species Information

3.1 Description and taxonomy

Uromyrtus australis is a tree to a height of about 20metres, with brown, scaly bark and glossy greenoppositely arranged leaves. The leaves are many andcrowded, giving a particular dense appearance to thecrown of the species.

Uromyrtus australis has characteristic pendantflowers that are initially white, then turning pink tomagenta. Flowers are present in November andDecember and are followed by small black berries inApril to July. Fuller description of the species can befound in Floyd (1989) and Wilson (1991).

Uromyrtus australis exhibits stems of variable heightand can occur in all strata of the forest. The stratumin which it occurs is related to forest height andpopulation structure at individual sites (Kooymanpers. comm.).



Figure 1. The fruit, flowers and foliage of Uromyrtus australis.Illustrated by Adam Gill, © Royal Botanic Gardens, Sydney.

(A)

anther

filament



Table 1. Some diagnostic characteristics separating Uromyrtus australis from superficially similarMyrtaceous shrubs and small trees.

Part of the plant Characteristics of Uromyrtus australis

Leaves andbranches

New growth and branchlets with fine, silky, silvery hairsBranchlets brown turning grey (red or red/brown in Pilidiostigma andArchirhodomyrtus)Intramarginal vein absent (present in other species)Oil dots obscure with no distinctive smell when crushed (strong smell inArchirhodomyrtus, Syzygium and Austromyrtus; smell also faint in Pilidiostigma)

Flowers Initially white, turning pink to magenta (other species tending to remain white orpaler pink)Held singly on slender pendant pedicels (no other species has pendant flowers)Distinctive and unique ‘tail-like’ appendage present on the apex of the anthers (notreadily visible to the naked eye and illustrated in Wilson [1991])

Fruit Black berry with few seeds (black in some species such as Pilidostigma, but generallymore seeds, yellow/orange in Archirhodomyrtus beckleri, reddish in Syzygium)

A number of species in other genera of theMyrtaceae can be confused with Uromyrtus australis,especially in the absence of flowers, as their habitand leaves are superficially similar. These includeArchirhodomyrtus beckleri, Pilidiostigma glabrum andspecies of Austromyrtus (sens. lat.) and Syzygium.Some of these species can be found in the samelocalities as Uromyrtus australis.

Table 1 details some of the features that are usefulfor identifying Uromyrtus australis. Figure 1illustrates flowers and fruit. Figure 1 also depicts theshort appendage extending beyond the anther (A),which is a diagnostic characteristic of the genus(Kooyman pers. comm.).

Uromyrtus is a member of the subfamily Myrtoideaeof the family Myrtaceae, which is characterised byfleshy fruits. The other subfamily(Leptospermoideae) has dry fruits (capsular or nut-like) and consists of the larger number of AustralianMyrtaceae, including Eucalyptus, Melaleuca,Leptospermum and others.

Uromyrtus is a small genus in the family Myrtaceae,consisting of around 15 species, four of which arerecognised in Australia (Wilson 1991; Guymer, pers.comm.). The genus appears to be of Gondwananorigin, based on the distribution of extant species(Australia and New Guinea to New Caledonia).The centre for diversity in Uromyrtus is NewCaledonia (Adam 1987).

There are four Australian species of Uromyrtus. Theyare widely scattered and include two species from farnorth Queensland, U. metrosideros (F.M. Bail.) A.J.Scott and U. tenellus N. Snow & G. Guymer. A thirdspecies, U. lamingtonensis N. Snow & G. Guymer

occurs from north-east NSW to south-eastQueensland.

3.2 Distribution

Uromyrtus australis occurs in a very specialisedhabitat, being restricted to high rainfall, high altitudeareas on Nimbin Rhyolite geology in the NightcapRange and nearby areas in north east NSW(particularly Jerusalem Mountain to KoonyumRange). Figure 2 shows the distribution of U.australis in north east NSW. This is a very limitedrange for a plant species, of approximately 13 by 11kms, and is an important risk factor for the species.Indeed, the range is smaller than this figure indicatesas a significant part of this nominal area, particularlyin the south-west, is on basalt geology or is in otherways unsuitable for U. australis.

Uromyrtus australis is patchy within its range, forobscure reasons. U. australis does not occur in allareas of seemingly suitable habitat such as rhyoliticareas of the western Nightcap Range (Stewart &McKinley 1998; Kooyman, pers. comm.) or does soin low numbers.

There are only a few areas with significantconcentrations of Uromyrtus australis, such as theheadwaters of Rocky Creek and the southeasternslopes of Mt Jerusalem. Some additional scatteredand peripheral populations occur such as aroundRocky Creek between Tungun and Rummery Roads,along the upper Gibbergunyah Range, near MtMatheson and on Koonyum Range and BlackbuttPlateau. Discrete populations are separated by areaswhere no U. australis occurs, with greatest continuityon the Nightcap Range to Mt Jerusalem

Figure 2. The distribution of Uromyrtus australis in north east NSW.

De

pa

rtme

nt o

f En

viro

nm

en

t an

d C

on

se

rva

tion

(NS

W)

Pa

ge

5

Approved R

ecovery Plan

Urom

yrtus australis

$

$$

$

$$

$

$$$

$$

$

$$$

$

$

$$$

$

$

$

$

$

$$$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$$

$$

$

$

$

$$

$

$

$$

$

$

$$$$$$$

$

$

Whian WhianSCA

Nightcap NP

Mount JerusalemNP

GoonengerryNP

Nightcap NP

Major rivers

Uromyrtus australisrecords

$T

DEC Estate

LEGEND

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Kilometres

N

Murwillumbah

Byron Bay#

#

Tweed Heads

Lismore

Qld

NSW



Table 2. General location data for Uromyrtus australis, estimates of population sizes and reservationstatus of the land concerned.

Locality1 Tenure Population estimate2

Headwaters of Rocky Creek Nightcap National Park (NP) > 500

Lower down Rocky Creek(Tungun to Rummery Roads)

Mostly Whian Whian State Conservation Area(SCA) with a minor area in Nightcap NP

> 100

Southern slopes of Mt Jerusalem Mt Jerusalem NP > 100

Headwaters of Wilsons River Mt Jerusalem NP > 50

Headwaters of BoomerangCreek

Whian Whian SCA > 40

Koonyum Range (PalmwoodsSpur)

Mt Jerusalem NP > 30

Koonyum Range (formerCompartment 61)

Mt Jerusalem NP > 30

Vicinity Of Peates MountainRoad

Whian Whian SCA and Nightcap NP > 10

Upper Gibbergunyah Range Nightcap NP and Whian Whian SCA > 10

Blackbutt Plateau Mt Jerusalem NP > 5

Adjacent to Goonengerry NP Private land <5

1 This general locality information summarises the main known localities of Uromyrtus australis and is based on Kooyman (pers.comm.) and Stewart & McKinley (1998).2 Estimates are based on Stewart & McKinley (1998), Kooyman (2000a) and Kooyman (pers. comm.) and are indicative only.Determining genetically distinct individuals in the field can be difficult due to the multi-stemmed habit of the species. There mayalso be some overlap of populations.

and the headwaters of Wilsons Creek (Kooymanpers. comm.). The connection between any of theoccurrences and whether the peripheral populationsare relicts or the result of recent dispersal is unclear.Answering such questions is important tounderstanding the ecology of U. australis and torefining its management. The DEC will encourageresearch into this and other related ecologicalquestions.

General locality information with estimates ofpopulation sizes is shown in Table 2. Some olderrecorded locations have not been re-located andsome have been corrected (Stewart & McKinley1998; Kooyman 2000a).

There are no records of Uromyrtus australis fromother rhyolite areas associated with the TweedShield Volcano, such as those to the north and

north west of Mt Warning (the ChillinghamVolcanics) or the outliers of Nimbin Rhyolite to thewest of the Nightcap Range. Any further discoveriesof Uromyrtus spp. from the high rainfall rhyolite onthe Lamington and Springbrook Plateaux(Queensland) are unlikely to be U. australis, giventhe presence of U. sp. ‘McPherson Range’ near thoseareas.

Details of the geology and geomorphology of theremnants of the Tweed Shield Volcano, includingthe habitat of Uromyrtus australis, are available fromnumerous sources (e.g. Adam 1987; RACAC 1996).Rainfall is amongst the highest recorded in NSW,with a 53-year average for Rummery Park in WhianWhian State Forest (SF) (now part of Whian WhianState Conservation Area) being 2368.3 mm, withrainfall certainly greater at higher altitudes.



As discussed in Section 4, there are strongindications that Uromyrtus australis was restricted inits range prior to European land use. Although thereare indications of European impact on populations(Section 3.5) the degree to which the present patchydistribution reflects European land use practices isunknown.

3.3 Land tenure

Uromyrtus australis is known only from WhianWhian SF (now Whian Whian State ConservationArea), Nightcap and Mt Jerusalem National Parksand one record from private land. This plan iswritten on the assumption that this is the completerange for the species.

Habitat

Uromyrtus australis is a species of ‘warm temperaterainforest’ (Floyd 1989; Wilson 1991; Quinn et al.1995). Such vegetation is typified by a closedcanopy, usually dominated by Coachwood(Ceratopetalum apetalum), along with other membersof the family Cunoniaceae, such as Black Wattle(Callicoma serratifolia), Crabapple (Schizomeria ovata)and Corkwood (Caldcluvia paniculosa). Numerousother tree species may be present. A discussion ofthe nature and distribution of warm temperaterainforest can be found in Adam (1994) andelsewhere.

The vegetation corresponds to Floyd’s (1990)‘Suballiance 35. Ceratopetalum/Schizomeria –Caldcluvia’ and is predominantly Simple NotophyllEvergreen Vine Forest in Webb’s (1959) physicalcharacter system. Although principally notophyllforest, the vegetation where the species occurs isreduced to tall microphyll thicket in some areas ofshallow soil.

It is probable that the combination of high rainfall,moderate temperatures and the relatively nutrient-poor podsolic soils derived from rhyolite accounts forthe occurrence of warm temperate rainforest in theNightcap area. Basaltic soils in the vicinity supportsubtropical rainforest.

Sites supporting Uromyrtus australis have thefollowing in common:

• predominantly above 600 metres in altitude;

• Nimbin Rhyolite geology;

• wet and often subject to cloud cover;

• close proximity to Coachwood, although it maybe scarce in some cases (Kooyman pers. comm.;Kooyman 2000a; Stewart & McKinley 1998).

However, Uromyrtus australis is patchy even on theNimbin Rhyolite. Reasons for this patchiness havenot been determined.

Uromyrtus australis can occur in ‘mixed forest’vegetation, where an overstorey of one or moreEucalyptus species, including Blackbutt (E. pilularis),Flooded Gum (E. grandis) and New EnglandBlackbutt (E. campanulata), or Brush Box(Lophostemon confertus) overtops a warm temperaterainforest stratum of varying degrees of development.The status of such vegetation has long beencontroversial (Adam 1994), but it has traditionallybeen available for timber harvesting in State Forests,despite its close relationship to rainforest.

3.4 Life history and ecology

Life cycle

Uromyrtus australis is a perennial, probably with arelatively long life span. Very slow growth rates areevident from analysis of initial growth rate data(Kooyman 2000b). Most stems observable in thefield are small, but Stewart & McKinley (1998)record stems up to 20 cm diameter at breast height(dbh). These larger stems may be four hundred toone thousand years old (Kooyman 2000b).

There is no information on pollinating agents ofUromyrtus australis. However, given the openstructure of the flower, and the general patterns inrainforest taxa, insects such as bees, and possiblybeetles, are most likely to be pollinating agents(Williams, pers. comm.).

Uromyrtus australis is monoecious (hermaphroditic),but there is little further information on its breedingsystem (e.g. questions of self-compatibility versusoutcrossing), nor on effective pollination distances.The latter, however, may be surmised from likelypollinators, and if large bees are pollinatingU. australis, then it may be speculated that relativelylong distances are involved (Williams & Adam1994).

The fruit is a small, fleshy, black berry and wouldprobably be attractive to birds (possibly smaller,generalist frugivores). It is likely that these would bedispersing agents. Based on what is known of thespecies’ biology it is unlikely that a persistentseedbank is present.

Little is known of the conditions required byUromyrtus australis to regenerate from seed. Noseedlings were seen during an inspection of one ofthe larger populations or in extensive surveys(Benwell, quoted in Stewart & McKinley 1998;Kooyman 2000a). Observations of flowering andfruiting suggest generally low numbers of flowers and



resulting fruit with annual variations including someyears with little or no flowering (Kooyman pers.comm.). The flowering season is in November andDecember and fruit is ripe in April and May (Floyd1989). During December 1998, a small number oftrees in several sites produced only a few flowers.While this sparse flowering may have resulted from avariable factor such as poor seasonal conditions, itdoes raise questions about the reproductive ability ofthe species.

Given that areas where Uromyrtus australis occursremain well vegetated, pollinating and dispersingagents are probably still present. Nevertheless, it isunclear whether U. australis can readily recoloniseformer habitat.

In cultivation Uromyrtus australis always has farfewer fruit than flowers (Nicholson and Nicholson1991) but this does not necessarily mean thatfecundity is low. Floyd (1989) recorded a reasonablegermination rate (75%) in a horticultural sample ofunstated size.

Population structure

Uromyrtus australis exhibits stems of a wide range ofheights and can occur in all strata of the forest. Thestratum in which it occurs is related to forest heightand population structure at individual sites(Kooyman pers. comm.).

Data on the height of Uromyrtus australis stems attwenty sites shows that two-thirds of stems are twometres or less, however plants have been recordedup to 20 metres (Kooyman 2000a). Most stems oftrees five metres and over are five centimeters to tencentimeters dbh, however stems have been recordedup to 20 cm dbh (Stewart & McKinley 1998). Stemdensities of up to 1625/ha (for stems greater than sixcentimeters dbh) and 500/ha (for stems greater thanten centimeters diameter dbh) have been recorded(Stewart & McKinley 1998).

The large number of small plants and large numbersof stems with a low dbh reflect the suckering habit(Wilson pers. obs.; Floyd pers. comm. quoted inQuinn et al. 1995; Stewart & McKinley 1998) of thespecies and make population numbers harder toassess.

Predators and parasites

There is no information recorded on predators andparasites of wild populations of Uromyrtus australis.

Disturbance

Uromyrtus australis suckers from the roots and thisalmost certainly gives greater persistence toindividual plants, at least following disturbance.

Uromyrtus australis has been observed to producesuckers in response to mechanical disturbance, suchas the slashing of roadsides in the former WhianWhian SF (Kooyman 2000a).

The closed forest habitat of Uromyrtus australis isrelatively protected against serious external(exogenous) disturbance events. Storms will occurfrom time to time but, while the mid storey specieswould mostly be unharmed, some damage toindividual plants would be likely if taller trees wereuprooted or branches fell.

Drought occurs infrequently in the high rainfallhabitat of Uromyrtus australis. U. australis isintolerant of dry and exposed conditions incultivation (Nicholson and Nicholson 1991) whichis understandable given the moist and protectedhabitat of the species.

The species’ mesic habitat is naturally fire resistantand naturally occurring fires would be rare. Veryinfrequent high intensity fires are possible,particularly following severe drought, and would belikely to have a major impact on vegetation that haddeveloped during a long inter–fire period. However,direct information on the response of Uromyrtusaustralis is lacking, although the species may be firesensitive.

The predominant disturbance regime in naturalhabitat is likely to be gap phase disturbance asindividual canopy trees die. This internal(endogenous) disturbance regime does not producegross changes in the vegetation, but may allowindividual sub-canopy plants to regenerate and growbetter in the relatively brighter conditions of a tree-fall gap.

The dynamics of Uromyrtus australis in response togap phase disturbance or to the more drasticexogenous disturbance events are poorly known andrequire further study. The species has been recordedgrowing with Nightcap Wattle (Acacia orites) whichprobably means that the area has experienced arelatively recent past disturbance event (Stewart &McKinley 1998).

Past silvicultural practices to promote the regrowthof commercial tree species and to establishplantations in the former Whian Whian SF andadjacent State Forests may have adversely affectedUromyrtus australis. The degree of impact isunknown given that the distribution of Uromyrtusaustralis in the Nightcap and Kooynum Range areaprior to European occupation is unknown.Nevertheless, large areas of the predicted habitat ofU. australis, based on a DEC model, is unoccupied bythe species.



3.5 Ability of species to recover

The relative security of Uromyrtus australis habitatsuggests that the species has the ability to recoverand persist in the long term, given sympatheticmanagement. One proviso is whether the specieshas the biological and demographic capacity topersist in the long term even in areas of protectedhabitat, given its restricted, possibly refugial,distribution and the possible influence of past landuse.

It is important that such naturally ‘rare’ species,particularly those with relatively small numbers, beprotected from additional human-induced pressure.They may be susceptible to such pressure becausethey have limited options for dispersal, along with asusceptibility to ecological or genetic catastrophicevents. Because questions remain about theperformance of Uromyrtus australis even in intacthabitat, research is a central recovery action underthis Recovery Plan.

4 Threats and Management Issues

4.1 Current threats

There is no direct evidence of decline of Uromyrtusaustralis within historical time. U. australis hasprobably always been ‘rare’ during the time ofEuropean occupation, with specific habitat needs.

Forestry was the principal extractive land use in thehabitat of Uromyrtus australis. However, conclusionsabout the impact of forestry activities on U. australisare sketchy due to a lack of information. Forestryactivities since 1999 in the vicinity of U. australiswere regulated by conditions of the TSL under theIFOA but the area has now been transferred to theDEC.

Low numbers

Total numbers of Uromyrtus australis are low,possibly as few as 800 individuals confirmed in thewild based on Stewart & McKinley (1998),Kooyman (2000a) and Kooyman (pers. comm.).Important population information is lacking, notablythe degree of interconnection through pollinationand dispersal, as is insight into effective populationsize (the average number of individuals in apopulation that are actually contributing genes tosuccessive generations [Ne]) (Nunney and Elam1994).

Fire

It is not known if Uromyrtus australis can suckerfollowing fire, but it is expected that it may suckerfollowing low intensity fires. No population or

specimen of the species is known to have beenaffected by fire over the past twenty years. However,given the current state of knowledge, it isprecautionary to class the species as fire sensitive,particularly with respect to intense fires. Therefore,fires, whether wildfire or on a smaller scaleassociated with silviculture or fuel reductionburning, may be a significant threat to U. australis.

Fire Management Strategies (FMSs) are theprincipal planning documents for fire managementon the National Park Estate, including fuel hazardreduction burns. Draft FMSs are being prepared forNightcap and Mt Jerusalem NPs. Information onthe likely fire response of Uromyrtus australis and thecommunity in which it occurs, generally warmtemperate rainforest, will be considered indevelopment of the strategy. A FMS will also needto be prepared for Whian Whian SCA.

Bush Fire Risk Management plans prepared for eachLocal Government Area and corresponding Plans ofOperations address general fire protection andcontrol measures until FMSs are adopted. Theseplans are also required to consider the requirementsof threatened species.

Roads and road maintenance

In the past, road construction, maintenance androadside slashing has affected Uromyrtus australis inWhian Whian SF when it was managed by SFNSW(now Forests NSW). A number of large populationshave been fragmented and some small populationssubstantially affected. These small populations nowpersist on and adjacent to roadsides (Kooyman pers.comm.).

Plants have now been marked in situ and DEC willensure plants are not damaged now the area is partof DEC estate. The proportion of individuals onroadsides that have been marked is unknown. U.australis is able to sucker from the roots soindividuals may survive incidental mechanicaldamage however this does not mean that the speciesis tolerant of roadside slashing. Further, the impactof roads on the clonal populations that theyfragment is not known (Kooyman pers. comm.).

Mining

The Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) hasissued an exploration licence to Diamond Rose NLfor the purpose of conducting exploration activitiesfor the presence and extent of Group 6 minerals(Corundrum, Diamond, Ruby and Sapphire) withinan area exceeding 200 km2, including the recentlygazetted Whian Whian SCA. The NPW Act permitscertain prospecting and mining activities within stateconservation areas with the concurrence of theMinister responsible for the administration of the

D e p a r t m e n t o f E n v i r o n m e n t a n d C o n s e r v a t i o n ( N S W ) P a g e 1 0


NPW Act. Prospecting and mining in national parksand nature reserves is prohibited.

Potential threats to Uromyrtus australis fromprospecting and mining include damage to individualspecimens and their habitat.

Grazing, Disease and Weeds

The threat posed by grazing, disease and weeds hasbeen assessed as low.

4.2 Potential threats

Logging

The threat logging poses to the occurrence ofUromytus austalis on private land is unknown andwill be determined during the life of the plan.Logging on private land is regulated under the NVAct.

Climate change

A longer-term threat to Uromyrtus australis may beclimate change brought about by anthropogenicactivities, either directly or through other agents,such as increased fire frequency. While this mightbe said for many species, it can be speculated that U.australis may be susceptible as a species withrelatively low numbers occupying a specialisedhighland habitat, with few options for lateral oraltitudinal migration. Recovery actions cannotremove this threat per se., however maintaining themaximum numbers of individuals and the quality ofthe habitat may provide greater resilience to climatechange, thereby increasing the imperative to protectall populations.

5 Previous Recovery Actions

Surveys and monitoring

Stewart & McKinley (1998) surveyed arepresentative range of Uromyrtus australis sites anddocumented abundance, distribution, sitecharacteristics and threats at these sites. Kooyman(2000a) sampled additional sites and surveyedpotential habitat to assist understanding of U.australis distribution, population numbers andhabitat.

Kooyman (2000b) designed a monitoring program todetermine whether wild populations of Uromyrtusaustralis are declining spatially and/or numericallyand implemented the initial stages of the program.

Management plans

A Plan of Management (NPWS 2004) whichincorporates Nightcap and Mt Jerusalem NPs wasadopted on the 15 November 2005. The plan:

• states that once threatened species RecoveryPlans are finalised the Plan of Management willneed to be reviewed to ensure consistency,

• includes as a desired biodiversity outcome toconserve populations of threatened species andtheir habitat, and

• includes as a desired fire management outcomethe exclusion of fire from rainforest and wetsclerophyll communities.

A plan will be prepared for Whian Whian StateConservation Area .

Habitat protection and management

Measures for the conservation of Uromyrtus australisin wood production areas of State Forests aredetailed in the TSL of the IFOA for the Upper andLower North East Regions. SFNSW is required toimplement the conditions of each IFOA, whilst theDEC is required to monitor and enforce compliancewith conditions.

As stated previously, no specimens of Uromyrtusaustralis are currently known from Forests NSW(FNSW) land.

Ex-situ Cultivation

Four Uromyrtus australis individuals are incultivation at the North Coast Regional BotanicGarden in parts of the Gardens devoted to rare andendangered plants and to rainforest. The plants arebeing cultivated primarily for public educationpurposes (Alex Floyd, pers. comm.). U. australis isalso cultivated at the Botanic Gardens of Adelaide,the Agricultural Research Institute, Wagga Wagga,the Royal Botanical Gardens Mt Annan Annex andthe Australian National Botanical Gardens,Canberra (Australian Network for PlantConservation, quoted in Quinn et al. 1995).

6 Proposed Recovery Objectives, Actionsand Performance Criteria

The overall objective of this Recovery Plan is toprotect populations of Uromyrtus australis fromdecline by human-induced impacts, and to ensurethat wild populations of U. australis remain viable inthe long term.

Specific objectives of this Recovery Plan are listedbelow. Recovery actions, each with a performancecriterion, have been developed for the thirteenobjectives.



Objective 1: Improve the consideration ofUromyrtus australis in environmental impactassessment for developments and activities.

Action 1.1:

The DEC will develop and distribute standard surveyand environmental assessment guidelines for Uromyrtusaustralis to all relevant DEC staff and consentauthorities.

A standard, minimum survey effort should beundertaken when determining if Uromyrtus australisis present in or near the area of a potentialdevelopment or activity. Presence of the speciesshould require implementation of effectivemitigation measures to reduce or eliminate theimpact of a proposed development or activity.

Performance Criterion: Standard survey andenvironmental assessment guidelines are developedand distributed within the life of the plan.

Action 1.2:

The DEC will implement the Memorandum ofUnderstanding (MOU) between the DEC and theDMR and the associated guidelines for a review ofenvironmental factors in relation to any prospecting ormining proposed in Whian Whian SCA. The DEC willoppose prospecting and mining proposals that may causeadverse impacts to specimens of Uromyrtus australisand their habitat.

Prospecting and mining activities have the potentialto damage or destroy specimens of Uromytrusaustralis and to damage its habitat. Implementationof the MOU’s ‘Guidelines for completing a review ofenvironmental factors covering exploration in stateconservation areas’ will ensure that adequateenvironmental impact assessment processes areundertaken, appropriate mitigation measures areapplied, the necessary approvals are obtained andthe management of exploration and mining ismonitored and reviewed.

Objective 2: Restrict the licensing of picking ofUromyrtus australis under the TSC Act or theNPW Act.

Action 2.1:

The DEC will not grant a licence under the TSC Act orthe NPW Act to collect propagation material fromUromyrtus australis unless collection is consistent withthe Recovery Program.

Actions that do not require a consent or approvalunder the EP&A Act may require a licence underthe TSC Act or the NPW Act, for example,collection of propagation material. Uromyrtusaustralis seedlings have not been observed in recentextensive surveys (Kooyman 2000a) and information

on reproduction biology is lacking. In view of this,licences will not be issued for the collection ofpropagation material, beyond the requirements ofany recovery actions in this plan, until furtherinformation is known.

Performance Criterion: No licences are grantedunder the TSC Act or the NPW Act for collectionof propagation material from Uromyrtus australisunless collection is part of the Recovery Program.

Objective 3: To familiarise landholders and publicauthority staff with Uromyrtus australis.

Action 3.1:

Staff from DEC, Rous County Council (RCC) andLismore City Council (LCC) and landholders directlyresponsible for the management of Uromyrtus australispopulations and habitat will be made familiar with thespecies in the field.

Currently, Uromyrtus australis is only known fromDEC estate and one location on private land.However, LCC and RCC have managementresponsibilities for adjacent land where U. australismay be present but has not been recorded. Agencystaff familiar with U. australis are unlikely toinadvertently damage the plant in the course of theirduties and are more likely to note and report newrecords and any damage that may occur by othermeans, for example, storms. Landholders are lesslikely to inadvertently damage the plant if they arefamiliar with its appearance, habitat and location.

Performance Criterion: Appropriate agency staff andlandholders participate in the Uromyrtus australisfamiliarisation field sessions. Familiarisation sessionswill be offered within the life of the plan andrelevant agencies and landholders will be invited toparticipate.

Objective 4: To protect roadside populations ofUromyrtus australis.

Action 4.1:

The DEC will develop and implement a marking systemfor roadside occurrences of Uromyrtus australis in areasunder its management.

The development and implementation of a markingsystem will assist DEC staff to identify Uromyrtusaustralis populations on roadsides and will help toprotect it from inadvertent damage by roadsidemaintenance practices.

Performance criteria: A marking system forUromyrtus australis populations on roadsides isdeveloped and implemented by the DEC in areasunder its management within the life of the plan.



Action 4.2:

The DEC will review roadside maintenance practices inmarked areas and, if necessary, modify practices toensure the protection of Uromyrtus australis populationsand their habitat.

Some roadside maintenance practices e.g.mechanised slashing, can pose a threat to Uromyrtusaustralis populations. Practices used in marked areasneed to ensure the protection of roadsidepopulations.

Performance criteria: No Uromyrtus australispopulations are damaged by DEC roadsidemaintenance practices within the life of the plan.

Objective 5: To protect Uromyrtus australis onprivate land.

Action 5.1:

The DEC will liaise with the owners of the privateproperty on which Uromyrtus australis occurs regardingthe protection of the population.

Through liaison with the private landholders theDEC will determine the ways it can assist thelandholders to protect the U. australis at thislocation.

Performance criterion: The DEC liaises withlandholders of private land where Uromyrtus australishas been located regarding its protection.

Objective 6: Fire planning.

Action 6.1:

The DEC will provide information on the ecologicalrequirements of Uromyrtus australis to the appropriateBushfire Management Committees and DEC bushfiremanagement planners.

The RF Act requires that the ecologicalrequirements of threatened species be considered byBushfire Management Committees (BMCs) inpreparing Bushfire Management Plans (BMPs) forlocal government areas. The DEC prepares FireManagement Strategies that complement the localBMPs, for areas under its control. Strategies arecurrently being prepared for Nightcap and MtJerusalem NPs and Whian Whian SCA.

Performance criterion: The DEC has providedinformation on the ecological requirements ofUromyrtus australis to the appropriate BMCs andDEC bushfire management planners within the lifeof the plan.

Objective 7: Uromyrtus australis records in theAtlas of NSW Wildlife are accurate and current.

Action 7.1:

The DEC will review existing records on the Atlas ofNSW Wildlife and, where possible, will remove recordsfor which there is evidence that they are incorrect.

It is important that the Atlas of NSW Wildlifedatabase contains accurate records of Uromyrtusaustralis as it is a primary resource for researchers,developers, environmental consultants and landmanagers. There is evidence that some records maybe incorrect.

Performance criterion: Existing records are reviewedand, where possible, incorrect records are removedwithin the life of the plan.

Action 7.2:

The DEC will ensure that all Uromyrtus australisrecords generated by research commissioned by the DECare entered on the Atlas of NSW Wildlife.

It is important that the Atlas of NSW Wildlifedatabase contains accurate records of Uromyrtusaustralis as it is a primary resource for researchers,developers, environmental consultants and landmanagers.

Performance criteria: Consultants and staffundertaking research commissioned by DEC withinthe life of the plan will provide details of newUromyrtus australis records in a form suitable forentry on the database to the DEC Wildlife DataUnit on completion of the research.

Objective 8: To monitor population dynamics.

Action 8.1:

The DEC will ensure that the collection of populationdynamics data from monitoring sites continues and willopportunistically monitor the impact of disturbanceevents.

It is expected that the outcomes of the currentmonitoring program will determine if wildpopulations of the species are declining spatially ornumerically or both.

This information is crucial to determining the levelof threat assigned to the species and themanagement actions required.

Opportunities may arise to document the response ofthe species to fire and other disturbances (e.g. stormdamage). The response of Uromyrtus australis toroadside slashing is being monitored (Kooyman2000b), however, little is known of the response ofU. australis to other disturbance events.

Performance criterion: Monitoring data is collectedaccording to the methodology and timeframesdescribed in Kooyman (2000b), including theopportunistic monitoring of representative sites of



Uromyrtus australis to sample response todisturbance.

Objective 9: Encourage research into genetics andreproductive biology.

Action 9.1:

The DEC will encourage research into genetics and thereproductive biology of Uromyrtus australis.

Information on genetics and the reproductivebiology of Uromyrtus australis will assist the DEC torefine management actions for individual U. australissites in the long term. This will assist inunderstanding whether the population acts as onecontinuous population or as discrete populations,possibly representing different refugia (Rossetto pers.comm.).

Research topics will include but not be restricted to:

• extent of clonality, inbreeding depression anddifferentiation across the population;

• identification of sub-populations;

• research into gene-flow within and betweenUromyrtus australis sites with the long-term aim ofguiding appropriate sub-population enhancementand population expansion;

• fertility, pollination and dispersal vectors,germination rates;

• environmental constraints on germination andseedling recruitment and persistence; and

• assessing natural recruitment to determinewhether recruitment is occurring from a limitedgene pool.

Performance criterion: The DEC will liaise withresearchers and research organisations to discuss andencourage research into genetics and reproductivebiology within the life of the plan.

Objective 10: Complete surveys of Uromyrtusaustralis populations and suitable habitat.

Action 10.1:

The DEC will coordinate the marking and recording ofthe boundaries of the larger Uromyrtus australispopulations.

Work begun on delineating population boundariesduring previous survey and monitoring (Kooyman2000a & 2000b) needs to be completed to assist withmanaging and monitoring these populations.

Performance criterion: Boundaries of the largerUromyrtus australis populations are marked andrecorded within the life of the plan.

Action 10.2:

The DEC will coordinate the opportunistic survey ofthose areas of suitable habitat in the western Nightcapand Mt Jerusalem areas that have yet to be surveyed, andthe recording of new occurrences of Uromyrtusaustralis.

Surveys of suitable habitat should be completed toestablish whether any further individuals orpopulations exist (Kooyman 2000a). Additionalsurvey is to be done opportunistically during anyresource inventory work that is undertaken asextensive targeted surveys have been undertaken ofUromyrtus australis habitat (Kooyman 2000a).

Performance criterion: Suitable habitat in thewestern Nightcap and Mt Jerusalem areas isopportunistically surveyed and new occurrencesrecorded within the life of the plan.

Objective 11: Collate data on ex-situ conservationplantings.

Action 11.1:

The DEC will collate information on the origin andpopulation dynamics of ex-situ conservation plantings ofUromyrtus australis in public collections.

Uromyrtus australis is cultivated in a number ofpublic collections, however, the DEC has only basicinformation on the success and origin of theseplantings. If a catastrophic event affects one or anumber of wild U. australis populations, the geneticcomposition of these plants may be valuable.Additionally, information on the populationdynamics of ex-situ plants may contribute tounderstanding the habitat requirements of U.australis.

Performance criterion: Information is collated by theDEC on plantings at the North Coast RegionalBotanic Garden, Coffs Harbour, the BotanicGardens of Adelaide, the Agricultural ResearchInstitute, Wagga Wagga, the Royal BotanicalGardens Mt Annan Annex and the AustralianNational Botanical Gardens, Canberra within thelife of the plan.

Objective 12: To co-ordinate Recovery.

Action 12.1:

The DEC will be responsible for the coordination andimplementation of the recovery plan.

The DEC is the authority responsible forcoordination of the plan and the implementation ofthe recovery actions

Performance criterion: The recovery plan iscoordinated and implemented by the DEC.



Objective 13: To integrate the recovery ofUromyrtus australis with the recovery of otherbiota.

Action 13.1:

Where practical, the DEC will integrate recovery actionsfor the Uromyrtus australis with those of otherthreatened species, populations or ecological communitiesoccurring in similar habitats.

A number of other threatened species, populationsor ecological communities are known or likely tooccur in similar habitats to the Uromyrtus australis.By integrating the recovery actions of otherthreatened biota with those of U. australis, limitedresources can be used more effectively.

Performance Criterion: Where practical, recoveryactions have been integrated with those of otherthreatened species, populations or ecologicalcommunities.

7 Implementation

Table 3 outlines the implementation of recoveryactions specified in this Recovery Plan by relevantgovernment agencies and/or parties for the period offive years from publication. The DEC is the partyresponsible for the implementation of the plan.Estimated costs of implementing the actionsidentified in the recovery plan are provided in Table3.

8 Social and economic consequences

The total cost of implementing the recovery actionswill be $95,725 over the five-year period covered bythis plan (Table 3).

Implementation of this Recovery Plan will not affectcurrent FNSW harvesting operations. Undercurrent forestry practice, the IFOA for the UpperNorth East Region applies prescriptions to harvestingoperations where individuals of Uromyrtus australisoccur. No specimens of U. australis are currentlyknown from Forests NSW land.

It is anticipated that there will be no significantadverse social or economic costs associated with theimplementation of this Recovery Plan and that theoverall benefits to society of implementation of theRecovery Plan will outweigh any specific costs.

9 Biodiversity Benefits

Uromyrtus australis is the most southerly species ofthe genus Uromyrtus, and the sole representative inNSW with the exception of U. sp. ‘McPhersonRange’ that occurs on the border with Queensland.

There are considerable ancillary benefits inprotecting Uromyrtus australis habitat as it representsa highly significant repository of biodiversity for bothfauna and flora. Some of these other species arediscussed in following sections.

Another wider benefit of the research programrecommended under this Recovery Plan will be thegaining of information about a geographicallyrestricted and threatened plant species that should,assuming the studies will be well designed, berelevant to other species in similar situations.

Flora

The entire remnant Tweed Shield Volcano is highlysignificant for its biodiversity (Hunter 1991). It is acentre of both rarity and endemism in flora, and is animportant refuge area. A significant proportion ofthis diversity is threatened: Duthy (1997) lists 60threatened species within the former Whian WhianState Forest, albeit including areas that are nothabitat for Uromyrtus australis.

Other threatened plant species listed on Schedule 1or 2 of the TSC Act, whose range and habitat isencompassed by that of Uromyrtus australis includeCorokia whiteana, Tinopspora tinosporoides, Symplocosbaeuerlenii, Amorphospermum whitei, Hicksbeachiapinnatifolia, Hibbertia hexandra, Elaeocarpus sp. ‘RockyCreek’ and possibly others, such as Grammitisstenophylla. Protection of Uromyrtus australis habitatwill also afford significant protection to these plants.

There are numerous plant species listed as ‘rare’ onthe Rare or Threatened Australian Plants (ROTAP)data base of Briggs & Leigh (1995) that are alsocoincident with Uromyrtus australis, along withnumerous others that are biogeographicallysignificant (e.g. Sheringham and Westaway 1995).ROTAP species include Gahnia insignis, Helmholtziaglaberrima, Acacia orites, Argophyllum nullumense andPararistolochia laheyana. Species withbiogeographical significance include a number withsignificant disjunctions in their distributions. Thesespecies include the Dorrigo Plum (Endiandraintrorsa), which is limited to the Nightcap Range andadjacent outliers dominated by rhyolite lithology andsimple notophyll vine forest, and also occurs in theDorrigo region.

The warm temperate rainforest vegetation thatcharacterises Uromyrtus australis habitat hassignificant conservation values as a regionallyrestricted vegetation assemblage and as a reflectionof the particular nature and diversity of plant speciesthat comprise it. Certain localities, such as areas oflow forest comprising Coachwood and Hill WaterGum (Tristaniopis collina) with a significant presence



of U. australis on shallow soils in Nightcap NP areparticularly interesting.

Fauna

It is not known if there is fauna specificallydependent on Uromyrtus australis, notwithstandingthe indications that insects (as pollinators) and birds(as dispersers) may feed on floral products and fruitrespectively. However, conservation action thatretains habitat quality (or allows habitat recovery forU. australis) will benefit a wide range of fauna,including threatened species, particularly thosepreferring dense, mesic forest habitats.

Threatened animal species either recorded or likelywithin the range of Uromyrtus australis include theLong-nosed Potoroo (Potorus tridactylus), PouchedFrog (Assa darlingtoni), Loveridge’s Frog (Philorialoveridgei), Stephen’s Banded Snake (Holocephalusstephensii), Sooty Owl (Tyto tenebricosa) and Albert’sLyrebird (Menura alberti).

10 Preparation Details

This Recovery Plan is largely based on a draftRecovery Plan prepared by Nick Wilson inconsultation with Nigel Cotsell, Nick Sheppard,Maria Matthes, John Hunter, Lynn Baker, of theformer NPWS and finalised by Dianne Mackey andKatrina McKay, DEC.

11 Review Date

This Recovery Plan will be reviewed within five yearsof the date of its publication.

12 References

Adam, P. 1987, New South Wales Rainforests: theNomination for the World Heritage List, NewSouth National Parks and Wildlife Service,Sydney.

Adam, P. 1994, Australian Rainforests, OxfordBiogeography Series No. 6, Oxford UniversityPress, Oxford.

Briggs, J.D. & Leigh, J.H. 1995, Rare or ThreatenedAustralian Plants, CSIRO Australia,Collingwood, Victoria.

Duthy, S. 1997, A study of the management optionsfor Whian Whian State Forest, north-east NewSouth Wales, Integrated Project Report,Southern Cross University, Lismore.

Floyd, A.G. 1989, Rainforest Trees of Mainland South-eastern Australia, Inkata Press, Melbourne.

Floyd, A.G. 1990, Australian Rainforests in New SouthWales, Volume II. Surrey Beatty and Sons,Chipping Norton, NSW.

Hunter, R.J. 1991, ‘The role of remnants in theconservation of rare or threatened rainforestplants’, in Rainforest Remnants: Proceedings of aWorkshop in Rainforest Rehabilitation held at theNorth Coast Agricultural Institute, 17-18November 1988, ed. S. Phillips, New SouthNational Parks and Wildlife Service, Hurstville.

Kooyman, R. 2000a, Results of field surveys todetermine the status of Peach Myrtle (Uromyrtusaustralis) at previously recorded site locations: plusadditional distribution records from area searches,report prepared for New South Wales NationalParks and Wildlife Service by Earth ProcessEcological Services, Myocum.

Kooyman, R. 2000b, Report on the development of amonitoring program for the endangered plantUromyrtus australis, report prepared for NewSouth Wales National Parks and WildlifeService by Earth Process Ecological Services,Myocum.

NSW NPWS 2004, Plan of Management for the Parksand Reserves of the Tweed Caldera (incorporatingMt Warning National Park, Border RangesNational Park, Mebbin National Park, NightcapNational Park, Mt Jerusalem National Park,Goonengerry National Park, Limpinwood NatureReserve, Numinbah Nature Reserve, Snows GullyNature Reserve), NSW NPWS, Sydney.

Nicholson, N. and Nicholson, H. 1991, AustralianRainforest Plants II: in the Forest and in theGarden, Terania Rainforest Nursery, TheChannon.

Nunney, L. and Elam, D.R. 1994, ‘Estimating theeffective population size of conservedpopulations’, Conservation Biology, 8(1), p.p.175-84.

Quinn, F.C., Williams, J.B., Gross, C.L. and Bruhl,J.J. 1995, Report on Rare and Threatened Plants ofNorth-eastern New South Wales, report preparedfor New South Wales National Parks andWildlife Service and Australian NatureConservation Agency, University of NewEngland, Armidale.

RACAC (Resource and Conservation AssessmentCouncil) 1996, Regional Report of Upper NorthEast NSW, Vol 2: Physical Attributes, RACAC,Sydney.



Scott, A.J. 1979, ‘New species and combinations inMyrtaceae for Melanesia and Australia’, KewBulletin, 41, p.p. 286.

Sheringham, P. and Westaway, J. 1995, SignificantVascular Plants of Upper North East New SouthWales, a report by the New South WalesNational Parks and Wildlife Service for theNatural Resources Audit Council, NPWS,Hurstville.

Snow, N. and Guymer, G.P. 2001, ‘Revision ofAustralian species of Uromyrtus (Myrtaceae)and two new combinations for New Caledonia’,Systematic Botany, 26(4), p.p. 733-742.

Stewart, B. & McKinley, A. 1998, Field surveys todetermine the locations and distribution of PeachMyrtle (Uromyrtus australis), Report preparedfor the NSW National Parks and WildlifeService by Landmark Ecological Services,Suffolk Park.

Webb, L.J. 1959, ‘A physiognomic classification ofAustralian rainforests’, Journal of Ecology, 47,p.p. 551-70.

Williams, G. and Adam, P. 1994, ‘A review ofrainforest pollination and plant-pollinatorinteractions with particular reference toAustralian subtropical rainforests’, AustralianZoologist, 29(3-4), p.p. 177-212.

Wilson, N. 2001, ‘Rare and endangered: PeachMyrtle’, Nature Australia, 26 (11), p.p. 22-23.

Wilson, P.G. 1991, ‘Uromyrtus’, in Flora of NewSouth Wales, Vol. 2, ed. G.J. Harden, NewSouth Wales University Press, Kensington.

13 Acronyms Used in this Document

BMC Bushfire Management Committee

BMP Bushfire Management Plan

dbh diameter at breast height

DLWC Department of Land and WaterConservation

EP&A Act Environmental Planning and AssessmentAct 1979 (NSW)

EPBC Act Commonwealth Environment Protectionand Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

IFOA Integrated Forestry OperationsApproval

FMS Fire Management Strategy

FNPE Act Forestry and National Park Estate Act1998 (NSW)

FNSW Forests NSW

LG Act Local Government Act 1993 (NSW)

NP National Park

NPW Act National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974(NSW)

NPWS NSW National Parks and WildlifeService

NSW New South Wales

NV Act Native Vegetation Act 2003 (NSW)

RF Act Rural Fires Act 1997 (NSW)

ROTAP Rare or threatened Australian plant

SF State Forest

SFNSW State Forests NSW (now FNSW)

SIS Species Impact Statement

TAP Threat Abatement Plan

TSC Act Threatened Species Conservation Act1995 (NSW)

TSL Threatened Species Licence

VCA Voluntary Conservation Agreement

Table 3. Estimated costs of implementing the actions identified in the recovery plan.

Actionno.

Action Title *Priority Cost Estimate ($’s/year) TotalCost ($)

ResponsibleParty/Funding

sources

#In-kind

^Cash

Y 1 Y 2 Y 3 Y 4 Y 5

1.1 Survey and assessment guidelines 1 $2500 $2500 DEC $1750 $750

2.1 Licensing the picking of Uromyrtus australis under the TSCAct

1 $350 $350 $350 $350 $350 $1750 DEC $1750

3.1 Familiarising agency staff and private landholders 1 $1600 $1075 $2675 DEC $2275 $400

4.1 DEC roadside marking system 1 $1200 $500 $1700 DEC $1050 $650

4.2 DEC review of roadside maintenance practices 1 $350 $350 $700 $700

5.1 Protection on private land 1 $10001 $10001 $10001 $10001 $10001 $50001 DEC $35001 $15001

6.1 Fire planning 2 $1000 $1000 DEC $700 $300

7.1 Review Atlas records 1 $1050 $1050 DEC $1050

7.2 Ensure new records from research are recorded in Atlas 1 $350 $350 $350 $350 $350 $1750 DEC $1750

8.1 Monitoring 1 $49002 $26252 $45502 $26252 $39502 $186502 DEC $143502 $43002

9.1 Genetics and reproductive biology 2 $700 $25350 $15350 $350 $41750 DEC $1750 $40000

10.1 Survey boundaries of larger populations 3 $800 $800 DEC $350 $450

10.2 Opportunistically survey suitable habitat in unsurveyedareas

3 $25503 $2550 DEC $1400 $1150

11.1 Collating data on ex-situ conservation plantings 3 $700 $350 $1050 DEC $1050

12.1 Recovery co-ordination 1 $1925 $1925 $1925 $1925 $3350 $11050 DEC $10150 $900

13.1 Recovery integration 3 $700 $700 $350 $1750 DEC $1750

Total Annual cost of Uromyrtus australis Recovery Program $21675 $32650 $25800 $6600 $9000 $95725 $45325 $50400

* Priority ratings are: 1 - action critical to meeting plan objectives; 2 - action contributing to meeting plan objectives; 3 - desirable but not essential action#‘In-Kind’ Funds represent salary component of permanent staff and current resources.

^‘Cash’ Funds represent the salary component for temporary staff and other costs such as the purchasing of survey and laboratory equipment.1 Expenditure of some of these funds is contingent on the scope of protection works required.

2 Expenditure of some of these funds is contingent on the occurrence of disturbance events.3 Expenditure may occur from Yr 1 – 5 to allow integration with other survey work.

De

pa

rtme

nt o

f En

viro

nm

en

t an

d C

on

se

rva

tion

(NS

W)

Pa

ge

17

Approved R

ecovery Plan

Urom

yrtus australis



Appendix 1: Summary of advice from the NSW Scientific Committee

Under Section 66A of the TSC Act, Recovery Plans must include a summary of any advice given by the NSWScientific Committee, details of any amendments made to the plan to take account of that advice and astatement of reasons for any departure from that advice. The Scientific Committee’s comments on the draftUromyrtus australis Recovery Plan and details of amendments made are provided in the table below.

Section and Advice Response

Presumably on info page citation and foreword – the text will bechanged from NPWS to DEC.

Noted. Text amended to reflect thecreation of the DEC.

The Native Vegetation Conservation Act 1997 is now replaced by theNative Vegetation Act 2003. Arrangements for any vegetationmanagement plan will now come under the relevant CMA.

Noted. Text amended accordingly.

Objective 9, Action 9.1 p14: More specific information aboutexactly what research is needed (especially as $40,000 has beenallocated).

Noted. Text amended accordingly.

Objective 10 Action 10.1: What is the time frame by whichcompletion of the survey and monitoring (begun by Kooyman) is tobe achieved.

Continuation (and completion) ofsurvey and monitoring is dependenton availability of funding.

Objective 11: Is there any plan to actively try and increase the sizeof the ex-situ populations?

Not at this stage.

Objective 12 Action 12.1 Objective is for the NPWS to co-ordinateand implement the recovery plan – Is it necessary to specify this as aseparate action as this would be understood for all recovery plansand therefore is not necessary.

Inclusion of this action, objective andcorresponding costing is necessary topermit sufficient budgetary allocationby the agency for this task.

Objective 12 Is there any likelihood that any of the agenciesholding material will develop the species for use in horticulture?

Noted. Inquiries will be made.

Approved NSW & National Recovery Plan Uromyrtus …...Department of Environment and Conservation...

Documents

Transcript of Approved NSW & National Recovery Plan Uromyrtus …...Department of Environment and Conservation...