Minutes of the RtBC Recovery Team Meeting 26 November 2009

Present:

Michelle Le Duff, Paul Koch, Jim McGuire, Randall Johnson, Bronwyn Stratman, Sue Mudford, Heather Kriesl, Mike Sverns, Tim Burnard, Rachel Sims, Richard Hill, David Baker-Gabb

Visitor:

Pat Walsh, SA Parks Ranger

Apologies:

David Ryan, Tania Rajic, David Paton, Kieran Lawton, Aggie Stevenson, Martine Maron, Evan Roberts, Colin Mibus, Bill Wallace, Vicky Jo Russell, Tony Zidarich, Janelle Thomas.

Welcome:

Bronwyn Stratman – new Project Coordinator. Bronwyn gave a summary of her work experience with the South Australian Department of Environment and Heritage. She has recently returned to work from maternity leave. She tabled an introductory piece for a more detailed background.

Previous Minutes:

Note thatSM was an apology from that last meeting.

JM commenting on point 10 of minutes: Time Since Fire Report: Querying the impact of reducing scorch on stringybark food supply. PK replied: proportion of food supply lost is directly proportional to crown scorch. JM concerned that fire managers reading this will conclude that minimum scorch burning is having little impact on overall food supplies. PK: Modelling showed that paddock trees having disproportionate impact on total food supplies because of their very large seed crops. This means that the impact of scorch in patches, on the total food supply in the range is discounted by the importance of scattered trees. However, he noted that minimising scorch is the only way to increase food availability at the moment because any tree planting has to mature first. Also minimum scorch burning is the only way of mitigating planned increased stringy burning. SM: further elaboration include a sentence which describes the site impact of fire (eg 30% scorch = 30% reduction in food availability at a particular site).

Action: amend minutes from last meeting to clarify the two points above - BS

Progress since last meeting:

1. Buloke Fact Sheet: Tania is in the final stages of finishing this, and it will then be put on the website.

Action: TR to complete and BS to alert the team to completion.

2. RTBC status report: Rachel hasn’t done anything on this.

Action: Carryover task for RS.

3. West Wimmera Shire ESO: Richard and Rachel gave a summary of the results of the panel hearings into the proposed amendments to the ESO. A copy of the Planning Panel report will be sent to all team members. Overall result was good and will greatly enhance protection of habitat. Challenge still remains to ensure suitable offsets are secured for removal of high-value and threatened paddock Buloke trees. JM emphasised the importance of local policy to guide farmers. RS summarised that DSE is reworking its advice on identifying RTBC feeding habitat, particularly the importance of scattered stringybark trees. One option is to ask recovery team to provide the expert advice and DSE will rely on that.

Action: RS to inform team of progress within DSE defining habitat for native vegetation matters. RS (and RH) to present to SA Native Vegetation Council to update on new information and procedures. RS to circulate ESO planning panel report to entire team.

4. Pressure to burn habitat: JM: Privateland burning is likely to increase. DSE/CFA are working together to develop joint approach to burning private land. Recovery team will need to get our advice for RtBC into that process. SM: Some of their covenanted property owners near priority fire risk towns are being approached by CFA/DSE to get permission to burn them. TFN are developing guidelines for their landowners. RS reported that DSE is completing their ‘cool burns’ report and hope to then engage a contractor to work with DSE Land and Fire and CFA personnel to develop working ‘guidelines’ for applying the cool burn method to RtBC habitat.

Action: RS to talk do DSE fire ecology / or BES people about this. SM and RS to liase on guidelines for burning RtBC habitat for landowners.

5.Nest Finding Incentives: DBG has circulated a proposalfor an incentives trial. Evaluation of this will be important because it is not widely practiced. This may produce a number of nests and will produce good publicity. It will require DSE/DEH to have a look at this. RJ: Nature Foundation still have RtBC money and they may be interested in contributing to this fund. Engagement officers would visit landholder, confirm nest, talk to them about RtBC issues, and collar the nest tree. They would need to visit the nest in a timely fashion to ensure nest is still there. TB: should we pay existing landowners with nests if they have active nests on their properties. Advantages is the additional monitoring information this provides, currently we don’t monitor nests. May be better to reward landowner for an active nest rather than a fledged young. Would be good to know fate of a nest, but caution the accuracy of the data will vary. Mike Sverns: offer of camera equipment to provide real-time photography of an active nest. This may be a great thing to link to the RTB website. SM: interested in offering permanent protection for nest sites through TFN. When PO goes out to landholder, covenanting will be offered as one option for the nest site. This might be done in a subsequent visit rather than the first visit. Possibly provide an incentive to permanently protect the site. Process from here: finalise proposal then write to DSE/DEH saying this is what recovery team is planning. Do you have any comments before we proceed. JM keen for this to be joint shire/recovery team project. TB: Advertisement through their Shire newsletters would be a practical way to work this.

Action: DBG to amend proposal from this discussion and recovery team to provide additional comments to DBG.DBG then to work with relevant agency staff to circulate to senior staff at DSE/DEH for comment.

6. Additional options for Community Education. RS: DSE is producing a schools curriculum program including threatened species conservation. They may be interested in doing RTBCs. Working with existing and/or new funded schemes to develop environmental education would free up the Project Coordinator for more targeted landholder education.

RS: team to note also that it is time to redo the Landholder Survey to assess the effectiveness of the Community Engagement Strategy developed after the last survey. This will be on the to do list for BS.

Action: RS and BS to liaise with education contractor to attempt to get RtBC on their agenda.

7. Landholder Survey: JM Key findings from this report haven’t been addressed. Remember the lessons from this report. RS indicated that the landholder survey is due to be redone to assess the effectiveness of the Community Engagement Strategy.

Action: BS to review strategy and look into resources for redoing the landholder survey.

8. TSN Project Update: RJ (on behalf of VJ): Current ‘Conservation on Country’ project finishes on 18 December. Final reports are being prepared now. Two events are planned, a central NRM tour for the Lucindale project. Second event is another bus tour and social event in January. 30 property management plans, of which 15 received funding to implement management. Two grant applications currently in. Larger state funded bid to continue work through to June 2011. Final report will be supplied to the recovery team before next meeting. Recovery team bid has been included in the SENRM competitive bid for period to June 2011.

[after the meeting RJ confirmed that funding for the team to June 2010 at current funding levels was included in the bid along with a smaller component to June 2011].

9. Other funding issues/opportunities: SM: The new Victorian Investment Framework goals have been released. This is an opportunity for TFN and other RT members to be proactive when applying for funding. RS: Birds Australia already has good relationships developed with the GHCMA and WCMA to fund core Recovery Team actions. It’s important to establish where SA funding will come from too.

Action: a sub-group will discuss the need to work together to secure funding beyond June 2010. The conversation will be initiated by RS and BS and will include RH, RJ, SM, and PK.

10. MECU block: Richard visited a private block of 200ha? owned by MECU, a credit union which is participating in Habitat 141. They have recently completed a 100 ha direct seeding project of Buloke; this is the largest buloke restoration project in the RTBC range. See their video on youtube: search on ‘MECU Minimay”.

11. Recovery Team Communications: HK: some people are missing off the current RT email list. BS: waiting to find the updated list which a temporary Birds Australia staff member compiled before leaving.

Action: RS to amend and check her list while waiting for the Birds Australia list to be supplied to BS. All contacts to be provided to all individuals in the team.

12. Reporting: Developing a report card for the recovery team. RJ will send out proforma to RS and RH and start the process for his DEH reporting.

13. PO Report: RS: Wimmera: Fire ecologist will be doing seed crop assessments to identify high quality sites and defer them from burning for one year. Also spoken to all land managers to protect long-term seed crop monitoring plots from prescribed burning. MLD: do Forestry SA do these assessments?

Action: RS to check whetherForestry SA are still doing seed crop assessments for their burning program and how they analyse the data.

ESO update: RS has initiated a program with Glenelg Shire to try and upgrade their RTBC ESO. This is funded through GHCMA threatened species project to DSE.

Flock count data: high proportion of males (46%) from autumn flocks this year suggests particularly low recruitment into autumn flocks this year. RH: This is the highest value recorded. GROUP DISC: Possibly due to increased death rates of juveniles during the very hot summer. This reiterates the importance of long-term seed crop monitoring sites. RJ queried whether seed fill should be monitored along with capsule density. PK found that birds primarily selected for capsule density and considered seed fill not a priority.

14. DSE Compliance Program: MS:described his new project monitoring RTBC nests using surveillance cameras. He is working with RS and RH setting up cameras within the RtBC range which will be monitored this year. He plans to continue for at least one more breeding season. He is using this work attempting to gather information on the degree of illegal trade. MS demonstrated some of the photos taken by the cameras. The group was impressed.

15. New on-ground works partnership: CVA and Conservation Enterprises.RS: Conservation Enterprises has been working with Conservation Volunteers Australia to develop a new project called ‘Wild Futures’ which has identified a number of high profile threatened species projects around Australia and has sourced private funding to work on RTBCs in Western Victoria and hopefully, in the future, SA. Looking at assisting the recovery team implement the recovery plan.

16. Research Directions: linking food to nesting success.PK outlined his circulated research proposal which arose out of the last recovery team meeting. Considerable discussion about what the key research questions were, whether it was fire management of public land stringybark, importance of scattered trees etc. Suggested we develop this further through a smaller group.

Action: RS to initiate a research priorities discussion group including BS, PK, RJ, RH, MM, DBG.

17. Beak and Feather Disease. RS: Researchers in Victoria are looking at distribution of beak and feather disease in wild birds. Is the RT interested in RtBC being a target of this program? GROUP: probably not necessary. JM: ask DPI vet Paul Beltz if it is likely to be in RtBC

Action: RS talk to DPI vet Dr. Paul Beltz / or melb zoo vets.

18. SA regional action plans. MLD: Thr species and Habitats project have proposed RTBC to develop regional action plans with regional priorities guided by the recovery plan. RS: RTBC conservation action plan may be of use, as the habitat modelling project.

Action: MLD to liase with PK as required.

19. Chairpersonship.DBG has been in the chair for 15 years and has decided to retire at the end of the financial year. So we have seven months to find a new chair.

Action: Team to discuss replacement.

20. Upcoming dates:

Next Annual Count: 1st May. Campout at Bailleys Rocks.

Next Meeting: Friday 4th June. SA. Struan.