Newsletter of the Managing and Monitoring for Growth and
Health
research programme of the CRC for Forestry
ISSUE ONE: DECEMBER 2005
From the programme
manager
Michael
Battaglia
Merry Christmas to you all. Congratulations on
being part of what has to be one of the most exciting research and
development programmes in Australian, if not world, forestry. The
time of politicking, of deal making and weasel words is now past -
at last it is action.
We have set ourselves some real challenges for the
next seven years (…the clock is ticking, 6.5 years
remaining). Given the time frame, the funding and the opportunity,
this is appropriate. If we pull off the full scope of Programme One
we will have changed the face of forestry - we will be using
process-based models to predict products, pest impacts and guide
vegetation management, we will have integrated remote sensing into
our forest health and condition assessment, our LiDAR
interpretation tools will be a key component of forest assessment,
we will be sampling the soils with new tools and using transfer
function and GIS to produce spatial coverage of key land
attributes, we might even be able virtually fly-through, fly-over
or burrow beneath our forests of today and the simulated forests
and forest landscapes of tomorrow to assess sustainability, guide
management or promote dialogue. This wealth of relevant information
will make forestry a less risky, more efficient enterprise in which
targeted and calibrated silvicultural inputs and site selection
reduce the potential for adverse environmental impact and may
contribute to benefits such as carbon sequestration, improved
biodiversity and improved water quality (see the Programme One
milestones and project objectives here).
At our disposal we have a wealth of talent.
Utilising this talent and working across our organisation
boundaries will be as great a challenge as our science goals. I
would suggest that for the first time in 14 years we have a true
CRC - in the sense that it is no longer a collection of projects
run by different organisations contributing to a common set of
outcomes, but rather different organisations contributing to the
same projects to bring about substantial outcomes that probably
would not have been within the reach of any one organisation. We
have significant in-kind contribution of great talent from
CSIRO/Ensis, University Melbourne, Forestry Tasmania, State Forests
New South Wales, Murdoch University, and the University of
Tasmania. On top of that we have some of the most innovative and
active forestry companies in Australia giving us in-kind time for
guidance and technical support. View the in-kind list (only members of the
CRC for Forestry will be able to download this document. Members
will need to register for access to the members' website)
The Monitor, the CRCF members' website, face-to-face and
electronically mediated meetings are ways we can work
together. So far we have had some really good start-up
meetings around the country. I am also hoping that we can all
get together at the first CRC Annual General meeting sometime in
2006. I look forward to the excitement these meetings will
generate as we start to gather our data and argue the toss about
what is going on.
Back to top
What's on
From a programme point of view the really
significant events in the next few months are:
-
-
New staff appointments and PhD student start-ups.
Don't forget to keep your eyes peeled for PhD candidates! We have
additional places for PhDs across
our
projects.
-
Formalisation of project plans.
View the project plans of
project 1.1,
project 1.2 and
project 1.3 (only members of the RP1
research programme will be able to download this document from
the members' website).
-
Monitoring science
news
A decade-long weed control study by CRC researchers
has found that, for effective weed control, competition for light
should be minimised, weed control methods should take into account
the availability of water and nutrients, as well as the
requirements for these resources by different tree species. This
analysis indicated that competition was most severe on the drier
sites, and that total weed control was rarely more beneficial than
strip control.
This report outlines the main findings of a weed
control study and its implications for management. Read on... (Only members of this research
programme will be able to download this document. Programme
members will need to register for access to the members'
website). Members can also download the 1999 report here.
Back to top
Project news
Project planning meeting in Perth, Western Australia, for projects
1.2.1 and 1.3
The first six months of project activity has seen
research scientists getting together for face to face meetings to
work out project plans and plan field experiments.
The sub-project teams for 1.1.1 ‘site
evaluation’ and 1.1.2 ‘remote sensing’ combined
with sub-project 1.2.2 ‘measuring and managing forest
health’ in a field trip with a short stay in prison along the
way.
Read
more about the 1.1 'monitoring and measuring' stay in
prison.
Read
more about recent activity in 1.1.1 'site evaluation'.
The forest inventory sub-project, 1.1.3, has
commenced work defining forest height algorithms and had a recent
‘win’ defining stream courses. Read
more about 1.1.3 'remote sensing of forest inventory'.
The sub-project 1.2.1 team ‘Sustaining site
productivity’ has been sorting out field sites and collecting
data from useful pre-existing experimental sites. Read
more about 1.2.1 'managing site resources' .
Project 1.3 ‘modelling and information
integration’ has been working with industry partners to
refine project activities and place project work within the broader
context of weed and competing vegetation work within Australasia.
The big picture has been mapped out. Read
more about 1.3 'modelling and information integration' .
Back to top
ARC project news
Project progress by Tony O'Grady (November 2005),
covering hyrdraulic conductance, sap flow, fine root respiration,
what's happening over summer, papers cited, papers in progress and
other communications. Download here (Only members of the CRC for Forestry
will be able to download this document. Members will need to
register for access to the members' website).
Back to top
Industry
insights
For the next edition feel free to provide an
industry perspective (a short piece) on science or practise
relevent to project activities. Please send your submission ideas
to Michael
Battaglia.
Back to top
Quips, comments and questions
For the next edition feel free to send in short
comments about project, programme or industry activity that will be
of interest to programme members. Comment could cover, for example,
changes that are happening in industry practises, interesting
applications or outcomes from programme work, or stories about
people we all know. Please send your submission ideas to Michael Battaglia.
Back to top
Guest spot
Commentary by RP1 science reviewer David Whitehead, 6 December 2005
Research Programme One, consisting of the three
projects, spans an impressive range of activity to provide tools to
monitor, interpret and predict the environmental processes
regulating sustainable productivity in Pinus radiata and
Eucalyptus. This effort is clearly relevant to the forest
industry but the broader importance of the findings for other
land-use concerns, including water availability, erosion control,
carbon sequestration and biodiversity, could be recognised to add
further support for the programme.
The overall success of this programme will be
dependent on a commitment by all those involved to a process-based
framework that incorporates appropriate scaling procedures from
leaves to plantations. Each component must be undertaken with the
clear objective of its contribution to the framework. Central to
this is the development and testing of models, since these define
the parameters that need to be obtained and provide the capability
for spatial and temporal scaling. This approach is implicit
throughout the descriptions of the projects, and the team is well
respected for its leading contribution in the development of models
including 3PG and CABALA. However, more formal reference to the
underlying process-based framework would provide linkages across
the components, focus research activity and strengthen the
perceived capability of success.
This programme deserves long-term funding
commitment to ensure that the objectives are achieved and the
completion of project milestones will be critical for monitoring
progress. Interpreting inter-annual variability in relation to
climate drivers for long-term prediction, consideration of
uncertainty associated with estimates of productivity and forest
health will be very valuable additional contributions. Close
association with other projects relating productivity to wood
quality also needs to be ensured to maximise the benefit of the
findings to the forest industry.
The calibre of the team is highly regarded internationally and
major scientific contributions from this work are anticipated. It
is encouraging to note the large number of postgraduate students
and emerging scientists that will contribute to this programme.
There is good opportunity to provide rigorous training and
development of new skills while providing the forest industry with
useful tools for future management planning.
