Sample land-owner responses

  Open Paddock, no regrowth What they said: average biodiversity value, good production value; "most productive patch, however probably needs some trees as it is too exposed" What we know: 41 sp./500m2, (32 native sp.) zero tree recruitment, 1 shrub species, 65% grass cover, few logs and low litter (structurally simple) = low biodiversity value; high production value.  

 

Open Paddock, no regrowth

What they said: average biodiversity value, good production value; "most productive patch, however probably needs some trees as it is too exposed"

What we know: 41 sp./500m2, (32 native sp.) zero tree recruitment, 1 shrub species, 65% grass cover, few logs and low litter (structurally simple) = low biodiversity value; high production value.

 

  Medium tree density, no regrowth What they said: good biodiversity value, poor production value; "hard to keep the paddock with a high stocking rate, will probably fence for us as a corridor" What we know: 61 sp./500m2 (54 native sp.) little tree recruitment, 1 shrub species, 55% grass cover, 12% log cover and 42% litter cover = moderate biodiversity value; moderate production value.  

 

Medium tree density, no regrowth

What they said: good biodiversity value, poor production value; "hard to keep the paddock with a high stocking rate, will probably fence for us as a corridor"

What we know: 61 sp./500m2 (54 native sp.) little tree recruitment, 1 shrub species, 55% grass cover, 12% log cover and 42% litter cover = moderate biodiversity value; moderate production value.

 

  Very high tree density (pole stage) old regrowth What they said: good biodiversity value, poor production value; "want to thin to increase grass cover, but is mapped as remnant" What we know: 42 sp./500m2, (37 native sp.) v high overstory cover, no tree recruitment, no shrub species, no grass cover, 18% log cover and 81% litter cover = low-moderate biodiversity value; low production value.  

 

Very high tree density (pole stage) old regrowth

What they said: good biodiversity value, poor production value; "want to thin to increase grass cover, but is mapped as remnant"

What we know: 42 sp./500m2, (37 native sp.) v high overstory cover, no tree recruitment, no shrub species, no grass cover, 18% log cover and 81% litter cover = low-moderate biodiversity value; low production value.

 

  Mediium tree density, no regrowth What they said: average biodiversity value, poor production value; "too expensive to manage as a productive paddock" What we know: 44 sp./500m2 (40 native sp.) reasonable tree recruitment, some shrub species, 10% grass cover, some logs and 20% litter cover = high biodiversity value; low production value.

 

Mediium tree density, no regrowth

What they said: average biodiversity value, poor production value; "too expensive to manage as a productive paddock"

What we know: 44 sp./500m2 (40 native sp.) reasonable tree recruitment, some shrub species, 10% grass cover, some logs and 20% litter cover = high biodiversity value; low production value.

  Open Paddock, no regrowth What they said: poor biodiversity value, poor production value; "was a very productive paddock, but lost condition in the last 10 years" What we know: 40 sp./500m2 (36 native sp.) zero tree recruitment, no shrubs, 16% grass cover, few logs and low litter; surface erosion evident - low biodiversity value; low production value.  

 

Open Paddock, no regrowth

What they said: poor biodiversity value, poor production value; "was a very productive paddock, but lost condition in the last 10 years"

What we know: 40 sp./500m2 (36 native sp.) zero tree recruitment, no shrubs, 16% grass cover, few logs and low litter; surface erosion evident - low biodiversity value; low production value.

 

  High tree density, no regrowth What they said: good biodiversity value, poor production value; "This is what the country was originally like" What we know: 42sp./500m2 (37 native sp.) little tree recruitment, some shrub species, 18% grass cover, 16% log cover and 53% litter cover = moderate biodiversity value; low production value.  

 

High tree density, no regrowth

What they said: good biodiversity value, poor production value; "This is what the country was originally like"

What we know: 42sp./500m2 (37 native sp.) little tree recruitment, some shrub species, 18% grass cover, 16% log cover and 53% litter cover = moderate biodiversity value; low production value.

 

  Low tree Density, regrowth What they said: average biodiversity value, poor production value; "no management problem with this patch as the regrowth (or regeneration) provides turn-over for soils" What we know: 32 sp./500m2, (29 native sp.), reasonable tree recruitment, some shrub species, 60% grass cover, some logs and 20% litter cover = moderate biodiversity value; moderate production value.  

 

Low tree Density, regrowth

What they said: average biodiversity value, poor production value; "no management problem with this patch as the regrowth (or regeneration) provides turn-over for soils"

What we know: 32 sp./500m2, (29 native sp.), reasonable tree recruitment, some shrub species, 60% grass cover, some logs and 20% litter cover = moderate biodiversity value; moderate production value.

 

  High tree density, no regrowth What they said: good biodiversity value, poor production value; "hard to muster, yet sheep death prevented for off-shears" What we know: sp./500m2 (50 native sp.) reasonable tree recruitment, reasonable shrub cover, <10% grass cover, 10% log cover and 43% litter cover = high biodiversity value; low production value.

 

High tree density, no regrowth

What they said: good biodiversity value, poor production value; "hard to muster, yet sheep death prevented for off-shears"

What we know: sp./500m2 (50 native sp.) reasonable tree recruitment, reasonable shrub cover, <10% grass cover, 10% log cover and 43% litter cover = high biodiversity value; low production value.