Harmonisation of methods for the assessment and reporting of forest health in Australia — a starting point

Summary The harmonisation of a sub-set of forest health attributes suitable for aggregating, through scales ranging from individual trees to the operational forest management unit and up to the national level, has been achieved in countries such as the USA and Canada. In Australia, however, data collected on forest health is currently obtained on an ad hoc basis with only a small proportion of the national forest estate actually having been assessed. National guidelines are required for the objective assessment of a set of indices relating to forest health before Australia is in a position to report adequately on forest ecosystem health and vitality as recommended by the (Australian) Montreal Process Implementation Group. Obtaining these indices must be an affordable process that fulfills forest health reporting requirements for a range of national, state and regional reporting commitments such as the State of the Forests Reports and for the Regional Forest Agreements review process. In addition, it is envisaged that the indices will contribute to the verification process for the forest health and vitality criterion described in the Australian Forestry Standard for certification of sustainable forest management practices. Tree crown condition is proposed as a key attribute of forest health and it is amenable to rapid standardised assessment. Four measures are proposed which have the potential to provide consistent core data on tree crown condition. Adoption of these indices will depend on the assessments being cost effective and consistent, and the results being meaningful for a range of applications. To facilitate this process an illustrated field manual has been published, providing guidance for standardised assessment methods. Initially the scope of the manual is limited, focusing on the assessment of eucalypt tree crown damage. If it proves successful, the number of indicators relating to forest health monitoring could be increased.

[1]  C. Messier,et al.  Development of integrated ecological standards of sustainable forest management at an operational scale , 2000 .

[2]  D. E. Mcleod,et al.  An unexpected decline in some forests of Eucalyptus obliqua and E. regnans in southern Tasmania. , 1980 .

[3]  Marco Ferretti,et al.  Forest Health Assessment and Monitoring – Issues for Consideration , 1997 .

[4]  David J. Rapport,et al.  What is ecosystem health , 1997 .

[5]  N. Coops,et al.  Conceptual Development of a Eucalypt Canopy Condition Index Using High Resolution Spatial and Spectral Remote Sensing Imagery , 2000 .

[6]  C. Beadle,et al.  A physiological approach to pruning. , 2000 .

[7]  Neal A. Scott,et al.  Designing systems to monitor carbon stocks in forests and shrublands , 2002 .

[8]  A. Chiarucci,et al.  Short-Term Changes of Response Indicators of Ecosystem Status in Broadleaved Forests in Tuscany (Central Italy) , 1999 .

[9]  S. Candy,et al.  Modelling the impact of defoliation by the leaf beetle, Chrysophtharta bimaculata (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), on height growth of Eucalyptus regnans , 1992 .

[10]  C. Stone,et al.  Forest Health Monitoring in Australia: National and Regional Commitments and Operational Realities , 2001 .

[11]  F. G. Neumann,et al.  Effects of simulated chronic defoliation in summer on growth and survival of blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus Labill) within young plantations in northern Victoria , 2002 .

[12]  C. Stone.  Assessment and monitoring of decline and dieback of forest eucalypts in relation to ecologically sustainable forest management: a review with a case study , 1999 .

[13]  J. Innes.  Forest Health: Its Assessment and Status , 1993 .

[14]  D. Brand.  Criteria and indicators for the conservation and sustainable management of forests: Progress to date and future directions , 1997 .

[15]  T. Grove,et al.  Nutrient disorders in plantation eucalypts , 2001 .

[16]  John L. Innes.  Methods to estimate forest health , 1993 .

[17]  Michael Köhl,et al.  Harmonisation and Standardisation in Multi-National Environmental Statistics – Mission Impossible? , 2000 .

[18]  Michael R. Wagner,et al.  Concepts of forest health: Utilitarian and ecosystem perspectives , 1994 .

[19]  Filippo Bussotti,et al.  Implementation of Quality Assurance Procedures in the Italian Programs of Forest Condition Monitoring , 1999 .

[20]  R. Florence.  Ecology and Silviculture of Eucalypt Forests , 2004 .

[21]  P. Carne,et al.  INSECT DAMAGE TO PLANTATION‐GROWN EUCALYPTS IN NORTH COASTAL NEW SOUTH WALES, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO CHRISTMAS BEETLES (COLEOPTERA: SCARABAEIDAE) , 1974 .

[22]  Robert D. Mangold.  Overview of the Forest Health Monitoring Program , 2000 .

[23]  I. Abbott,et al.  Impact of frequency and intensity of defoliation on growth of Jarrah (Eucalyptus marginata): an experimental study with saplings , 1993 .

[24]  T. Wardlaw.  MANAGEMENT OF TASMANIAN FORESTS AFFECTED BY REGROWTH DIEBACK , 1989 .

[25]  Richard G. Lathrop,et al.  Monitoring hemlock forest health in New Jersey using Landsat TM data and change detection techniques , 1997 .

[26]  R. Bashford,et al.  Effects of defoliation by the leaf beetle, Chrysophtharta bimaculata, on growth of Eucalyptus regnans plantations in Tasmania , 1993 .

[27]  R. Davies,et al.  Ecosystem health and integrity , 1995 .