ECO WATCH is an initiative by the Urban Sustainable Ecology Restoration Society – USERS. It aims to identify environmental issues within urban areas so that they may be addressed with community support. We invite you to participate in this initiative by submitting articles and information as well as your own pictures and videos letting us know what is happening with your environment.
I was wondering if anyone has done any research on the number of fig trees felled or had the canopies trimmed over past 10 -15 year with in a 20km radius of Blackbutt reserve NSW, where the Grey-headed Flying-fox roosts.
One of the main threats to the endangered Grey-headed Flying-fox’s is loss of foraging habitat. The distance to Laman street is approximately 9km however there is no foraging habitat much further in that direction; figs don’t grow in the sea. This reduces their foraging space quite dramatically. With councils removing trees here and there over time and not replacing them, it chips away at their foraging habitat without assessing the impact.
Impact assessments don’t require considerations of time or space. So they are not looking at how many other tree where removed from their habitat the years before or in areas outside the scope of the test. Environmental law is founded on the premise of public involvement so well can all have a say.
If we can measure the reduction of foraging habitat within a 20km radius over the past 10-15 years and predict the future lopping or felling of habitat against its renewal programs. There may be strong grounds to save the fig trees in Laman street and protect the Grey-headed Flying-fox’s from extinction. Efforts should be made to increase Grey-headed Flying-fox numbers so they are no longer at risk; not just to maintain current numbers.
Feel free to contact the Office of Environment and Heritage with your concerns for the fig trees and the fate of the gray headed flying fox, asking for information of on the cumulative impact of the reduction of foraging habitat within the past ten years within a 20km radius of their roosting site at Blackbutt Reserve NSW. http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au
If you have information relating to the cumulative impacts on habitat reduction in your area it is of interested to us here at USERS.
This circumstance sums up the predicament of endangered wildlife and our somewhat floored efforts to protect them. The fauna habitat assessment states that an endangered species the Grey-headed Flying-fox Pteropus poliocephalus would have a reduction in its foraging area. ‘The loss of 14 trees would represent a 2.3% reduction in foraging resources within a 2km radius of the Laman Street site. Within the context of the normal foraging range of an individual Grey-headed Flying-fox (average 20km per night, DECCW, 2009), the reduction in foraging habitat percentage is reduced to less than 0.01%.’ This may not seem like much, but with figs becoming unpopular with councils, due to risk they pose to infrastructure and the bottom line. They are often removed and replace with other trees which may not benefit the bats. This is a concern for the Grey-headed Flying-fox as its main threats are Loss of foraging habitat, Disturbance of roosting sites and Electrocution on power lines in urban areas.
The City of Newcastle website states “Council is not alone in this challenge of managing large mature tree plants in such as Hills Figs in road reserves. Waverly City Council, City of Sydney, Centennial and Moore Park Trust and Leichardt Council are also grappling with their street tree renewal programs.”
The cumulative impacts have not been measured. Under our current legislation there is no need to do an assessment on spatial and temporal use of a site and the cumulative effects. Part 8, test of significance in the EPA Act was removed most probably too fast track the development proposal process.
Year by year we chip away the habitat, bit by bit.
We need an 8 part test back in our environmental legislation.
Last night we email the heritage council in regards to the trees on Laman Street in Newcastle NSW. Expressing an opinion.
To: heritage@heritage.nsw.gov.au Cc.newcastle@parliament.nsw.gov.au, tony.burke.mp@aph.gov.au
Notification of possible heritage items/relics
These items may need immediate protection
The items of concern are Hills Figs in Laman Street Newcastle NSW. The figs where planted in the early 1930’s and since then have become an important part of Newcastle’s heritage and its living culture. Their established presence and beauty greets people walking into the street on their way to the regional gallery, public library and park as well as nearby cafe and restaurant strip. It is an important feature of the park that has held protest, festivals and gatherings over its history. Many people have had their wedding photos under the trees entwining a personal family connection to the city’s heritage and environment.
Growing up in Newcastle I remember some of the trees being scarred with graphite; Names, love notes, initials. This evidence of occupation and cultural significants is held on this living history that has survived weather and earthquakes.
Newcastle Council is taking action to have the trees destroyed due to safety concerns despite the trees being healthy. According to council risk assessment it appears that road maintenance over many years has lead to the trees becoming unstable. Seeing the trees are healthy; changing the use of this low traffic street to pedestrian use and securing the trees in a way that would allow their root systems to grow back may be an option to save these heritage items. In ideal conditions Fig trees can live 150-200 years and are capable of taping in to solid structures for stability, Root barriers and other measures would ensure the long term growth of the trees and lower risk of impact to infrastructure.
Of concern should the items have to be removed I suggest the storing of the trees or the scared fragments of the tree so that it may be left for people researching local history in regards to its people and events. This would be a remnant of the tactility of the trees and what is not always evident in a photograph but only touch. Any tree markings should also be well documented and made available to public as they have been available on the trees for the last 80 year. These could be held in an area close to the site. The Federal Government g announced $7 million funding for the redevelopment of the Newcastle Art Gallery given is location to the trees this would be an appropriate place for remnants to be held permanently on display.
There have been large protest and costly legal battles with council and the people of Newcastle who are trying save the trees. This should indicate the cultural value of the trees and the need for an effort to protect and restore them.
Follow up story
Then the grass started to die around the edges.
We don’t know what exactly is killing the grass.
We assume that it may have been sprayed with herbicide on the same day the grass was mowed by council on the 16.11.2011. Link
We don’t know what the herbicide was?
We don’t know if it poses a risk to school children who use the tennis court or residents?
We don’t know if this presents a much bigger risk to aquatic life with the sediment run off problems?
As residents across the road we do know that we were not informed. And perhaps we should have been, looking at the Pesticides Regulation Act 1995. As the council is the authority that is normally the first point of call, making the matter a conflict of interest for them to resolve. We lodged a pollution incident report with the state authority, the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) on the 22.11.2011.
St Martha’s Catholic Church was informed of this issue within our bio-diversity project proposal delivered in person on 15.11.2011. St Martha Catholic School was informed of this issue within our bio-diversity project proposal delivered in person on 21.11.2011 after the church made no response. We requested a meeting. This was followed up by us on the 25.11.2011 in person after no meeting was scheduled stressing concern of councils recent herbicide use on their fence which raises issues of duty of care and to make a more direct approach in alerting them to the environmental impacts of the site and offering solutions as well as highlighting possible legal responsibility. A meeting was set for the next working day.
We had already expressed our concerns to the Strathfield Councils Natural Resources on the 18.10.2011 that herbicide use was a contributing factor to sediment in the lane. This was restated through a bio-diversity project proposal sent by email on the 10.11.2011. Asking for special consideration by council maintains of the projects needs. Example; restrict the use of herbicides on the area and consideration if mowing.
