Koala Management

Available Downloads
	Tweed Coast Koala Habitat Study 2011 (7.34mB)

The Tweed Local Government Area (TLGA) covers an area of approximately 103,000ha extending from the Queensland border in the north to near the villages of Burringbar and Mooball in the south, and encapsulated to the west and south east by the Border, Nightcap and Burringbar Ranges. This report describes the results of a koala habitat and population assessment for the coastal portion of the TLGA, an area of approximately 21,200ha comprising lands surrounding Terranora and Cobaki Broadwaters in the north before extending along the coast for approximately 35km south of Tweed Heads generally between the coast and the Pacific Highway.

Tweed Coast Koala Atlas The Tweed Coast Koala Atlas, prepared by the Australian Koala Foundation, is available for download or can be obtained from Tweed Shire Council at a cost of $25.
	Koala Habitat Atlas (1.43mB)
	Koala Habitat Classes Map (3.33mB)
	Koala Field Sites Map (3.37mB)
	Koala Vegetation Communities Map (3.44mB)

Land Use Planning for Tweed Koala Populations

Background

In April, 1993 Council resolved to contribute $10,000 to the Australian Koala Foundation (AKF) to assist them in the preparation of a Tweed Coast Koala Atlas for the eastern section of the Shire.

Summary of Tweed Coast Koala Atlas

Site Location

The 37,608 hectare study area comprises approximately 29 percent of Tweed Shire.

Study Objectives

The objectives of the AKF study were as follows:

1. to quantify tree preferences and habitat utilisation;
2. to delineate areas of Primary and Secondary Koala Habitat;
3. to examine the relationship of this information in terms of State Environmental Planning Policy No 44 (Koala Habitat);
4. to identify threatening processes; and
5. to recommend measures to provide Koala populations with a measure of long term viability.

Tree Preferences and Habitat Utilisation

An assessment of tree preferences and habitat utilisation by koalas conducted within the study area between February, 1994 and May, 1996 have established that three species of eucalyptus, Swamp Mahogany Eucalyptus robusta, Tallowwood E. microcorys, Forest Red Gum E. tereticornis and the naturally occurring hybrid, E. robusta X E. tereticornis are the subject of preferential utilisation by koalas within the study area. Forest Red Gums on alluvial deposits of Quaternary origin are particularly significant according to the AKF report. There are no indications that the level of utilisation by koalas of Swamp Mahogany, Forest Red Gum and Tallowwood is dependent upon their respective densities when growing in optimum habitat. The occurrence of these eucalyptus species appear to be the major natural limiting factors affecting the distribution, abundance and autecology of remaining populations of koalas inhabiting the study area. The use of other eucalyptus and non-eucalyptus species can be shown to be aphenomena associated with the presence of either one or more of the preferentially selected eucalyptus species.

The significance of Small-fruit Grey Gum E. propinqua as koala habitat has also been placed in context. In contrast to those species listed above, Small-fruited Grey Gum is the only species which demonstrates a density dependent strike rate with preferential utilisation by koalas only occurring at low densities or upon isolated trees in higher density stands. Further, in common with Tallowwood, Grey Gum tends to be a subdominant component of the overstorey vegetation. It is for these reasons that no mention is made of them in terms of the Primary Habitat categories identified by the Atlas. It is recognised by the AKF that both Tallowwood and Grey Gum sometimes occur in sufficient densities to warrant classification as primary habitat.

Primary and Secondary Habitat

For the purposes of the Koala Habitat Atlas, the Australian Koala Foundation therefore recognises the following four categories of koala habitat:

Primary Koala Habitat (2.5% of study area)

Tree species preferentially utilised by koalas in which tree utilisation is independent of tree density. Preferred trees are a dominant or co-dominant component of the overstorey vegetation.

Secondary Koala Habitat (10.7% of study area) (Secondary (A) Habitat)

Tree species preferentially utilised by koalas, on average, constitute less than 35% of the overstorey vegetation.

Marginal Koala Habitat (10.3% of study area) (Secondary (B) Habitat)

Tree species preferentially utilised by koalas are largely absent or otherwise occur at very low densities (<10%).

Habitat Value "Unknown" (0.7% of study area)

Composition of the vegetation remains unknown, but where it is possible for one or more preferentially utilised tree species to occur as a dominant or co-dominant component of the overstorey.

The remainder of the study area has either been cleared of native vegetation (66.3%) or contains other categories of vegetation not listed above (9.5%).

It was clear from the AKF results that significant levels of koala activity extends from prime koala habitat into adjoining areas of otherwise secondary habitat. The proximity of these tree species to prime habitat was therefore considered an important component from the koalas’ perspective, providing secure roosting and interaction areas in addition to opportunistic browsing opportunities. The importance of these areas has been accommodated by provision of a 100 metre "activity" buffer around all areas of Primary Habitat.

Primary Koala Habitat has a potentially high koala carrying capacity because of the density of preferred trees with resultant smaller home range areas required by resident koalas. In contrast, secondary koala habitat has potentially lower carrying capacity wit resultant larger home ranges of resident koalas. The carrying capacity of Marginal Habitat is lower again than the preceding categories, and is considered by the AKF as unlikely to be capable of supporting breeding aggregations of koalas over the long term.

Koala Populations on the Tweed Coast and Threatening Processes

Habitat categories defined by the Koala Habitat Atlas do not necessarily signify occupation by koalas. In addition, field research by the AKF suggests that 80% of Prime Koala Habitat and a similar proportion of secondary (class A) Habitat no longer supports table populations. This is possibly explained by an overwhelming driving force of ranging koalas to be near other koalas and adverse past landuse practices creating hazards such as bushfires, predation by domestic and/or feral animals and collision with motor vehicles. The AKF have identified several primary and secondary habitat areas have been fragmented to such an extent that they no longer provide realistic opportunities to sustain viable populations. These areas include:

1. Primary habitat areas north of Banora Point, but west of the Pacific Highway and bounded by the Tweed River to the north and Fraser Drive to the west;
2. An area of Primary habitat located to the south of the QLD/NSW border adjacent to Coolangatta/Gold Coast Airport and now bisected by the South Tweed Bypass.

The AKF estimate that there are between 200 and 300 individual koalas within the study area which are made up of relatively small breeding aggregations or sub-populations which are genetically isolated. The "effective" population size of many of these independent aggregations is considered by the AKF to be already below the minimum required to afford the population a guaranteed level of medium term longevity, particularly given the potential consequences associated with factors such as bushfire, habitat clearing, predation by domestic and feral animals, road kills from motor vehicle collisions and inappropriate planning measures. The "effective" population size is estimated to be between 65 and 130 individuals within the study area based on an understanding of social structures, breeding systems, reproductive rates and other various other considerations. The long term prognosis for koala populations on the Tweed Coast is considered poor unless a pro-active and assertive management strategy is implemented.

State Environmental Planning Policy No 44

This State Policy was introduced in 1995 by the State Government to encourage the proper conservation and management of areas of natural vegetation that provide habitat for koalas, to ensure permanent free-living populations over their present range, and to reverse the current trend of population decline.

The policy only applies to land in which a development application has been made, has an area of more than one hectare including any adjoining land in the same ownership, and satisfies both the definition of ‘Potential Koala Habitat’ and ‘core koala habitat’ as defined in the Policy. Core Koala Habitat is defined as an area of land with a resident population of koalas, evidenced by attributes such as breeding females and recent sightings of and historical records of a population. Potential koala habitat defined as areas of native vegetation where scheduled species of koala feed trees constitute at least 15% of the total number of trees.

Part V approvals under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are not affected by this policy eg, road widening works by Council within an existing road reserve. Part V approvals, however, are affected by the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 in which the koala is listed as vulnerable.

Where development applications are affected by the policy ie, the land contains core koala habitat, a koala management plan must be prepared for the site and approved by the Director of the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning before Council can approve the application. Any approval by Council must be consistent with the plan of management.

Councils can prepare Koala Management Plans provided it is approved by the Director of Urban Affairs and Planning. For Shirewide plans, consultation with the National Parks and Wildlife Service is also required.

The policy also recommends that Councils should identify and place core koala habitat into environmental protection zones by making or amending local environmental plans.

Consistency of the Atlas with SEPP 44

Areas of Prime Koala Habitat identified by the AKF generally meet the criteria for recognition as ‘potential koala habitat’ under SEPP 44 provided it is within a 1 hectare area of land within one ownership. However, both categories of secondary habitat (A and B) will probably fail to meet SEPP 44 requirements because:

1. two species of eucalyptus preferred by koalas on the Tweed Coast are not listed in the SEPP 44 as koala feed trees;
2. one species of eucalyptus listed as a feed tree in SEPP 44 is not recognised as a preferred koala feed tree based on the AKF field work;
3. the Atlas identifies potential koala habitat based on activity levels associated with various tree species, not on the application of a percentage of koala feed trees present (15%) within the development site required under SEPP 44.

The Atlas highlights some of the major flaws of SEPP 44 in identifying koala habitat in Tweed Shire.

Notwithstanding the above, all areas of Primary and Secondary Koala habitat as defined by the Koala Atlas are potentially ‘core koala habitat’ under SEPP 44.

Recommended Measures

The AKF have recommended 16 measures that are considered to be the minimum necessary to provide for the long term persistence of koalas in the Tweed Coast Study area.

In summary, the AKF have recommended a variety of measures that include:

• introducing local and state moratoriums on land use activities that would have adverse impacts on primary and secondary habitat identified in the Atlas;

• introduction of regulatory land use planning measures to protect potential koala habitat (LEP amendments, Development Control Plans, Tree Preservation Orders, Council policy, modification of Bushfire Management Plans/Strategies, Koala Management Plan - SEPP 44, encourage consideration agreements with NPWS, traffic management, dog control);

• initiate a community-based koala survey;

• employ an environmental officer to supervise implementation of the recommendations;

• introduction of coordinated feral dog and fox control program with land holders and NPWS;

• in consultation with the AKF, develop guidelines and standards for assessing koala habitat;

• promote koala habitat enhancement projects to re-establish viable koala populations;

• consider protocols developed by the AKF for koala translocation.

Comments from National Parks and Wildlife Service

In December, 1996 Council obtained comments from the National Parks and Wildlife Service regarding the draft Koala Atlas. After reviewing the draft Atlas, the Service concluded that it adequately identifies and maps koala habitat within the study area. There remained a need, however, to interpret and clarify the AKF habitat mapping categories into the context of potential and core habitats as defined under SEPP 44. Review of the Atlas by Council officers would suggest that the AKF have provided this information in the report. The field based survey, vegetation and habitat mapping and analysis is not entirely consistent with SEPP 44, particularly in regards to identifying ‘Potential Koala Habitat’. Based on the AKF work definition of ‘Potential Koala Habitat’ in SEPP 44 is flawed. The Atlas does not identify core koala habit. This requires further work either by Council or developers/landowners to be consistent with core koala habitat as defined in SEPP 44.

The Service considers that the findings of the Atlas are disturbing, and clearly indicate the urgent need for a comprehensive Koala Management Plan incorporating adequate planning controls. The Management Plan should also detail performance indicators, monitoring processes and future reporting requirements to facilitate implementation of the Plan.

Prior to the preparation of a Koala Management Plan, the Service considers that a community-based survey is an essential and relatively inexpensive method for establishing a more complete picture of recent and historical records of koalas within the study area. The Service has been previously involved with community-based surveys, and have offered to provide advice to Council on the most appropriate methods in conducting the survey.

The Service has indicated that landuse planning and associated management decisions on koala habitat should not be made prior to a detailed plan being completed and approved by the Service and the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning in accordance with SEPP 44. In the interim, the Service has suggested that Council should consider interim measures to protect identified koala habitat pending the finalisation of a Koala management Plan. Options include introducing a Tree Preservation Order over the study area, particularly relating to identified species of koala food trees or adoption of an interim Development Control Plan similar to that developed between the Service and Hastings Shire Council’s SEPP 44 Committee.

Discussion

The comprehensive work undertaken by the AKF in preparing the Tweed Coast Koala Atlas represents a systematic approach to identifying potential ‘core’ koala habitat along the Tweed Coast. However, the legislative framework regarding protection of koalas and koala habitat and the outcomes of the Koala Atlas raise a number of planning and administrative issues:

• The AKF have indicated that Copyright of the Atlas and vegetation data belongs to the AKF. The AKF have given their permission to use the Koala Atlas for the purposes of public exhibition and availability of hard copies to interested persons. The AKF have also endorsed the proposed use of the Koala Habitat Atlas by Council for the purposes of its land use planning. The AKF has provided some of the digital data (dominant and co-dominant) vegetation used in the preparation of the Koala Atlas. However, they have not provided all of the field data and attribute layers on which the Atlas was derived (detailed vegetation inventory and mapping, soil landscape data and geological attributes). Copyright of some of these layers is not owned by AKF. As a result, Council cannot reproduce the analysis of the data carried out by the AKF.
• It is recognised that the mapped areas of Primary and Secondary Koala Habitat require further field work to determine if they represent ‘core koala habitat’ for inclusion into a Koala Management Plan. Additional field work is therefore required to clarify an area’s potential and core habitat status in response to SEPP 44 and the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. The AKF have recommended that Council officers consult with them in the development of guidelines and standards relating to assessment of potential core habitat areas along the Tweed Coast to determine its status as core koala habitat. This raises the issue further funding of the AKF Council staff resourcing to complete this work and enable preparation of a Koala Management Plan.
• Council should publicly exhibit the findings of the Koala Atlas regarding preferred koala feed trees and potential koala habitat mapping for the Tweed Coast study area and adopt, as an interim measure, the AKF findings for purposes of implementing SEPP 44 and the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. Areas mapped as Primary and Secondary Habitat (Class A) in the Atlas would therefore be recognised as potential koala habitat under SEPP 44 and the Threatened Species Conservation Act.
• The preparation of a Koala Management Plan is one of the adopted actions of Council’s recently adopted Shire Strategic Plan 2000 . However, before preparing a plan, Councils are required to consult with the National Parks and Wildlife Service. The Serviced has indicated that Council should undertake a community-based survey before preparing a plan. Council should accept the offer of assistance from the Service in the preparation and analysis of the survey. The Council’s Tweed Link can be used to distribute the survey. It may be appropriate to undertake the community based survey at the same time Council exhibits the Koala Atlas.
• The Atlas only covers approximately 30% of the Shire (eastern sector). The remaining 70% of the Shire does not have any comprehensive vegetation mapping, except for the State Forests. As a result, it is not currently possible to map koala habitat in these areas. Council should consider seeking additional funding to complete vegetation mapping for the rest of the Shire such as the National Heritage Trust (Commonwealth Government).
• The AKF have indicated in their report that many areas of prime koala habitat are not currently utilised by koalas for various reasons. These areas may potentially be repopulated at some time in the future. Absence from these areas may have been a result of extermination/migration of koalas as a result of bushfires or severe habitat fragmentation. Reintroduction of a viable population in unfragmented or reafforested areas may only be a matter of time. However, the current definition of ‘core’ koala habitat under SEPP 44 would not provide protection or management of these areas. While a community based survey may reveal the historical use of the site, these sorts of surveys are not a very accurate measure of koala activity or distribution. Lower human population densities in rural areas, for example, will mean less sightings, and therefore unlikely to reveal accurate historical trends of koala populations in rural areas. This raises the issue f whether these areas should be protected over the long term by an LEP amendment or other methods despite absence of more detailed information (precautionary principle).
• Most of the AKF recommendations require substantial upfront and ongoing resources from Council for works, land use planning, monitoring and administration. This raises the issue of further funding and affordability. Local Government generally have limited resources. If Councils are expected to reflect State priorities in their own limited budgets, it could be argued that it is reasonable for Councils to seek additional funding from the State or Federal Government. Alternatively, Council could seek permission from the State Government to raise additional funds to prepare, implement and monitor a Shirewide koala management plan eg, green levy.
• Primary and Secondary (Class A) koala habitat mapping by the AKF has variable protection under Council’s current land use planning documents and land tenure. Parts of many of the large koala habitat areas are either earmarked for urban development or adjacent to them eg, Cobaki Lakes release area, Kingscliff South, Black Rocks Estate, Tanglewood, Koala Beach Estate, Kielvale rural residential. Smaller fragmented areas are found in existing and future urban areas of Tweed Heads. Habitat areas are also located in or adjacent to areas of proposed Council works eg, proposed Cobaki bridge and Bogangar bridge, Bogangar Road upgrading, Piggabeen road bypass, Kirkwood road upgrading, Clothiers Creek Road upgrading and Stotts Creek Landfill Project. Some of these projects and release areas have already undertaken or are undertaking more detailed investigations and management plans to clarify and ameliorate impacts on koalas and koala habitat. Examples include Koala Beach Estate, Cobaki bridge, Stotts Landfill Project, Bogangar bridge and road upgrading and Piggabeen Bypass etc. For other projects and currently unprotected rural areas, the issue of potential core habitat assessment and ongoing management remains an outstanding issue.
• The introduction of interim measures to protect potential core koala habitat as recommended by the AKF and NPWS until a more comprehensive Koala Management Plan is formally prepared is an immediate issue for Council. Two options include the introduction of a blanket Tree Preservation Order over those areas identified as koala habitat which are not currently protected under Council’s land use planning provisions and/or the preparation of an interim Development Control Plan. Byron Shire Council introduced a blanket TPO in 1996. Hastings Shire Council is currently considering introducing an Interim DCP on koala habitat. There are obvious staff resource implications for any interim measures eg, increased number of Development Applications and inspections and associated administrative costs for blanket TPO. As a minimum requirement and interim measure, Council should adopt both the eucalyptus tree species listed by the Atlas as preferred koala food trees and the mapped areas of primary and secondary (Class A) habitat as potential koala habitat.
• Council should advise the Department of Land and Water Conservation, who are responsible for the administration of SEPP 46 (Protection and Management of Native Vegetation), of the Koala Atlas and obtain their comments. Under SEPP 46 consent is required from DLWC for clearing of native vegetation in rural areas. Copies of the report and mapping should also be provided to the Department.

Council Recommendations

Council resolved on 2 July, 1997 as follows:

1. Place the Tweed Coast Koala Atlas on public exhibition for a period of 28 days and provide a copy of the submissions to the AKF for their information.
2. Seeks comments on the final Koala Atlas from relevant Government authorities prior to the preparation of a Koala Management Plan.
3. Initiates a community based koala survey with the assistance of the National Parks and Wildlife Service.
4. Adopt, as an interim measure, areas mapped as prime and secondary (Class A) koala habitat in the Atlas and the following Eucalyptus species as representing potential koala habitat in that area covered by the Tweed Coast Koala Atlas for the purposes of SEPP 44 and the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995;

   Tallowwood Eucalyptus microcorys

   Swamp Mahogany E. robusta

   Forest Red Gum E. teriticornis

   Hybrid E. teriticornis x E. robusta

   Small fruited Grey Gum E. propinqua

5. Seeks assistance from the AKF or other appropriate consultants to help Council develop interim development assessment guidelines and standards to identify and manage core koala habitat.
6. Seeks assistance from the National Parks and Wildlife Service and the AKF (or other appropriate consultants) to prepare a draft DCP (Koala Management Plan) for further public exhibition and review of submissions to the Tweed Coast Koala Atlas.