Changes
On January 17, 2019 at 11:22:41 AM +1100, National Native Title Tribunal:
-
No fields were updated. See the metadata diff for more details.
f | 1 | { | f | 1 | { |
2 | "author": null, | 2 | "author": null, | ||
3 | "author_email": null, | 3 | "author_email": null, | ||
4 | "creator_user_id": "8d2ac61a-d63a-4456-a00d-b35fee4c4025", | 4 | "creator_user_id": "8d2ac61a-d63a-4456-a00d-b35fee4c4025", | ||
5 | "id": "d33a176a-27aa-4b5e-8e43-048842e3200f", | 5 | "id": "d33a176a-27aa-4b5e-8e43-048842e3200f", | ||
6 | "license_id": "cc-by", | 6 | "license_id": "cc-by", | ||
7 | "maintainer": null, | 7 | "maintainer": null, | ||
8 | "maintainer_email": null, | 8 | "maintainer_email": null, | ||
9 | "metadata_created": "2018-06-15T08:52:41.790085", | 9 | "metadata_created": "2018-06-15T08:52:41.790085", | ||
t | 10 | "metadata_modified": "2019-01-16T04:22:23.191468", | t | 10 | "metadata_modified": "2019-01-17T00:22:41.132934", |
11 | "name": | 11 | "name": | ||
12 | -lowland-grassy-woodland-brogo-wetvine-forest-and-dry-rainforest-tec", | 12 | -lowland-grassy-woodland-brogo-wetvine-forest-and-dry-rainforest-tec", | ||
13 | "notes": "Indicative map for Lowland Grassy Woodland:\r\n\r\nThe | 13 | "notes": "Indicative map for Lowland Grassy Woodland:\r\n\r\nThe | ||
14 | indicative map for Lowland Grassy Woodland was constructed to resolve | 14 | indicative map for Lowland Grassy Woodland was constructed to resolve | ||
15 | long-standing issues surrounding its identification, location and | 15 | long-standing issues surrounding its identification, location and | ||
16 | extent within the NSW State Forest estate covered by the eastern | 16 | extent within the NSW State Forest estate covered by the eastern | ||
17 | Regional Forest Agreements. The determination of Lowland Grassy | 17 | Regional Forest Agreements. The determination of Lowland Grassy | ||
18 | Woodland was reviewed by the project\u2019s Threatened Ecological | 18 | Woodland was reviewed by the project\u2019s Threatened Ecological | ||
19 | Community (TEC) Reference Panel (the Panel), and a set of diagnostic | 19 | Community (TEC) Reference Panel (the Panel), and a set of diagnostic | ||
20 | parameters for the identifying the Lowland Grassy Woodland TEC was | 20 | parameters for the identifying the Lowland Grassy Woodland TEC was | ||
21 | agreed upon.\r\nUsing these diagnostic parameters, we sampled | 21 | agreed upon.\r\nUsing these diagnostic parameters, we sampled | ||
22 | candidate areas from existing vegetation maps to identify potential | 22 | candidate areas from existing vegetation maps to identify potential | ||
23 | areas of Lowland Grassy Woodland occurrence in 296 000 hectares of | 23 | areas of Lowland Grassy Woodland occurrence in 296 000 hectares of | ||
24 | State Forest and undertook additional mapping work using two | 24 | State Forest and undertook additional mapping work using two | ||
25 | independent mapping methods. Random Forest models (predictive habitat | 25 | independent mapping methods. Random Forest models (predictive habitat | ||
26 | models) were generated using plot data and a selection of | 26 | models) were generated using plot data and a selection of | ||
27 | environmental variables. Aerial photo interpretation targeted stands | 27 | environmental variables. Aerial photo interpretation targeted stands | ||
28 | of forests dominated by Eucalyptus tereticornis to refine the | 28 | of forests dominated by Eucalyptus tereticornis to refine the | ||
29 | potential boundaries of Lowland Grassy Woodland.\r\nWe tested whether | 29 | potential boundaries of Lowland Grassy Woodland.\r\nWe tested whether | ||
30 | Lowland Grassy Woodland was present in State Forest by completing | 30 | Lowland Grassy Woodland was present in State Forest by completing | ||
31 | systematic plot surveys within mapped areas indicating potential | 31 | systematic plot surveys within mapped areas indicating potential | ||
32 | presence. We compared our collected data to a large regional pool of | 32 | presence. We compared our collected data to a large regional pool of | ||
33 | plot data that contained a subset of plots assigned to vegetation map | 33 | plot data that contained a subset of plots assigned to vegetation map | ||
34 | units cited in the determination for the Lowland Grassy Woodland TEC | 34 | units cited in the determination for the Lowland Grassy Woodland TEC | ||
35 | (see Gellie 2005, Tozer et al 2006, and Keith and Bedward 1999). Our | 35 | (see Gellie 2005, Tozer et al 2006, and Keith and Bedward 1999). Our | ||
36 | analysis of data confidently assigned only a few plots in State Forest | 36 | analysis of data confidently assigned only a few plots in State Forest | ||
37 | to Lowland Grassy Woodland (2/43).\r\nFrom these results, we were | 37 | to Lowland Grassy Woodland (2/43).\r\nFrom these results, we were | ||
38 | unable to construct an operational map for Lowland Grassy Woodland. | 38 | unable to construct an operational map for Lowland Grassy Woodland. | ||
39 | The relationship between the existing mapping cited in the | 39 | The relationship between the existing mapping cited in the | ||
40 | determination and the plot data on State Forest was not strong enough | 40 | determination and the plot data on State Forest was not strong enough | ||
41 | to be a reliable basis for mapping the TEC. We also found that | 41 | to be a reliable basis for mapping the TEC. We also found that | ||
42 | Eucalyptus tereticornis could not reliably be used as an indicator of | 42 | Eucalyptus tereticornis could not reliably be used as an indicator of | ||
43 | Lowland Grassy Woodland in State forests. As a result, we were unable | 43 | Lowland Grassy Woodland in State forests. As a result, we were unable | ||
44 | to map this TEC from the few confirmed sampling points without | 44 | to map this TEC from the few confirmed sampling points without | ||
45 | including a significant area of forest that was highly unlikely to be | 45 | including a significant area of forest that was highly unlikely to be | ||
46 | Lowland Grassy Woodland. However, we created indicative maps of | 46 | Lowland Grassy Woodland. However, we created indicative maps of | ||
47 | Lowland Grassy Woodland by merging our predictive and API maps to | 47 | Lowland Grassy Woodland by merging our predictive and API maps to | ||
48 | provide an indication of the likely extent of Lowland Grassy Woodland | 48 | provide an indication of the likely extent of Lowland Grassy Woodland | ||
49 | in State Forests.\r\n\r\nOperational map for Brogo Wet Vine | 49 | in State Forests.\r\n\r\nOperational map for Brogo Wet Vine | ||
50 | Forest:\r\n\r\nThe operational map for Brogo Wet Wine Forest (BWVF) | 50 | Forest:\r\n\r\nThe operational map for Brogo Wet Wine Forest (BWVF) | ||
51 | was constructed to resolve long-standing issues surrounding its | 51 | was constructed to resolve long-standing issues surrounding its | ||
52 | identification, location and extent within the NSW State Forest estate | 52 | identification, location and extent within the NSW State Forest estate | ||
53 | covered by the eastern Regional Forest Agreements. We assessed whether | 53 | covered by the eastern Regional Forest Agreements. We assessed whether | ||
54 | BWVF was likely to be present in more than 296 000 hectares of State | 54 | BWVF was likely to be present in more than 296 000 hectares of State | ||
55 | Forest in the South-east Corner Bioregion.\r\nThe project\u2019s | 55 | Forest in the South-east Corner Bioregion.\r\nThe project\u2019s | ||
56 | Threatened Ecological Community (TEC) Reference Panel (the Panel) | 56 | Threatened Ecological Community (TEC) Reference Panel (the Panel) | ||
57 | preceded the assessment process by reviewing the determination for | 57 | preceded the assessment process by reviewing the determination for | ||
58 | BWVF and reaching an agreed interpretation of floristic, environmental | 58 | BWVF and reaching an agreed interpretation of floristic, environmental | ||
59 | and distributional characteristics. The Panel found that BWVF is | 59 | and distributional characteristics. The Panel found that BWVF is | ||
60 | primarily defined by a source vegetation community derived from | 60 | primarily defined by a source vegetation community derived from | ||
61 | quantitative floristic plot data (Keith and Bedward, 1999), with | 61 | quantitative floristic plot data (Keith and Bedward, 1999), with | ||
62 | additional defining characteristics relating to bioregion and | 62 | additional defining characteristics relating to bioregion and | ||
63 | elevation.\r\nThe Panel\u2019s interpretation resulted in the | 63 | elevation.\r\nThe Panel\u2019s interpretation resulted in the | ||
64 | identification of all State Forests located below an elevation | 64 | identification of all State Forests located below an elevation | ||
65 | threshold of 550 metres within the South East Corner Bioregion as | 65 | threshold of 550 metres within the South East Corner Bioregion as | ||
66 | potentially containing BWVF. We identified other potential areas of | 66 | potentially containing BWVF. We identified other potential areas of | ||
67 | BWVF by overlaying the cited vegetation maps and any State Forest | 67 | BWVF by overlaying the cited vegetation maps and any State Forest | ||
68 | mapping where vegetation was dominated by or includes Eucalyptus | 68 | mapping where vegetation was dominated by or includes Eucalyptus | ||
69 | tereticornis (a defining species of BWVF).\r\nWithin these state | 69 | tereticornis (a defining species of BWVF).\r\nWithin these state | ||
70 | forests, we used aerial photo interpretation (API) to identify and | 70 | forests, we used aerial photo interpretation (API) to identify and | ||
71 | delineate potential areas of BWVF based on structural characteristics | 71 | delineate potential areas of BWVF based on structural characteristics | ||
72 | and overstorey and understorey attributes, namely dominance or | 72 | and overstorey and understorey attributes, namely dominance or | ||
73 | inclusion of Eucalyptus tereticornis. \r\nWe then compiled floristic | 73 | inclusion of Eucalyptus tereticornis. \r\nWe then compiled floristic | ||
74 | plot data for all State Forest areas within our study area. The | 74 | plot data for all State Forest areas within our study area. The | ||
75 | floristic plot data was sourced from both existing flora surveys held | 75 | floristic plot data was sourced from both existing flora surveys held | ||
76 | in the OEH VIS database and from targeted flora surveys conducted | 76 | in the OEH VIS database and from targeted flora surveys conducted | ||
77 | specifically for this project. We used multivariate analysis to | 77 | specifically for this project. We used multivariate analysis to | ||
78 | compare plots assigned to vegetation communities identified as BWVF in | 78 | compare plots assigned to vegetation communities identified as BWVF in | ||
79 | the determination to all other plots in the study area. We used | 79 | the determination to all other plots in the study area. We used | ||
80 | explicit membership thresholds to identify whether plots in State | 80 | explicit membership thresholds to identify whether plots in State | ||
81 | forests and elsewhere belonged to one or more of the communities | 81 | forests and elsewhere belonged to one or more of the communities | ||
82 | listed in the BWVF determination.\r\nWe used the plot assignments to | 82 | listed in the BWVF determination.\r\nWe used the plot assignments to | ||
83 | candidate BWVF to develop a predictive presence and absence Random | 83 | candidate BWVF to develop a predictive presence and absence Random | ||
84 | Forest statistical model. The model generates a probability of | 84 | Forest statistical model. The model generates a probability of | ||
85 | occurrence of BWVF for each grid cell using plot data and a selection | 85 | occurrence of BWVF for each grid cell using plot data and a selection | ||
86 | of environmental and remote-sensing variables. \r\nWe constructed our | 86 | of environmental and remote-sensing variables. \r\nWe constructed our | ||
87 | operational map using the API line work in combination with the | 87 | operational map using the API line work in combination with the | ||
88 | floristic plot data and our predictive habitat models to identify and | 88 | floristic plot data and our predictive habitat models to identify and | ||
89 | map the locations and extent of BWVF. Our mapping identified six small | 89 | map the locations and extent of BWVF. Our mapping identified six small | ||
90 | areas of Brogo Wet Vine Forest totalling 17.5 hectares. All areas were | 90 | areas of Brogo Wet Vine Forest totalling 17.5 hectares. All areas were | ||
91 | within Bodalla State Forest and were located on the exposed lower | 91 | within Bodalla State Forest and were located on the exposed lower | ||
92 | slopes of Mount Dromedary.\r\n\r\nOperational map for Dry Rainforest | 92 | slopes of Mount Dromedary.\r\n\r\nOperational map for Dry Rainforest | ||
93 | of the South East Forests:\r\n\r\nThe operational map for Dry | 93 | of the South East Forests:\r\n\r\nThe operational map for Dry | ||
94 | Rainforest of the South East Forests (Dry Rainforest) was constructed | 94 | Rainforest of the South East Forests (Dry Rainforest) was constructed | ||
95 | to resolve long-standing issues surrounding its identification, | 95 | to resolve long-standing issues surrounding its identification, | ||
96 | location and extent within the NSW State Forest estate covered by the | 96 | location and extent within the NSW State Forest estate covered by the | ||
97 | eastern Regional Forest Agreements. The determination of Dry | 97 | eastern Regional Forest Agreements. The determination of Dry | ||
98 | Rainforest was reviewed by the project\u2019s Threatened Ecological | 98 | Rainforest was reviewed by the project\u2019s Threatened Ecological | ||
99 | Community (TEC) Reference Panel (the Panel), and a set of diagnostic | 99 | Community (TEC) Reference Panel (the Panel), and a set of diagnostic | ||
100 | parameters for the identifying the Dry Rainforest TEC was agreed | 100 | parameters for the identifying the Dry Rainforest TEC was agreed | ||
101 | upon.\r\nUsing these diagnostic parameters, we sampled candidate areas | 101 | upon.\r\nUsing these diagnostic parameters, we sampled candidate areas | ||
102 | from existing vegetation maps to identify potential areas of Dry | 102 | from existing vegetation maps to identify potential areas of Dry | ||
103 | Rainforest occurrence in 296 000 hectares of State Forest and | 103 | Rainforest occurrence in 296 000 hectares of State Forest and | ||
104 | undertook additional mapping work using two independent mapping | 104 | undertook additional mapping work using two independent mapping | ||
105 | methods. Random Forest models (predictive habitat models) were | 105 | methods. Random Forest models (predictive habitat models) were | ||
106 | generated using plot data and a selection of environmental variables. | 106 | generated using plot data and a selection of environmental variables. | ||
107 | Aerial photo interpretation targeted stands of forests dominated by | 107 | Aerial photo interpretation targeted stands of forests dominated by | ||
108 | Ficus rubiginosa to refine the potential boundaries of Dry | 108 | Ficus rubiginosa to refine the potential boundaries of Dry | ||
109 | Rainforest.\r\nWe tested whether Dry Rainforest was present in State | 109 | Rainforest.\r\nWe tested whether Dry Rainforest was present in State | ||
110 | Forest by completing systematic plot surveys within mapped areas | 110 | Forest by completing systematic plot surveys within mapped areas | ||
111 | indicating potential presence. We compared our collected data to a | 111 | indicating potential presence. We compared our collected data to a | ||
112 | large regional pool of plot data that contained a subset of plots | 112 | large regional pool of plot data that contained a subset of plots | ||
113 | assigned to vegetation map units cited in the determination for the | 113 | assigned to vegetation map units cited in the determination for the | ||
114 | Dry Rainforests TEC (see Keith and Bedward 1999). Our analysis of data | 114 | Dry Rainforests TEC (see Keith and Bedward 1999). Our analysis of data | ||
115 | confidently assigned only a few plots in State Forest to Dry | 115 | confidently assigned only a few plots in State Forest to Dry | ||
116 | Rainforest (2/21).\r\nFrom these results, we were able to construct an | 116 | Rainforest (2/21).\r\nFrom these results, we were able to construct an | ||
117 | operational map for Dry Rainforest. We identified six small patches of | 117 | operational map for Dry Rainforest. We identified six small patches of | ||
118 | Dry Rainforest but only one patch was located within the study area. | 118 | Dry Rainforest but only one patch was located within the study area. | ||
119 | This patch was located in Towamba State Forest and was 0.53 | 119 | This patch was located in Towamba State Forest and was 0.53 | ||
120 | hectares.\r\n\r\nOperational TEC Mapping have been derived by API at a | 120 | hectares.\r\n\r\nOperational TEC Mapping have been derived by API at a | ||
121 | viewing scale between 1-4000 using ADS40 50 cm pixel imagery and 1 m | 121 | viewing scale between 1-4000 using ADS40 50 cm pixel imagery and 1 m | ||
122 | derived LIDAR DEM grids for floodplain EECs.\r\n\r\nIndicative TEC | 122 | derived LIDAR DEM grids for floodplain EECs.\r\n\r\nIndicative TEC | ||
123 | Mapping have been generated from best available composite | 123 | Mapping have been generated from best available composite | ||
124 | environmental data layers - standardised to 30 m pixels.\r\n", | 124 | environmental data layers - standardised to 30 m pixels.\r\n", | ||
125 | "owner_org": "83a21590-19cd-49af-a188-f06f5d4fe231", | 125 | "owner_org": "83a21590-19cd-49af-a188-f06f5d4fe231", | ||
126 | "private": false, | 126 | "private": false, | ||
127 | "revision_id": "076ccfda-7ef3-4f87-bdb5-9c1f3e521ab0", | 127 | "revision_id": "076ccfda-7ef3-4f87-bdb5-9c1f3e521ab0", | ||
128 | "state": "active", | 128 | "state": "active", | ||
129 | "title": "Assessment of Lowland Grassy Woodland, Brogo Wet Vine | 129 | "title": "Assessment of Lowland Grassy Woodland, Brogo Wet Vine | ||
130 | Forest And Dry Rainforests of The South East Forests TECs on NSW Crown | 130 | Forest And Dry Rainforests of The South East Forests TECs on NSW Crown | ||
131 | Forest Estate", | 131 | Forest Estate", | ||
132 | "type": "dataset", | 132 | "type": "dataset", | ||
133 | "url": "", | 133 | "url": "", | ||
134 | "version": null | 134 | "version": null | ||
135 | } | 135 | } |