1

MAKING CONSERVATION PAY

Improving Ecological Function in our

Remnants
David Duncan, Claire Moxham and Josh Dorrough (Arthur Rylah Institute
for Environmental Research, Department of Sustainability and
Environment).

The Wimmera Mallee Ecosystem Function Project (2005-2007) is being undertaken by the
Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research (DSE) in collaboration with BCG and
CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems. This project is funded by the North Central and Mallee
Catchment Management Authorities with support from DPI Our Rural Landscapes and
Wimmera CMA. North Central and Mallee CMA’s acknowledge the support of the
Commonwealth and State Governments through the National Heritage Trust and the National
Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality. The opinions expressed in this article are those of
the authors and are necessarily those of the Department of Sustainability and Environment.

Summary
In this article we summarise results of a recent study of ecological function of 60 patches of
remnant native vegetation (“remnants”) in the Wimmera and Murray Mallee bioregions, the
major dryland areas in Victoria’s northwest. We assessed soil and vegetation characteristics
assumed to contribute towards the long term survival of remnants in the agricultural landscape.
The key practical messages reinforced by this study are:
• Uncontrolled livestock access is the greatest local threat to the ecological function of
remnants, through prevention of regeneration and nutrient enrichment of soils.
• In the short term, remnants require longer periods without stock access to allow seedlings to
germinate beyond the reach of stock.
• All remnants can add value to production as they contribute to soil stabilisation, water
infiltration and nutrient cycling at higher levels than the adjacent production land.
• Most remnants show a basic level of ecological function; however small remnants which
are typically highly valued by farmers for stock shelter are typically heavily degraded.
• In larger remnants, western edges appear more prone to degradation due to greater exposure
to prevailing winds, which prevent soil stabilisation, and may transport weed seed, and
nutrients into vegetation.
• Targeting tree planting / revegetation on the exposed windward edges may provide a buffer
to the remnant from the wind.
• Conversely, efforts to expand native vegetation cover may achieve greater success on the
more protected leeward side of remnants rates due to protection offered by the existing
remnant.
 2
MAKING CONSERVATION PAY

Figure 1. The project study area with surveyed remnants marked. The project focussed on the
primary dryland production landscapes of the Murray Mallee and Wimmera regions,
and excluded the major Mallee Parks.
Background
In this article, we summarise the approach and key findings from the project’s first year. We
undertook a survey of the current ecological status of remnant vegetation, and also examined
historical photographs and interviewed farmers to establish links between the management of
remnants and their condition. In the project’s second year, this knowledge is being further
developed to guide revegetation and restoration programs by prioritising investments for
minimum cost and multiple benefits and establishing reasonable expectations about the pace of
ecological recovery.
At present, there is only around 5% remnant native vegetation cover remaining in the dryland
production landscapes (excluding Mallee Parks, Fig. 1). The majority of this vegetation occurs
as patches of small size, mostly on private land and valued primarily for stock shelter. Not
surprisingly, landholders and Catchment Management Authorities have concerns over the long
term survival of these remnants and are seeking ways to increase native vegetation cover in the
most efficient way possible, without threatening the viability of farm businesses.
The project ‘Understanding and improving ecosystem function in the Murray Mallee and
Wimmera bioregions’ was developed to investigate the current status of remnant vegetation
patches across the dryland cropping landscape, and determine whether they are likely to
improve or decline into the future. This project will enable more strategic investment in
restoration and revegetation programs and contribute to practical plans for farmers for
improving the survival of their remnant vegetation in the agricultural landscape.
3
MAKING CONSERVATION PAY
The phrase “ecosystem function” includes most of the values that people want from nature,
including livelihood, soils, clean water, biodiversity, and healthy communities. These benefits
all contribute to people’s desire to live and work in a landscape. We want these services to be
provided not only now but into the future, and in the face of change in climate and socio-
economic trends. Consequently, ecosystem function is a quality that is hard to define and
measure. From a practical perspective, we know that healthy native vegetation contributes an
enormous amount to sustaining production, clean water and stable soils, and to maintaining
native species in the landscape.
For these reasons we investigated the status of native vegetation to give us information about
the ecological function of the land, and its ability to continue into the future under current
conditions. For remnants to support a basic level of ecological function, they require fallen
timber, soil crusts and perennial vegetation cover to retain resources. We focused on soil
nutrients and surface characteristics, vegetation composition, structure and cover, and on the
presence or absence of saplings of dominant trees and woody shrubs (recruitment). Recruitment
is important in nature; if the dominant species that provide habitat for other species of plants
and animals are not replacing themselves, then the benefits will cease to flow when the current
generation dies out.
Method
60 field surveys of soil and vegetation characteristics in remnants were undertaken during
winter 2005. 20 small (<3 ha), medium (5-10 ha) and large (>20 ha) remnants across a mixture
of private and public land (Fig. 1). At each remnant, vegetation cover and structure, grazing
intensity, and a series of indicators of soil stability, water infiltration, and nutrient cycling
capacity known as Landscape Function Analysis were recorded.
Soil samples were taken from within each remnant and from the adjacent crop or pasture to
examine the influence of resource transfer between the remnant and the agricultural landscape
and vice versa. The data from the field survey was complemented by interviews with 35 land
managers on the history, values and management of the surveyed remnants.
Results
The results confirm that most measures of ecological function (native species cover and
diversity, ground layer cover of litter and logs, mosses and lichens) are higher in larger
remnants in comparison to small remnants. The smaller remnants (<3 ha) were typically
heavily degraded with greater weed populations and high soil nutrient enrichment, primarily as
a result of stock camping. Taking available phosphorous for example, soil samples from small
remnants were enriched to a similar level to adjacent crop lands (40-45 mg/kg), and up to 4-5
times higher than the interior of large patches (ca 7 mg kg, Fig. 2).
 4
MAKING CONSERVATION PAY
Figure 2. Average (± standard errors) available phosphorous (Colwell) by remnant size and
sample location. “Adjacent” is 15 m outside remnant, “Edge” is 15 m inside fence,
“Crop” is ca. 150 m east of remnant in crop/pasture.
Small remnants typically had high weed cover, very low native understorey and litter cover,
and little fallen timber on the ground. Land managers reported that small and medium remnants
were primarily retained for stock shelter and are still largely valued for this purpose. Given that
most small remnants are still regularly used for stock shelter these results are not unexpected.
Of interest is the potential of the smaller remnants to persist into the future. Very few small
remnants had been without stock for more than a few years; the few that had been without
sheep for 8-10 years had strongly increased native understorey cover. Further research this year
will look at ecological changes in de-stocked remnants over the first 30 years of stock removal,
including the incidence of native tree and shrub regeneration.
The ability to support the emergence of native seedlings and saplings of trees and shrubs is a
key ecological function in itself. For successful regeneration there needs to be available seed
from adult plants, and available moisture, and seedlings need to escape herbivores until they
grow out of reach. Our survey of remnants found no regeneration of trees and shrubs at all in
small remnants. In larger patches there was some recruitment of black box, native pine and
buloke in the Wimmera, but no recruitment of Mallee eucalypts at all. Tree recruitment was
observed where the remnant was primarily ungrazed, and can commonly be seen on roadsides.
We, like many farmers, eagerly await the next big rains at which time we may judge what
capacity for regeneration many of these remnants retain.
Discussion
This study has brought together an important data set regarding the current status and history of
remnant native vegetation of the Murray Mallee and Wimmera bioregions. Although the status
of the average remnant in the landscape is often poor according to a range of measures, we hold
some optimism for the future.
Not all remnants will be managed for maximum ecological function. Our interviews confirmed
that some will continue to be valued primarily for stock shelter and it may be of little concern if
the remnant is not species-diverse. As a minimum, people are more likely to want to know that
the dominant structural species in remnants, trees, tall shrubs, and perennial understorey will be
able to regenerate given favourable management and rainfall.
Results indicate that most remnants in the Wimmera and Murray Mallee landscape currently
have the capacity for basic ecological function whilst the current generation of trees survive.
Even given the extended series of dry years, the failure of many dominant tree species to recruit
in small and medium patches is of concern. Even though small remnants may remain degraded
into the future, all remnants contribute to soil stabilisation, water infiltration and nutrient
cycling at higher levels than the adjacent production land. Small patches (<5ha) cumulatively
account for around one quarter of remaining vegetation in our landscape.
For remnants to have a basic level of ecological function, they require fallen timber, soil crusts
and perennial vegetation cover to retain resources. Therefore when managing our landscape we
need to take into account the following management strategies that improve the probability of
regeneration and the sustainability of remnants:
1. Livestock access
Uncontrolled livestock access is the greatest local threat to regeneration of native species and
ecological function of remnants. We expect that continuation of current grazing rotations would
mean that the current standing crop of trees will die without replacement over the coming
5
MAKING CONSERVATION PAY
decades. In the short term, longer periods without stock access are necessary to allow seedlings
to grow beyond the reach of browsing stock. Often times there may only be one small remnant
of native vegetation available for shelter within a paddock; therefore the productivity value of
remnant vegetation as shade and shelter to livestock may be important. This means both that it
may be costly to keep stock out of shelter sites, but also that it will be costly to allow current
shelter sites to continue to degrade. Further modelling of the economics of this situation is
required.

2. Strategic controlled grazing

Once some recruitment occurs, strategic controlled grazing may provide one of the most
practical means of reducing nutrient loads for the benefit of perennial native plant species. Data
shows how stock grazing and camping over time can lead to nutrient enrichment, soil
compaction and loss of soil crust. The greatest impact was seen in small remnants where stock
remove biomass from paddocks and concentrate nutrients within native vegetation patches,
where they shelter. At certain times, if stock are permitted to graze remnant vegetation but not
camp, they may effectively act to export nutrients back out of enriched remnants into
surrounding paddocks. Such management could also control weed biomass.

3. Buffer and expand remnants

Our study suggests two major strategies for buffering and expanding remnants, based on the
evidence that windward western edges are more prone to degradation. Firstly, target
regeneration or seek opportunities to facilitate passive * regeneration along the more protected
leeward edges. Secondly, undertaking revegetation and tree planting on the windward edges
may provide a buffer to sand and nutrients. Plantings for alternative stock shelter could also be
established up-wind of remnants or located down-wind of the source of wind erosion or
fertiliser drift. The problem with many buffer strips planted in recent years is that they are far
too narrow to have much chance of long term survival.
Economic modelling tested the opportunity cost to landholders of removing a 50 m wide strip
adjacent to a 10 ha remnant from production for revegetation or regeneration purposes. The
forgone income from production was small in terms of cropping or grazing enterprise.
However, further study is required to understand the shelter value of remnants for livestock in
these landscapes.
The Wimmera Mallee Ecosystem Function project will be completed in June 2007. By this
time we will have an excellent understanding of the health of remnant vegetation in the dryland
zone, its ability to respond to removal of stock pressure, and how it should be managed to
maximise the benefits that landholders gain from having remnants on their land. We will have
also established a plan for monitoring change within remnants over the coming years, an
adaptive experiment that landholders can implement in their remnant vegetation. A ute guide
will help landholders to read their local landscape, and note subtle but ecologically important
changes that results from their activities.
For further information on this project and its outputs contact Jodie Odgers at BCG, or visit
the project webpage at http://www.bcg.org.au/cb_pages/EcosystemFunctionProject.php

*
Passive or natural regeneration refers to allowing native species to germinate and grow unassisted, except by
protection from herbivores by fencing or other management. The phrase is used to distinguish from more
expensive methods of direct seeding and tubestock planting.