Friends of the Box-Ironbark Forests

In the light of the odd angry shot fired earlier this year at conservation works along our creeks, it is interesting to read a letter in the June issue of the Castlemaine Historical Society Newsletter. The letter, dated 25/9/1934, was retrieved from the Forests Commission files, and was written by noted Castlemaine artist A. M. E. Bale. Several of Bale’s works hang now in the Castlemaine gallery.  She had a house in Gingell [now Gaulton] Street, backing onto Barker’s Creek. We reprint the letter courtesy of the Historical Society. It illustrates the fact that creek management controversy didn’t start yesterday:

‘Dear Sir,

‘I have to complain of the over much zeal of the employees of the Commission at Castlemaine. They are carefully removing every scrap of bramble and gorse along Barker’s Creek, regardless of the fact that where there is nothing but “noxious weeds” to bind the banks of the creek together, then it would be best to leave a little of them to carry out that necessary function. So much gorse has been taken from the creek banks just behind my property in Gingell Street and the earth so loosened in consequence that in the last year or two the creek has washed away yards of the bank and the few trees that are scattered along it have in some instances fallen into the creek. Where there was a fence and a footpath (on the creek side of it) beyond the fence of my paddock, the path has gone and the outer fence had to be moved back. Last flood the water was half across my paddock for the first time since I have had it. Next time, as no binding roots whatever are being left, the water will probably take a yard or two more and then be nibbling at my land. It would be much better that your employees should use some judgment and leave some gorse on the creek banks to bind them-in places where native growths have been already destroyed.

Plaque on AME Bale's house in Gaulton Street: her concern was that erosion followed over enthusiastic vegetation clearance.

‘The Town Clerk seems pleased that what the Council have done in the matter of taking out the willows and gums higher up lets the water “get away quickly”. My opinion is the faster it gets away, the more violent it is and the more of the banks it takes with it. I would plant the banks behind my place with tee tree etc., but the cattle would leave none of it. In such a case the only binding force to rely on is one distasteful to cattle-such as gorse and I do not see what harm gorse does in such a position.

Continue reading →

We are likely to have an exceptional few months of orchids this year. Hundreds of Nodding Greenhood rosettes can already be seen.

Nodding Greenhood rosettes in the South Walmer Nature Conservation Reserve. Photo by Bronwyn Silver, 24 June 2011.

An early flowering type is the Tall Greenhood Pterostylis longifolia, pictured here. Photos of other local Greenhoods can be viewed in our photo gallery.

Tall Greenhood, 10 June 2011.

On June 19 twenty three hardy souls braved unpromising conditions to tackle FOBIF’s June walk in a remote corner of the Castlemaine Diggings National Heritage Park. In fact, however, the weather held nicely, and the group experienced some great moments walking the serene and misty ridges of the south end of the Park, sampling a stretch of the Goldfields Track through Stone’s Gully, and doing a bit of a scramble over Sebastopol Gully and through interesting relic mining sites.

The FOBIF group takes a break on a ridge north of Sebastopol Creek. They look a bit chilled, but in fact the weather was benign, and even a bit serene. Photo by Frank Forster, 19 June 2011.

The dim winter’s day provided some good sightings of fungi and a few patches of the rare Fryerstown grevillea [not in flower], plus a surprising show of wildflowers, masses of hakeas in bloom being the highlight. And the rain held off till the precise moment the group finished the walk in the afternoon.

Fungi field guides can disconcert the newcomer with their specialist vocabulary–in fact, learning about fungi seems to begin with the learning of a lot of new words to describe both the structure and the habit of a particular fungus. Some of these words are easy to absorb–for example, some guides, when describing fungi which appear in large numbers in the same place as ‘gregarious’ or growing ‘in troops’. Some are more technical–like caespitose, a word used to describe fungi which grow with their stem bases more or less joined. An example is the Mycena pictured below.

A caespitose cluster of Mycena clarkeana, Stone's Gully, Castlemaine Diggings NHP. Photo by Bernard Slattery, 19 June 2011.

The same cluster seen from above seems tightly clumped–or ‘densely caespitose’:

Caespitose clump of Mycena, seen from above

In line with changes to its Code of Practice, and with recommendations of the Bushfire Royal Commission, DSE has reduced the number of fire management zones to four:

1. Asset Protection
2. Strategic wildfire moderation
3. Ecological management
4. Prescribed burning exclusion

Asset Protection zones are those which on the whole are treated most severely, ecologically speaking, because they are designed to protect human settlement. Nevertheless, all zones are supposed to be treated in a way which respects the environment: obviously there is no point in reducing the bush to a desert, or a dried out scrub even more fire prone than it was before.

DSE burned a section of the Diggings Park in Autumn 2010. FOBIF believes the burn was so severe in parts that it killed large trees, and caused massive regeneration of stringybark seedlings. The net result is probably an increase in fuel load in the zone. The picture was taken in November 2010

We persist in the belief that with sensible policies over a range of issues [including controls on building in fire prone areas] safety and ecological health can be achieved. It’s not yet clear how the new zoning system will affect practice on the ground.

The Victorian Environment Assessment Council pointed out in its recent report that DSE possesses ‘vast’ amounts of information about forest ecology, but suggested that DSE workers are not necessarily in possession of this knowldge when it recommended the implementation of training schemes for those working in the bush [see item below].

This is one problem with DSE and Parks Victoria land management practices. The other one is intense political pressure to conduct large fuel reduction burns without particular regard to local conditions.

In this context, DSE has begun to plan the next stage of its fuel reduction strategy by inviting interested groups, including FOBIF, to participate in this planning process.

FOBIF’s position on fire has been consistent for many years: use of fire as a management tool should be no different from any other management activity. That is, it should be guided by the best available knowledge; and each exercise should be conducted with the lessons of the previous one in mind, in the effort to improve results, both for safety and for the bush environment.

This is, in fact, DSE’s own policy of adaptive management. Readers of our statements on fire [see https://www.fobif.org.au/documents/ and recent posts under Fire Management at https://www.fobif.org.au/category/fire-management/ ] will know of our dissatisfaction with the way it has been implemented. We will participate in the consultation process, however, in the belief that DSE and Parks officers want to do the best job possible with the resources available. Our submission is printed above.