Changes
On January 17, 2019 at 11:19:51 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": "f6e272bd-b0a5-4827-b3b9-571baa2e05e5", | 5 | "id": "f6e272bd-b0a5-4827-b3b9-571baa2e05e5", | ||
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": "2018-06-15T08:52:50.517176", | 9 | "metadata_created": "2018-06-15T08:52:50.517176", | ||
t | 10 | "metadata_modified": "2019-01-16T04:03:57.271635", | t | 10 | "metadata_modified": "2019-01-17T00:19:51.180564", |
11 | "name": "assessment-of-swamp-oak-floodplain-forest-south", | 11 | "name": "assessment-of-swamp-oak-floodplain-forest-south", | ||
12 | "notes": "The operational map for Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest (SOFF) | 12 | "notes": "The operational map for Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest (SOFF) | ||
13 | was constructed to resolve long-standing issues surrounding its | 13 | was constructed to resolve long-standing issues surrounding its | ||
14 | identification, location and extent within the NSW State Forest estate | 14 | identification, location and extent within the NSW State Forest estate | ||
15 | covered by the coastal Integrated Forestry Operation Agreements. The | 15 | covered by the coastal Integrated Forestry Operation Agreements. The | ||
16 | map was constructed in two parts, with State Forests to the north of | 16 | map was constructed in two parts, with State Forests to the north of | ||
17 | Sydney being mapped in a separate process to those to the south of | 17 | Sydney being mapped in a separate process to those to the south of | ||
18 | Sydney. We did this to minimise the risk that relationships between | 18 | Sydney. We did this to minimise the risk that relationships between | ||
19 | regional vegetation communities and the TEC would be confounded or | 19 | regional vegetation communities and the TEC would be confounded or | ||
20 | masked by geographical variation or other major ecological gradients, | 20 | masked by geographical variation or other major ecological gradients, | ||
21 | which might otherwise be a significant risk if we had treated the full | 21 | which might otherwise be a significant risk if we had treated the full | ||
22 | latitudinal range of the TEC as a single study area. In total, we | 22 | latitudinal range of the TEC as a single study area. In total, we | ||
23 | assessed 1,218,000 hectares of State Forest across coastal NSW. This | 23 | assessed 1,218,000 hectares of State Forest across coastal NSW. This | ||
24 | consisted of 868,000 hectares of State Forest on the north coast and | 24 | consisted of 868,000 hectares of State Forest on the north coast and | ||
25 | more than 350,000 hectares of State Forest on the south coast. \r\nIn | 25 | more than 350,000 hectares of State Forest on the south coast. \r\nIn | ||
26 | both study areas, the project\u2019s Threatened Ecological Community | 26 | both study areas, the project\u2019s Threatened Ecological Community | ||
27 | (TEC) Reference Panel (the Panel) preceded the assessment process by | 27 | (TEC) Reference Panel (the Panel) preceded the assessment process by | ||
28 | reviewing the determination for SOFF and agreeing upon a set of | 28 | reviewing the determination for SOFF and agreeing upon a set of | ||
29 | diagnostic parameters for its identification. The Panel found that | 29 | diagnostic parameters for its identification. The Panel found that | ||
30 | SOFF is primarily defined by floristic plot data and that it is mostly | 30 | SOFF is primarily defined by floristic plot data and that it is mostly | ||
31 | located on coastal floodplains and associated alluvial | 31 | located on coastal floodplains and associated alluvial | ||
32 | landforms.\r\nFollowing on from these conclusions, we started the | 32 | landforms.\r\nFollowing on from these conclusions, we started the | ||
33 | mapping process by mapping the distribution of floodplains and | 33 | mapping process by mapping the distribution of floodplains and | ||
34 | alluvial soils and thus identifying possible areas of SOFF. For both | 34 | alluvial soils and thus identifying possible areas of SOFF. For both | ||
35 | the north and the south coast we used an existing map of coastal | 35 | the north and the south coast we used an existing map of coastal | ||
36 | landforms and geology in combination with several fine-scale models of | 36 | landforms and geology in combination with several fine-scale models of | ||
37 | alluvial landform features to determine the likely extent of | 37 | alluvial landform features to determine the likely extent of | ||
38 | floodplains and alluvial soils within our study areas.\r\nWe used | 38 | floodplains and alluvial soils within our study areas.\r\nWe used | ||
39 | aerial photograph interpretation (API) to assess floristic and | 39 | aerial photograph interpretation (API) to assess floristic and | ||
40 | structural attributes of the vegetation cover on our modelled alluvial | 40 | structural attributes of the vegetation cover on our modelled alluvial | ||
41 | environments, and thus delineated polygons likely to contain SOFF. We | 41 | environments, and thus delineated polygons likely to contain SOFF. We | ||
42 | also used API to modify the boundaries of the modelled alluvial areas | 42 | also used API to modify the boundaries of the modelled alluvial areas | ||
43 | using a prescribed list of casuarina and melaleuca species in | 43 | using a prescribed list of casuarina and melaleuca species in | ||
44 | combination with the interpretation of landform elements relevant to | 44 | combination with the interpretation of landform elements relevant to | ||
45 | alluvial and floodplain environments.\r\nWe then compiled floristic | 45 | alluvial and floodplain environments.\r\nWe then compiled floristic | ||
46 | plot data for all State Forest areas within our modelled alluvial | 46 | plot data for all State Forest areas within our modelled alluvial | ||
47 | landforms and API polygons. For both the north and the south coast the | 47 | landforms and API polygons. For both the north and the south coast the | ||
48 | floristic plot data was sourced from both existing flora surveys held | 48 | floristic plot data was sourced from both existing flora surveys held | ||
49 | in the OEH VIS database and from targeted flora surveys conducted | 49 | in the OEH VIS database and from targeted flora surveys conducted | ||
50 | specifically for this project. We compared these plots with those | 50 | specifically for this project. We compared these plots with those | ||
51 | previously assigned to flora communities listed in the determination | 51 | previously assigned to flora communities listed in the determination | ||
52 | of SOFF. Both dissimilarity-based methods and multivariate regression | 52 | of SOFF. Both dissimilarity-based methods and multivariate regression | ||
53 | methods were used for the comparison. The results of the comparison | 53 | methods were used for the comparison. The results of the comparison | ||
54 | were then used to assess the likelihood that the plots in State | 54 | were then used to assess the likelihood that the plots in State | ||
55 | forests belonged to one or more of the communities listed in the SOFF | 55 | forests belonged to one or more of the communities listed in the SOFF | ||
56 | determination.\r\nTo create the operational map, we assigned every | 56 | determination.\r\nTo create the operational map, we assigned every | ||
57 | mapped API polygon to SOFF based on the plot data, over-storey and | 57 | mapped API polygon to SOFF based on the plot data, over-storey and | ||
58 | understorey attributes, landform features and model output underlying | 58 | understorey attributes, landform features and model output underlying | ||
59 | each API polygon. \r\nIn total, we mapped approximately 272 hectares | 59 | each API polygon. \r\nIn total, we mapped approximately 272 hectares | ||
60 | of SOFF across our full study area.\r\n\r\nOperational TEC Mapping | 60 | of SOFF across our full study area.\r\n\r\nOperational TEC Mapping | ||
61 | have been derived by API at a viewing scale between 1-4000 using ADS40 | 61 | have been derived by API at a viewing scale between 1-4000 using ADS40 | ||
62 | 50 cm pixel imagery and 1 m derived LIDAR DEM grids for floodplain | 62 | 50 cm pixel imagery and 1 m derived LIDAR DEM grids for floodplain | ||
63 | EECs.", | 63 | EECs.", | ||
64 | "owner_org": "83a21590-19cd-49af-a188-f06f5d4fe231", | 64 | "owner_org": "83a21590-19cd-49af-a188-f06f5d4fe231", | ||
65 | "private": false, | 65 | "private": false, | ||
66 | "revision_id": "950855a3-1f3e-48bb-ad08-980cfcc0e65c", | 66 | "revision_id": "950855a3-1f3e-48bb-ad08-980cfcc0e65c", | ||
67 | "state": "active", | 67 | "state": "active", | ||
68 | "title": "Assessment of Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest TEC on NSW Crown | 68 | "title": "Assessment of Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest TEC on NSW Crown | ||
69 | Forest Estate (South Coast Region)", | 69 | Forest Estate (South Coast Region)", | ||
70 | "type": "dataset", | 70 | "type": "dataset", | ||
71 | "url": "", | 71 | "url": "", | ||
72 | "version": null | 72 | "version": null | ||
73 | } | 73 | } |