LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY REPORT by Mihali Mahairas

Mapping and Deconstruction of the Landscape Structure of the Rochedale region, Queensland, Australia Mihali Mahairas Ȃ n7537409 Landscape Ecology Ȃ DLB 330 Coordinator Ȃ Dr Gill Lawson Tutor Ȃ Mrs. Bleuenn Marchand Word Count Ȃ 4545 Date submitted Ȃ Wednesday, 30 May 2012

Executive Summary This report provides a critical analysis and evaluation of the current landscape structure of a selected region within the Rochdale suburb. By achieving this, recommendations will be documented to whether proposed urban developments will protect green space in the future. Methods of analysis include an evaluation of landscape dynamics, landscape structure, simple trend analysis and a site visit to reinforce findings using Forman͛Ɛ (1995) Patch-‐Corridor-‐Matrix model. All findings can be found in the results and discussions section of the report. Results of the analysis depict that over the past 45-‐ year period, it is evident, that an increase of built environment encroachment on surrounding riparian vegetation is occurring. This has resulted in poor water quality and the overall degradation of natural habitat. The report finds that the current state of green space is low in connectivity. To implement further construction major features regarding the surrounding vegetation must be considered. Recommendations discussed include: eradication of weeds in the riparian habitat and other natural corridors, regeneration of indigenous plant species, layering of indigenous plant species and the endorsement of natural corridors. dŚĞ ƌĞƉŽƌƚ ĂůƐŽ ŝŶǀĞƐƚŝŐĂƚĞƐ ƚŚĞ ůŝŵŝƚĂƚŝŽŶƐ ƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐ ƚŚĞ ƵƐĞ ŽĨ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ ;ϭϵϵϱͿ P-‐C-‐M model of the analysis conducted. These limitations include: the over simplification of landscape units and scale dependency of the analysis and how landscape processes vary on scale.

Table of Contents

1.0 -‐ Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 4 2.0 -‐ Historical Background .................................................................................................................................. 5 3.0 -‐ Methodology ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 4.0 -‐ Methods .............................................................................................................................................................. 7 4.1 Ȃ Landscape Mosaic Mapping Methods .......................................................................................................... 8 4.2 Ȃ Site Visit .................................................................................................................................................................. 8 4.3 Ȃ Landscape Dynamics .......................................................................................................................................... 9 4.4 Ȃ Landscape Structure Transformation ......................................................................................................... 9

5.0 -‐ Results ................................................................................................................................................................. 9 5.1 Landscape Structure ............................................................................................................................................. 9 5.2 Landscape Dynamics .......................................................................................................................................... 10 5.3 Attributes Table ................................................................................................................................................... 10

6.0 -‐ Discussion ........................................................................................................................................................ 20 6.1 Ȃ Land Fragmentation ........................................................................................................................................ 21 6.2 Ȃ Riparian Landscape ......................................................................................................................................... 22 6.3 -‐ Comparative Model Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 23

7.0 -‐ Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................ 23 8.0 -‐ Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................................... 24 9.0 -‐ References ....................................................................................................................................................... 25

1.0 -‐ Introduction

Rapid population growth has brought forth worldwide urbanisation, which raises concerns. Regional ecosystems are increasingly subjected to a substantial human presence, and management decisions have an overwhelming influence on adjacent ecosystems (Andersson, 2006). Therefore the need to protect and manage green spaces is a fundamental issue, on not only a worldwide scale, but also regionally. Landscape ecology focuses on the spatial patterns of ecological processes in order to confront the problems of environmental degradation (Golubiewski, 2007). This study ĂŝŵƐ ƚŽ ĂƉƉůǇ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ ;ϭϵϵϱͿ Patch-‐Corridor-‐Matrix model (P-‐C-‐M model) to the selected site of Rochedale, situated approximately 15km southeast of the Central Business District of Brisbane, South East Queensland (SEQ), Australia. Rochedale, in recent times, has been subjected to an increase in housing ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƐ͘ Ǉ ƵƚŝůŝƐŝŶŐ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ (1995) P-‐C-‐M model, a deduction of spatial data, landscape structure and dynamics through the use of aerial photography of the selected study area will attempted to be attained. In doing so, assessing current development and its impact to surrounding greens space and the viability of future developments as to whether proposed developments will assist or derogate adjacent natural habitat. The scope of this report will follow a certain pattern, with the initial section dedicated to obtaining an understanding of the geomorphology of the study area, and also an overview of landscape ecology, with regards to the concepts sƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ ;ϭϵϵϱͿ W-‐C-‐M model. The second section will focus more on the deconstruction of the study area in terms of landscape structure, networks and flows, and will also examine ƚŚĞ ƌĞůĂƚŝǀŝƚǇ ŽĨ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ (1995) model to the particular study. Through the course of this section, reference to a sequence of diagrams detailing the previously mentioned features will be made in attempt construct a more Figure 1: Map of Rochedale in relation to Central Business District (Brisbane comprehensive analysis. To end the City Council, 2008). second section recommendations for amendment and enhancement will be discussed in regards to the ƌĞƉŽƌƚ͛Ɛ findings.

2.0 -‐ Historical Background Knowledge of the geomorphology of the chosen study area is an essential aspect in attaining a contextual understanding of the region. To grasp this knowledge of the existing formation of the study area, an investigation into the geomorphology and general history must be undertaken. The study area for this report, as previously stated is Rochedale situated in SEQ. The Rochedale area is adjoined to both Redland Shire (east) and Logan City (north) (Brisbane City Council, 2008). Rochedale is situated in a valley and is surrounded by mid hill slopes, which are generally gently inclined, with the presence of steep slopes which are linked to the shallow open gullies (Brinckerhoff, n.d). These gullies are subjected to direct surface run-‐off and drainage occurs towards Bulimba Creek Catchment, the major water tributary of the area (Brinckerhoff, n.d). The study area is located on top of the Neranleigh-‐Fernvale beds. The Neranleigh-‐Fernvale beds came to be, approximately 300 million years ago, as deep sea sediments underwent large scale compression, and folding in which the meta-‐sedimentary sequence was bent, and eventually uplifted to form the surrounding mountainous terrain (Willmott, 2004). Whilst conducting the site visit a notable observation was the vibrant rich red soil found along side passing roads. The soil type can be classified as lateritic red earth, which lies on tertiary basalts (Godfrey, 1995). The origins of this basalt eventuated through the possible interlayered basalt compositions of the volcanic activity (Willmott, 2004). After this erratic activity, erosion of the solidified magma began, forming the Rochedale region, as we know it today. Indigenous people have lived in SEQ for at least twenty thousand years (Crew 2002). They lived in groups or ͚ĐůĂŶƐ͛ ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚŝŶŐ ŽĨ ĞǆƚĞŶĚĞĚ ĨĂŵŝůǇ͕ with each clan subsisted in its own territory, however due to their nomadic existence, family groups tended to move from territory to territory depending on variables such as food availability and weather conditions (Crew 2002). With the arrival of the convict settlement in 1824, brought forth an alter state of living with the introduction of foreign exchange between the early settlers. Flour, sugar and tobacco were exchanged for fish, kangaroo tails, crabs and honey (Crew 2002). Settlement of the area dates from the 1860s, with land delegated to farming, vineyards and fruit growing. Population was minimal until the early 1900s, when many market gardens were established (Brisbane City Community Files, 2012). By the early 1920s larger properties were broken up into small lots (Logan City Council, 2010). The most significant development occurred from the 1960s subsequently subdividing for residential housing began. The population and dwelling stock have been relatively stable since the early 1990s. Land is used mainly for market gardens, nurseries and farms due to the fertility of the soil type.

3.0 -‐ Methodology ͞Landscape ecology represents a unique field because it looks at the effect of spatial pattern on ecological processes͟ ;Golubiewski, 2007). Due to this understanding of landscape ecology practice, and for the purpose of this study, FŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ ;ϭϵϵϱͿ P-‐C-‐M model for deducing spatial patterns will be applied to the study area to pronounce these patterns and processes as they come to be observed. ͞ Ŷ ĂĞƌŝĂů ǀĂŶƚĂŐĞ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƐ Ă ŐŽůĚŵŝŶĞ ŽĨ ŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ ŽŶ ƚŚĞ ĞĐŽůŽŐǇ ŽĨ ůĂƌŐĞ ĂƌĞĂƐ͕ ƐƵĐŚ ĂƐ landscapes and ƌĞŐŝŽŶƐ͟ ;&ŽƌŵĂŶ͘ ϭϵϵϱ͕ Ɖ͘ϯͿ͘ KŶ ŽďƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ĂŶ ĂĞƌŝĂů ƉŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚ ŽĨ Ă ůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉĞ ƚŚĞ ĚŝĨĨĞƌŝŶŐ ŐƌĂŝŶ ƐŝǌĞƐ assist in differentiating ecological elements of the region (Forman, 1995). This differing grain size can be dissimilar in each ecosystem, due to the varying outcomes of geomorphic processes, natural disturbances, and human activities combining to form the spatial pattern (Franklin & Forman, 1987). A well-‐known model of identifying different elements situated in a landscape mosaic is &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ (1995) P-‐M-‐C model. The model consists of three major elements being the patch, corridor and matrix, with every landscape comprising of these components to create a landscape mosaic, with obvious discretion to the scale to which the landscape mosaic is observed. The model defines the landscape with regards to clearly defining patches and corridors situated in a juxtaposing matrix (Hersperger, 2006). As stated, Ă ƉĂƚĐŚ ŝƐ ĂŶ ĞůĞŵĞŶƚ ŽĨ ĂŶǇ ŐŝǀĞŶ ůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉĞ ĂŶĚ ĐĂŶ ďĞ ƐŝŵƉůǇ ƉƵƚ ĂƐ ͞Ă ǁŝĚĞůǇ ƌĞůĂƚively ŚŽŵŽŐĞŶŽƵƐ ĂƌĞĂ ƚŚĂƚ ĚŝĨĨĞƌƐ ĨƌŽŵ ŝƚƐ ƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐ͟ &ŽƌŵĂŶ ;ϭϵϵϱ͕ ƉϰϯͿ͘ dŚĞ ƉĂƚĐŚĞƐ ǁŝƚŚŝŶ Ă ůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉĞ mosaic can be distinguished by possessing certain differing attributes ʹ size, shape, fine grained to coarse grain, number and location. These characteristics assist in differentiating patches, and also distinguishing the landscape usage (Forman, 1995). These attributes not only assist in characterising, but also categorising the origins and cause of patches. As described by Forman, five basic groups of patches exist, which include, disturbance patches, remnant patches, environmental patches, regenerated patches, and introduced patches (Forman, 1995). It is in the repetition of unpredictable occurrences and disturbances that forms a mosaic of units differing spatial heterogeneity (Wiens, 1976). The distinguishing differences of grain contrast signify dissimilar, yet, distinct elements signifying distinct patches; which are an element that assists to compose any landscape (Forman, 1995). At current the scale of 1:25,000 one can observe a landscape as a mosaic composed of patches, uneven and seemingly arbitrary. Landscapes are always spatially heterogeneous (an uneven, non-‐ random distribution of objects), that is always have structure (Forman, 1995). At any point within a mosaic a heterogeneous pattern of patches and corridors can be perceived, however there is a range of levels (Forman, 1995). Our planet is segmented into continents, which are then divided into regions within each continent. Each region is then subdivided into landscapes and so on (Forman, 1995). Furthermore each level in the hierarchy is represented in a single scale. Meaning the boundaries, which are imposed, to attempt to define divisions within each hierarchy, are only applicable at one particular scale. Yet, nevertheless of these artificially ŝŵƉŽƐĞĚ ďŽƵŶĚĂƌŝĞƐ ͙͞ĂŶ ĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů ƉĂƚĐŚǁŽƌŬ ǁŚŝĐŚ ĞǆĞƌƚƐ ƉŽǁĞƌĨƵů ŝŶĨůƵĞŶĐĞƐ ŽŶ ƚŚĞ distributions of organisms, their interactions, and their adaptations... ͟ ;tŝĞŶƐ͕ ϭϵϳϲͿ is perpetuated. A boundary can be observed where, a difference between parallel areas is articulated (Forman, 1995). Boundaries, like other landscape elements, can be characterised by distinct aspects such as, straight or curvilinear, hard or soft (abrupt or gradual), wide or narrow edge and so on (Forman, 1995). A boundary can be characterised by three elements. If two adjacent, but differing patches were to be dissected, one would be able to observe a patch edge, boundary, and opposing patch edge.

A corridor, in contrast to a patch, is a strip that differs from its surroundings (or the matrix), which often permeates the land. They are created similarly to patches, through the disturbance within a strip (Forman, 1995). Corridors function as protection, transportation, resources, and also aesthetics with nearly every landscape permeated by a corridor (Forman and Gordon. 1986). Corridors may be either natural or manmade, acting as a conduit when objects move along it (Forman, 1995). Manmade corridors are well known in the fields of transportation and communications, such as paths, railroads, and power lines due to their ability to connect different areas together. Natural corridors play a fundamental role by providing not only a protected route from patch-‐to-‐patch but also provide sources of meat for carnivorous species (Forman and Godron. 1986). There are three types of corridor structures. Line corridors, which consist of paths, roads, and hedgerows, are narrow strips, which do not allow for an interior environment, but are essentially dominated by edge species (Forman and Godron, 1986). Strip corridors are wider, giving way for a central interior in which interior organisms can strive (Forman and Godron, 1986). Finally stream corridors, as the term insinuates, are watercourses (Forman and Godron, 1986). Although, as explained, there are only three types of corridors, one could consider a network, the intersection of two corridors of a single type, to be a forth corridor structure (Forman, 1995). In essence, the overlapping or junction of interconnecting corridors can also be considered a node, or a beginning of a node, due to the typical role nodes play in the formation of networks (Forman, 1995). Although nodes do not necessarily occur at overlapping areas, but can also be observed along linkages between intersections, which are described as attached nodes (Forman, 1995). Linkages are simply corridors that connect nodes, meaning that, linkage density is fundamental in understanding particular nodes, with linkage width and curvilinearity significant attributes of a network (Forman, 1995). The connectivity of networks between differing landscape elements has an essential role in the representation of a dominant patch type (Forman, 1995). To be more specific Forman and Godron (1986) explain that of these, the matrix is the most extensive and most connected landscape element type, therefore plays the dominant role in the functioning of the landscape. The landing of humans to a new landscape sees the development of structure to retain a source of living. Over an extended period development infiltrates the surroundings leaving ƚŚĞ ůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉĞ ĂƐ Ă ͞ĚŝƐƚŝŶĐƚ ĨƌĂŐŵĞŶƚ ĞŵďĞĚĚĞĚ ŝŶƚŽ ƚŚĞ ŵĂƚƌŝǆ͟ ;&ŽƌŵĂŶ ĂŶĚ 'ŽĚƌŽŶ͕ ϭϵϴϲ͕ ƉϭϱϳͿ͘ In this example, the matrix element over time has changed with development exerting the most dominance, as it developed the greater connectivity over the mosaic making the developmental patch the matrix. A land mosaic is composed only of these three types of spatial elements. Every point is either within a patch, a corridor, or a matrix (Forman. 1995, p7). In saying this, ƚŚĞ ƵƐĞ ŽĨ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ (1995) P-‐C-‐M model is not a method of conserving landscapes but a model in which areas of habitat and non-‐habitat are simplified and ideas are translated into spatial context (Lindenmayer & Burgman, 2005).

4.0 -‐ Methods The subsequent section discusses the methods utilised to represent and depict the chosen study area. As ĂůƌĞĂĚǇ ƐƚĂƚĞĚ͕ ͞ĂŶ ĂĞƌŝĂů ǀĂŶƚĂŐĞ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƐ Ă ŐŽůĚŵŝŶĞ ŽĨ ŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ůĂƌŐĞ ĂƌĞĂƐ ƐƵĐŚ ĂƐ ůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉĞƐ ĂŶd ƌĞŐŝŽŶƐ͟ (Forman. 1995, p3). Furthermore, to compile a comprehensive report the use of aerial photography ŵƵƐƚ ďĞ ƵƐĞĚ ŝŶ ĐŽƌƌĞƐƉŽŶĚĞŶĐĞ ǁŝƚŚ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ ;ϭϵϵϱͿ W-‐C-‐M model (as a conceptual base) to create a series of maps and diagram to detail spatial elements within the region. These maps and diagrams are detailed in Figures 2 -‐ 9 in the following results section of this report. These figures are utilised throughout the remaining sections of the report to construct an understanding of the current condition of the selected site, and also to deduce spatial elements and their interrelationships.

4.1 Ȃ Landscape Mosaic Mapping Methods &ŝƌƐƚůǇ͕ ƚŽ ƐĞůĞĐƚ ƚŚĞ ĚĞĨŝŶŝƚŝǀĞ ƉĂƌĂŵĞƚĞƌƐ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ƐƚƵĚǇ ĂƌĞĂ ƚŽ ĂƉƉůǇ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ ;ϭϵϵϱͿ W-‐C-‐M model the utilisation of Sunmap topographic image map series, Queensland Map number 9542-‐41 was selected due to its accuracy and availability. A criterion was composed to choose a specific study area within Rochedale to focus on: The area must be within a close enough vicinity for a site visit to be made, the site needed to comprise of a range of manmade and natural elements, the area must encompass at least six differing landscape units. With these criteria in mind, the selected area shown in Figure 2 was chosen. When analysing an aerial photograph, distinguishing differentiations of grain contrast signified dissimilar, yet, distinct land covers of the mosaic -‐ individual patches types ʹ are found prominent. To further this juxtaposition, the aerial photograph was photocopied, translating the photograph into a grey scale image, attaining greater degree of granularity. Next, the manipulated aerial photograph was overlayed with 50-‐gsm tracing paper, and placed upon a light box to assist with revealing details of the image. Following this, the identifying of distinct landscape units. The three most distinct elements observed in this process were, medium density residential, natural vegetation and agriculture. Various other landscape units were identified, however, due to their size or similar granularity to surrounding units, were more arduous to identify, with the need of research on digital mapping programs such as Google Maps (2012) needed to reinforce presumptions of unit type. In addition to the three distinct landscape units recognised, four other units were acknowledge, including: Industrial, recreational, landfill and aquatic. After identifying the seven differing landscape units, the boundaries were outlined and drawn. Different hatching techniques were utilised to represent the difference in granularity in a more conceptual manner, further exacerbating the simplicity and readability of the structure map. Through this process of identifying contrasting spatial landscape elements, an acknowledgement of points of interest could be achieved. By doing so, a site visit was able to be conducted to further develop an understanding of the site.

4.2 Ȃ Site Visit th

A site visit was also conducted to the selected area within Rochedale, and was embarked upon on 28 March 2012, points visited detailed in Figure 8. After choosing the specific parameters of Rochedale to be studied, an analysis of points of interest were identified. These points on the aerial photograph were chosen due to the changes of patch size over time, and also if the borders coincided between built environment and green space. Although an understanding of spatial relationships can be obtained through simply analysing an aerial photograph and ĂƉƉůǇŝŶŐ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ ;ϭϵϵϱͿ W-‐C-‐M model, a greater understanding of the changes and the reason of their occurrence was needed to compile a comprehensive report. Not only can an understanding be established, but also the further verification of assumptions made through analysis of aerial photography in ƵŶŝƐŽŶƐ ǁŝƚŚ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ ;ϭϵϵϱͿ W-‐C-‐M model can be achieved. A site visit was conducted to further examine the site at a finer scale of the site.

4.3 Ȃ Landscape Dynamics ͞dŚĞ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ĂŶĚ ĚǇŶĂŵŝĐƐ ŽĨ ƐƉĂƚŝĂů ŚĞƚĞƌŽŐĞŶĞŝƚǇ ŝŶ ůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉĞƐ ŝƐ Ă ĐĞŶƚƌĂů ƚŚĞŵĞ ŽĨ ĞĐŽůŽŐŝĐĂů ƐƚƵĚŝĞƐ͟ (Clark, 2010). This statement directly underlines the determining role of flows and networks with regard to formation of landscapes. Due to the emphasis placed upon the flow and networks by ecological studies, diagrams were created to identify these elements within the study area. To begin with, the composition of manmade corridors was identified using a similar method to that of the structure map. The two central elements obviously being major and minor roadways, which are detailed in Figure 4. Next, utilising the same process of deconstruction, the classification of natural corridors followed. Identified were the dendritic minor watercourses and the riparian corridor enclosing the watercourse. Finally, after detailing both natural and manmade networks of the site, directional flows within both were documented in corresponding diagrams. As a result, a simplistic illustration of the connectivity of networks between differing landscape elements was compiled. These diagrams not only take into consideration the directional flow of each network, but also aspects such as flows, sources, sinks and nodes. The addition of these elements within the diagrams is due to the particular size of the site and scale with which the selected site must be observed; one cannot detail specific attributes of the corridors. By applying these features, reasoning for qualities of specific corridors can be attempted to be defined.

4.4 Ȃ Landscape Structure Transformation The most obvious method of observing landscape transformation is to compare two maps of differing times. This was achieved by comparing several images from online mapping service eBIMAP (BCC, 2011). These maps ranged in periods of time from 1946, 2005 and 2011. By comparing and contrasting each map, an established insight into the processes the site is subjected to can be attained.

5.0 -‐ Results The succeeding figures depict the utilisation of the methods to the subsequent selected site within the study area. These diagrams illustrate the previous aforementioned concepts with specific focus on landscape structure and dynamics.

5.1 Landscape Structure

The following results refer to Figure 3 and Table 1. Seven individual landscape units (A ʹ G) were acknowledged in the selected parameters of the study area. The three major landscape units include: natural vegetation (Unit E) comprising approximately 31.3% of the total study area, followed closely by medium density residential (Unit A) occupying 30.59%, and agriculture (Unit F), which covered approximately 20.24%. Although natural vegetation (Unit E) is only marginally larger to Unit A (medium density reisdential) it is evident that Unit E exerts the greatest amount of connectivity over the site resulting from lack of segmentation; therefore, clearly constituting the matrix of the site. The matrix is composed of primarily of open ʹ medium density Eucalyptus forest explaining the homogeneity of the patch unit (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2012). All three Landscape units are seemingly homogenous due to their uniform composition as observed through the granularity of the enhanced aerial photograph. Following Unit E, Unit A and Unit F in magnitude of land coverage are Unit B and Unit G which contain Austral Bricks and Brisbane Landfill, which ranged 5.06% -‐ 3.7%, with Units D and C occupying merely 0.5%-‐0.15% of the chosen site.

The presence of humans and natural disturbances, in many cases, sharpens an existing natural edge (Forman, 1995). As can be noted from Figure 3 and the boundary descriptions section of the Table 1, the boundary qualities of the patches are predominantly geometric. This can be directly linked to the initial statement, as manmade corridors (major and minor roads) border many of the patches. Although this is the case for the majority of patch boundaries, instances of convolution can be also be observed mainly residing parallel to the riparian corridor, which can be seen in Figure 3. 5.2 Landscape Dynamics The dynamics of the site are shown in Figures 5 and 7. These diagrams take into consideration both natural and manmade corridors within the parameters of the chosen site. As depicted in manmade corridor diagrams (Figures 4 and 5) of the region much of the area is interconnected, specifically patches A1 and A2, with minor and major artilleries. There is a clear definition seen, with the heavy presence of minor roadways illustrated in the medium density residential patches. In contrast, the assumed agricultural land only consists of several corridors, indicating its usage for agricultural purposes due to the need of vast amounts of acreage. Separating the two major patch units is the Gateway Motorway which is seen to be a source for the Brisbane airport. Adjacent to patch A2 is the Pacific Motorway, which displayed the highest connectivity, as observed and confirmed in field studies. The natural corridors consist solely of the Bulimba Creek catchment, and are considered a level 3 water catchment (WBM, 2003). This river system considered to be a dendritic drainage system due to it branching pattern form (Michael, 2011). Figure 6 details tributary streams adjoining the main tributary of the Bulimba at acute angle, which then leads to the Brisbane River. The main stem labelled as major watercourse, is categorised a level 5 stream, with adjoining intermediate tributary considered level 3 stream and minor streams level 1 (WBM, 2003). The outlining of the river is understood to be consisting of the vegetation and is considered to be a riparian corridor (Forman, 1995).

5.3 Attributes Table

The attributes table was quite simple to produce. By using the already constructed structure map, observations of boundary patch characteristic could be made through simply utilising the necessary descriptions previously discussed in the methodology section of this report. Specifying the matrix of the region was achieved by using the structure map and merely photocopying it onto trace paper. Following this, the trace paper featuring the structure map was overlayed onto a 1 X 1cm grid = 250 X 250 km this meant that each square would equate to 2 0.0625km . Each landscape Unit was measured and placed within the table with the largest landscape unit natural vegetation (Unit E) found to be the matrix. The purpose of the attributes table was specifically to deduce characteristics of each landscape unit to assist in understanding the processes occurring at boundary edges. By simplifying the landscape into a structure map a description of the each unit could be easily obtained. This information was then converted into a table format, making it easy to order and refer to.

Figure 2 : AERIAL MAP OF ROCHEDALE SELECTED STUDY AREA DEPICTING LANDSCAPE UNITS (Source: SUNMAP topographic image map 9542-‐41, 1995)

E1 G1 B1

F4 F2 F1 E2 A2

C1 A3 A4 Figure 3 : LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE MAP OF ROCHEDALE SELECTED STUDY AREA DEPICTING LANDSCAPE UNITS (Source: SUNMAP topographic image map 9542-‐41, 1995) LEGEND:

Unit A ;DĞĚŝƵŵ ĞŶƐŝƚǇ ZĞƐŝĚŶĞƟĂůͿ

Unit E ;EĂƚƵƌĂů sĞŐŝƚĂƟŽŶͿ

Unit B (Industrual)

Unit F (Agriculture)

Unit C ;ZĞĐƌĞĂƟŽŶĂůͿ

Unit G ;>ĂŶĚĮůůͿ

Unit D ; ƋƵĂƟĐͿ

Figure 4 : NETWORK DIAGRAM OF ROCHEDALE SELECTED STUDY AREA DEPICTING MAN-‐MADE CORRIDORS (Source: SUNMAP topographic image map 9542-‐41, 1995) LEGEND: Major Roads Minor Roads

Z/^ E /ZWKZd

CBD

&ŝŐƵƌĞ ϱ ͗

LEGEND:

FLOWS DIAGRAM OF ROCHEDALE SELECTED STUDY AREA DEPICTING MAN-‐MADE FLOWS (Source: SUNMAP topographic image map 9542-‐41, 1995) DĂũŽƌ dƌĂĸĐ &ůŽǁƐ DŝŶŽƌ dƌĂĸĐ &ůŽǁƐ

ŝƌĞĐƟŽŶ ŽĨ &ůŽǁ

^ŽƵƌĐĞ ^ŝŶŬ EŽĚĞ

Figure 6 : NETWORK DIAGRAM OF ROCHEDALE SELECTED STUDY AREA DEPICTING

LEGEND:

NATURAL CORRIDORS Source: (SUNMAP topographic image map 9542-‐41, 1995) (Healthy Waterways, 2003) Riparian Corridor Major Watercourse (Level 5)

Intermidiate Watercourse (Level 3)

Minor Watercourse (Level 1)

Figure 7 : NETWORK DIAGRAM OF ROCHEDALE SELECTED STUDY AREA DEPICTING NATURAL CORRIDORS Source: (SUNMAP topographic image map 9542-‐41, 1995) (Healthy Waterways, 2003)

LEGEND:

Riparian Corridor

Intermidiate Watercourse

Major Watercourse (Level 5)

Minor Watercourse (Level 1)

ŝƌĞĐƟŽŶ ŽĨ &ůŽǁ

(Level 3)

ZƵŶŽī Prevailing Winds (S.E)

EŽƚĞ͗ ůů ǁĂƚĞƌ ŇŽǁƐ ƐŚŽǁŶ ĂƌĞ ĚŝƌĞĐƚĞĚ ĚŽǁŶƐƚƌĞĂŵ͘ ,ŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ ƌŝǀĞƌƐ ĂŶĚ ƐƚƌĞĂŵƐ ŝŶ ƚŚĞ ƐƚƵĚǇ ĂƌĞĂ ĂƌĞ ƟĚĂů ĂŶĚ ĐĂŶ ŇŽǁ ŝŶ ĞŝƚŚĞƌ ĚŝƌĞĐƟŽŶ͘

(Dispersal of organic and inorganic materials)

E1 G1

H3 B1

F2 F1 E2 A2

C1 H1

H2 H3

Figure 8 : LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE MAP, WITH MANMADE CORRIDORS OF ROCHEDALE SELECTED STUDY AREA DEPICTING LANDSCAPE UNITS IN RELATION TO MAN-‐MADE CORRIDORS (Source: SUNMAP topographic image map 9542-‐41, 1995) LEGEND:

Unit A ;DĞĚŝƵŵ ĞŶƐŝƚǇ ZĞƐŝĚŶĞƟĂůͿ

Unit E ;EĂƚƵƌĂů sĞŐŝƚĂƟŽŶͿ

Unit B (Industrual)

Unit F (Agriculture)

Unit C ;ZĞĐƌĞĂƟŽŶĂůͿ

Unit G ;>ĂŶĚĮůůͿ

Unit D ; ƋƵĂƟĐͿ

Unit H ;DĂũŽƌ ZŽĂĚ ŽƌƌŝĚŽƌƐͿ Unit I ;DŝŶŽƌ ZŽĂĚ ŽƌƌŝĚŽƌƐͿ

STOP-2

STOP-1 STOP-5

STOP-4

STOP-3

Figure 9 : MAP OF ROCHEDALE SELECTED STUDY AREA DEPICTING SITE VISIT STOPS (Source: Google Maps, 2012) LEGEND:

STOP-1

Stops on Site Visit

1 km

Landscape Units Unit A

(Medium ʹ High residential)

Unit B (Industrial)

Unit C (Recreational) Unit D (Aquatic) Unit E (Natural Vegetation) Unit F (Agriculture)

Unit G (Landfill)

Matrix Area (km ) The matrix covers approximately 31.3% of the total study area 2 (13.44km ). Comprising of two landscape units, unit number E1 and E2.

Unit Number A1

Patch Size (km ) 2.78

1.1

0.15

0.08

0.03

0.65

0.07

4.2

Patch Shape medium elongation medium convolution medium elongation medium convolution low elongation low convolution high elongation low convolution medium elongation low convolution high elongation low convolution low elongation low convolution

Boundary Description mostly curvilinear

0.02

low elongation low convolution

mostly curvilinear

mostly geometric

E2 F1

0.37

0.28

1.94

0.16

0.5

low elongation low convolution medium elongation low convolution medium elongation low convolution low elongation low convolution medium elongation low convolution

mostly geometric

mixed mostly geometric

Table 1: Attributes table describing the landscape units found in Figure 3. Accessing each patch characteristics and size.

6.0 -‐ Discussion As previously stated, the study of landscape ecology endeavours to ƉƌŽƚĞĐƚ ƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚ ŐƌĞĞŶ ƐƉĂĐĞƐ͘ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ ;ϭϵϵϱͿ ƉĂƚĐŚ-‐matrix-‐ corridor model, as exhibited in the result, is utilised to identify structural landscape element, in doing so, simplifying the selected site to a conceptual basis. By transposing the aerial photograph through this process, not only do landscape elements characteristics become more graphically coherent, but also an understanding of dynamics and relationships between differing elements can be attained. ͞dŚĞ ƐƵďũĞĐƚ ŽĨ ůĂŶĚ ƚƌĂŶƐĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ ĂŶĚ ĨƌĂŐŵĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶ ŝƐ ƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚ ƚŽ Ăůů ŚƵŵĂŶ ŝƐƐƵĞƐ ƚŚĂƚ ŝŶǀŽůǀĞ ůĂŶĚ͟ ;&ŽƌŵĂŶ͕ ϭϵϵϱ͘ ƉϰϬϱͿ͘ dŚĞ significance of this statement can be clearly depicted in the corresponding imagery in Figures 10-‐12. These three aerial photographs taken from: 1946, 2007, and 2011, illustrate spatial processes in land transformation. By comparing each image it is evident, that significant detrimental human-‐induced processes have conspired on the selected site. The beginning of fragmentation process is apparent in 1946, with the initial establishment of manmade corridors able to be observed due to linear disruptions with in natural vegetation. These dissections of the landscape are only present due to land clearing for agricultural purposes, as found to be the initial purpose of the region as discussed in the methodology section of the report. The occurrence of human-‐ induced land fragmentation and other spatial processes become ever more prominent in the following image of 2007, which raises many concerns. This increase of residential development can be assumed to have occurred due to the ͞ƚŽƚĂů ƉŽƉƵůĂƚŝŽŶ ŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞ ďǇ over half a million people bĞƚǁĞĞŶ ϭϵϴϲ ĂŶĚ ϮϬϬϳ͟ (BCC, 2011).

Figures 10-‐12: Selected study site. From top to bottom, 1946, 2007, 2011 (BCC, 2011).

As observed in the second image, several spatial processes seem to be occurring, including, dissection and shrinkage. In comparing Figures 11 and 12 there has been immense change induced by the increase of population. Shown in Figure 12, unit A1 and A2 (medium residential) have developed within the region heavily fragmenting the previously established green space. With this increased human presence the need for human corridors become essential, however, decrease connectivity within green space through dissection. This then consequently results to the shrinkage and inevitable proliferation of minor natural vegetation patches, these processes ĂƌĞ ĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚ ƚŚĞ ŵŽƐƚ ƐĞƌŝŽƵƐ ƚŚƌĞĂƚƐ ƚŽ ĂƌƚŚ͛Ɛ ďŝŽůŽŐŝĐĂů ĚŝǀĞƌƐŝƚǇ (Collinge, 2010).

The final image shows fractional change in comparison to the previous imagery obviously due to the shorter span of time. Although on a rigorous inspection of both Figure 11 and 12, it is still evident that the encroachment and shrinkage of green space is occurring. This simple trend analysis of multi-‐period mosaic sequences (e.g. natural vegetation to agriculture) the region suggests that the Rochedale Community has undergone significant change over the past 65 years. Whilst the Figure 10 (1946) image showed indications of fragmentation from human presence, by 2011 natural vegetation patches were extensively fragmented, which can ĚĞǀĞůŽƉ ͞profound impacts on populations of species, their interactions within ecological communities, and the functiŽŶ ŽĨ ĞĐŽƐǇƐƚĞŵƐ͟ ;Collinge, 2010).

6.1 Ȃ Land Fragmentation Due to population increase and the over densification of the Central Brisbane District expansion is inevitable, with the Brisbane City Council ;ϮϬϭϭͿ ƐƚĂƚŝŶŐ ͞ƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚ ĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ ĂŶĚ ĚĞǀĞůopment is expected to occur in ƚŚĞ ZŽĐŚĞĚĂůĞ ĂƌĞĂ ŽǀĞƌ ƚŚĞ ĐŽŵŝŶŐ ǇĞĂƌƐ͘͟ This was also verified during the site visit from Stop 2 to Stop 3 (refer to Figure 9) a substantial amount of advertisement for housing development was observed. Fundamentally, usinŐ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ ;ϭϵϵϱͿ P-‐C-‐M model the proposed Rochedale community would be categorised as an introduced patch type (Forman, 1995). Although it may not currently be seen to be the matrix, through the knowledge gained from the site visit, one could assume that built environment is gradually encroaching the surrounding green space. Although Brisbane City Council advocate that Rochedale Urban Community proposed plan will achieve a ͞Greener Suburb͟, its existence affects the ecology of the surrounding environment and can be devastating. ͞Large patches contain more energy and mineral nutrients than smaller patches͟ (Forman and Godron, 1986, p99), but with the clearing of land major effects such as habitat fragmentation can occur. During the undertaking of the site visit this was confirmed, with substantial amounts clearing occurring in the surrounding open eucalyptus forests. This has the ability to increase external impacts (predators or invaders), altered microclimates, and increased wildlife isolation (MacDonald, 2003). Larger patches can begin to fragment and the possibility of patch edge recession can occur, and subsequently, over time the site begins to resemble the example previously used to describe matrix. This, consequently, would make green space a fragment imbedded within an urban development matrix. The further need of residential development gives way for not only the need for land but also the ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚ ŽĨ ƌŽĂĚ ĐŽƌƌŝĚŽƌƐ͘ ͞EĞĂƌůǇ Ăůů ůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉĞƐ are both divided and at the same time tied together by ĐŽƌƌŝĚŽƌƐ͟ ;&ŽƌŵĂŶ ĂŶĚ 'ŽĚƌŽŶ͘ ϭϵϴϲ͕ ƉϭϮϯͿ͘ /Ŷ ƚŚŝƐ regard, road corridors act to tie together residential developments to neighbouring corresponding patches by doing so intersecting natural patches in the process as seen in Figure 9 with manmade corridors H1, H2 and H3 dissecting the matrix. The road corridor acts as a Figure 13: The remnants of a kangaroo found filter for crossing animals, which effects connectivity during the site visit, adjacent to high flow man-‐ and movement of wildlife. These effects were made corridor (Mahairas, 2012). witnessed firsthand during the site visit with the remnants of a deceased kangaroo found lying beside the road as displayed in Figure 13. This form of dissection of previously linked vegetation patches alters the existing ecology (Lindenmayer & Fischer. 2006, p125). The road corridor acts as a boundary between surrounding

patches having similar effect as land fragmentation with more emphasis being placed on the restricted circulation and flow. Although Brisbane City Council attempt to address the concepts of sustainability by retaining significant portions of existing vegetation (BCC, 2011), it is just that, an attempt, sustainability can be simply put ĂƐ Ă ǁĂǇ ƚŽ ͞create and maintain the conditions under which humans and nature can exist in productive harmony, that permit social, economic and other requirements of present and future generations͟ ;EPA, n.d). With the understanding of sustainability one would question the sustainability of newly proposed Rochedale Urban Community, situated on large areas of natural patches clearly illustrated in Figure 14. Although the proposed housing development incorporates the use of sustainability it is the occupation of green space and the close vicinity of the development to neighbouring waterways that is the detrimental factor.

Figure 14: The proposed Rochedale Community Urban Plan (Brisbane City Council, 2012).

6.2 Ȃ Riparian Landscape The clearing of vegetation in the proximity of riparian corridors can have severe effects on the water quality and natural habitants (Brisbane City Council, 2008). This can be clearly identified, when comparing Figures 11 and 12, with both Unit A1 and A2 (medium density residential) progressively encroaching on the adjacent riparian vegetation, straightening the boundary edge. This degradation of watercourses is mainly due the clearing of vegetation increasing speed and volume in which rainwater flows (Brisbane City Council, 2008). The increase of urban development also corresponds with an increase of soil and organic materials and chemicals found in surrounding waterways consequently causing sediments to silt up of waterholes (Brisbane City Council, 2008). Increased nutrients and organic materials may be thought to benefit waterways, however posses the opposite effect (Brisbane City Council, 2008). Due to the increased presence of nutrients the possibility of algal blooms can occur resulting too ͞...ďŝŽŵĂŐŶŝĮĐĂƚŝŽŶ ǁŝƚŚŝŶ ƚŚĞ ĨŽŽĚ ǁĞď͟ (Barwick, Maher, 2003). These processes discussed are evident within Bulimba Creek Catchment as it received ĂŶ ͞&͟ ŝŶ ƚŚĞ latest waterways report card (Strachan, 2010). Figure 7 depicts the close vicinity of the development in regards

to the riparian corridor and possible run-‐off areas. Surrounding the catchment area are Units A1, A2 and F1. These patches consist of both agricultural land and residential, which raises the issue of pollutant runoff which ĐĂŶ ͞ŶĞŐĂƚŝǀĞůǇ ĂůƚĞƌ important hydrogeological conditions and ƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĞƐ͟ ; ƉĂŶ͕ Raine & Paterson, 2002).

6.3 -‐ Comparative Model Analysis

͞A land mosaic is composed only of these three types of spatial elements. Every point is either within a patch, a corridor, or a matrix͟ (Forman. 1995, p7). In stating this, ƚŚĞ ƵƐĞ ŽĨ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ ƉĂƚĐŚ-‐matrix-‐corridor model is not a method of conserving landscapes but a model in which areas of habitat and non-‐habitat are simplified and ideas are translated into spatial context (Lindenmayer & Burgman, 2005). Although, there are faults associated with the P-‐C-‐M model. Due to the ͞ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚ ŽĨ ĐůĞĂƌůǇ ĚĞĨŝŶing landscape elements with sharp ďŽƵŶĚĂƌŝĞƐ ĂƐ Ă ďĂƐŝƐ ĨŽƌ ĐĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŶŐ ůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉĞ ŵĂƚƌŝǆ͟ (Hoechstetter, 2009. p.74). In most cases, the environmental boundaries are in the form of ecological gradients. Therefore, the model can be seen to oversimplify landscape structure in certain instances (Hoechstetter, 2009). Scale is also another important factor of landscape ecology, with most research scale-‐dependant; great focus is dedicated to the interpretation of landscape patterns and processes on varying scales (Kent, 2007). Put simply, at a smaller scale one could witness landscape unit to be the matrix, however, on a different scale this unit may appear to be only a patch within the matrix. Although these faults provide limitations to the analysis conducted, for the purposes of this ƌĞƉŽƌƚ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ ;ϭϵϵϱͿ W-‐C-‐M model is substantial enough to evaluate the processes occurring within the selected site.

7.0 -‐ Recommendations This is obviously not the first instance of land fragmentation and riparian vegetation clearing witnessed. Many schemes for the protection, rehabilitation and management have been created. In this section of the report schemes and methods for the assistance of green space and recommendations made will be adapted and appropriately adjusted to suite the planning of future development of Rochedale. Principles used in landscape ecology should be utilised in the planning and management of both riparian and vegetative ecosystems. These strategies should include the ͞ŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ƐƚƌĞĂŵs on which vegetation ĐŽƌƌŝĚŽƌƐ ƐŚŽƵůĚ ďĞ ƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞĚ Žƌ ƌĞŚĂďŝůŝƚĂƚĞĚ͟ ;Ipswich City Council, 2012) and the immediate managing and restoration of damaged riparian corridors and land fragmentation. By identifying areas of heavily damaged riparian vegetation the process of rehabilitation and protection can occur. There are many strategies to assist in retaining and protecting existing native vegetation, however, most revolve around the idea of revegetation, weed control and protection (Ipswich City Council, 2012). Weed control mainly relies on categorising weed species located in the riparian corridor. Once located, cut stump treatment and foliar spraying of large woody weeds such as: Chinese elm, Camphor laurel and Mulberry, can occur, eradicating many weed species (Ipswich City Council, 2012). Once this has occurred the revegetation of the area can transpire. Utilisation of indigenous species such as, Brisbane Wattle, Creek Lillypilly and Black Bean can be planted, ͞maintaining the genetic integrity and biodiversity of the riparian corridor͟ ;/ƉƐǁŝĐŚ ŝƚǇ Council, 2012). The positioning of layers of vegetation is also fundamental for providing differing areas of foraging and nesting locations for native wildlife and also can ensure structural integrity and security of the bank (Department of sustainability, 2012). These steps would inevitably assist the regeneration of connectivity within the site if implemented. Current policies such as the, ƌŝƐďĂŶĞ ŝƚǇ ŽƵŶĐŝů͛Ɛ ϭϱ WƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞƐ ŽĨ ^ƵƐƚĂŝŶĂďŝůŝƚǇ ;ϮϬϭϮͿ ĂƐƐŝƐƚ ŝŶ ĚŝƌĞĐƚŝŶŐ the built environment industry in regards to the preservation and restoration of our remaining green spaces. It is

the implication of policies in correlation with the protection, rehabilitation and management of our green spaces that will ensure its presence in the future.

8.0 -‐ Conclusion The structure of natural vegetation of the Rochedale area has changed significantly during a 65-‐year period. This study attempts to analyse the human-‐induced processes degrading the natural ecosystem of the Rochedale area. Land and riparian vegetation has been identified as becoming progressively more fragmented, due to the stronger presence of human residence in the area. The matrix was identified to be Unit E (natural vegetation) however, due to the dissection of corridors occurring from the establishment of major road ways the matrix has become heavily fragmented, subsequently reducing the connectivity of the matrix. Utilisation of aerial photography provided a platform, with further manipulation of the imagery occurring to ĂƐƐŝƐƚ ŝŶ ĐƌĞĂƚŝŶŐ ƚŚĞ ŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇ ĚŝĂŐƌĂŵƐ ƚŽ ĂĚĂƉƚ &ŽƌŵĂŶ͛Ɛ ;ϭϵϵϱͿ W-‐C-‐M model. An establishment and comprehension of the dynamics and structure of the selected region was then made. This process influenced the position taken in the discussion of the report as an understanding of the detrimental influence of human presence within the site was obtained. Brisbane City Council attempt to dampen the effect of infrastructure, but it is not only the effect of the infrastructure to adjacent habitats, but also the overwhelming presence and encroachment of humans that is of concern. However, in saying this, a restriction of development is not a feasible solution due to the increasing population of Brisbane. Though, as discussed, there are ways to assist the redevelopment of these corridors as explained in the recommendations section of this report, with particular focus on the regeneration and rehabilitation of the natural patches and corridors. By implementing these strategies in future developments, an assurance of the conservation and restoration of natural spaces, under which both humans and nature can coexist and sustain a balance of requirements.

9.0 -‐ References Andersson, E. 2006. Urban landscapes and sustainable cities. Ecology and Society. Retrieved from: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art34/ Apan, A, A. Raine, S, R & Paterson, M, S. (2002). Mapping and Analysis of Changes in the Riparian Landscape Structure of the Lockyer Valley Catchment, Queensland, Australia. Retrieved from: http://eprints.usq.edu.au/2903/1/Apan_Raine_Paterson.pdf Barwick, M & Maher, W. (2003). ŝŽƚƌĂŶƐĨĞƌĞŶĐĞ ĂŶĚ ďŝŽŵĂŐŶŝĮĐĂƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ƐĞůĞŶŝƵŵ copper, cadmium, zinc, arsenic and lead in a temperate seagrass ecosystem from Lake Macquarie Estuary, NSW, Australia. Retrieved from: http://www.canberra.edu.au/centres/iae/pdfs/2003_Barwick_Maher_Biotransference_and_biomagnifica tion_of_selenium_copper_Cadmium_zinc_arsenic_lead.pdf BCC. (2011). eBIMAP Digital Mapping Service. Retrieved from: http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/planning-‐ building/planning-‐guidelines-‐and-‐tools/online-‐mapping-‐tools/ebimap/index.htm BCC. (2011). Population Growth Challenges. Retrieved from: http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/prdc/groups/corpwebcontent/documents/documents/046373.pdf BCC. (2011). Rochedale Urban Community Local Plan Frequently Asked Questions. Retrieved from: http://adrianschrinner.com/Portals/0/Newsletters%20and%20Publications/Rochedale%20Urban%20Com munity%20Local%20Plan%20FAQ.pdf Brinckerhoff, P. (n.d). Topography, geomorphology, geology and soil and geotechnical conditions. Retrieved from: http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/021103ce-‐f9d4-‐4ad7-‐b94e-‐ 4c930457dc24/pdf_sebx_cds_v1_s07_topography.pdf Brisbane City Community Files. (2012). Rochedale. Retrieved March 10, 2012 from: http://profile.id.com.au/Default.aspx?id=327&pg=101&gid=1230&type=enum Brisbane City Council. (2008). INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIBUTIONS PLANNING SCHEME POLICY. Retrieved from: http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/documents/building_development/planning%20scheme%20policies/roc hedale_psp.pdf Brisbane City Council. (2008). zŽƵ͛ƌĞ ǇŽƵƌ ƌĞĞŬ ʹ Bulimba Creek. Retrieved from: http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/documents/environment/know_your_creek_bulimba_2008.pdf Brisbane City Council. (2011). Brisbane City Plan. Retrieved from: http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/BCCWR/LIB181/CHAPTER4_ROCHEDALEURBAN_LP_FULL.PDF?xml=/BCC: PdfHitXml:svDocNum=2 Brisbane City Council. (2012). Rochedale Urban Community Local Plan. Retrieved March 10, 2012 from: http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/planning-‐building/current-‐planning-‐projects/neighbourhood-‐ planning/Neighbourhood-‐plans-‐in-‐your-‐area/rochedale/index.htm Clark, W. (2010). Principles of Landscape Ecology. Nature Education Knowledge 2(2):34 Collinge, S. (2010). Spatial Ecology and Conservation. Nature Education Knowledge 1(8):69 Crew, G. (2002). History of Rochedale ʹ Aboriginal History. Retrieved from: http://www.gbkgraphics.com/history/ab.htm

Department of Sustainability. (2012). Enhancing the value of revegetation for wildlife. Retrieved from: http://www.environment.gov.au/land/publications/pubs/revegwild4.pdf Department of Environment and Resource Management. (2012). Regional ecosystems search results. Retrieved from: http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/REDD EPA. (n.d). What is Sustainability?. Retrieved from: http://www.epa.gov/sustainability/basicinfo.htm Forman, R. T. T. (1995). Land mosaics: The ecology of landscapes and regions. CA, England: Cambridge University Press. Forman, R. T. T., & Godron, M. (1986). Landscape Ecology. New York, USA: Wiley. Franklin, J. F. & Forman, R. T. T. (1987). Creating landscape patterns by forest cutting: Ecological consequences and principles. The Hague, Netherlands: SPB Academic Publishing. Godfrey, J. (1995). A History of the Bulimba Creek Valley. Retrieved from: Golubiewski, N. (2007). Landscape Ecology. Retrieved from: http://www.eoearth.org/article/Landscape_ecology Google Maps. (2012). Rochedale Queensland 4123. Retrieved from: http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&q=rochedale&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1920&bih=8 32&um=1&ie=UTF-‐8&sa=N&tab=wl Health Waterways. (2003). Brisbane River Catchment. Retrieved from: http://healthywaterways.org/HealthyWaterways/Waterwaysandcatchmentsinformation/Level2and3Catc hments/BrisbaneRiverLevel3Catchments.aspx Hersperger, A. (2006). Spatial adjacencies and interactions: Neighborhood mosaics for landscape ecological planning, 77(3), 227-‐239. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.02.009. Hoechstetter,S . (2009). ENHANCED METHODS FOR ANALYSING LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE, (2)2, 73-‐75. Retrieved from: http://www.iale.cz/downloads/JLE_4/8_Madera_book%20review.pdf Ipswich City Council. (2012). Riparian Corridor Revegetation Guideline. Retrieved from: http://www.ipswich.qld.gov.au/documents/environment/riparian_corridor_revegetation_guidelines.pdf Kent, M. (2007). Biogeography and landscape ecology. Progress in Physical Geography. 31(3), 345-‐355. Doi: 10.1177//0039133307079059 Lindenmayer, D, & Burgman, M. A. (2005). Practical Conservation Biology. Retrieved from: http://books.google.com.au/books?ei=UMhmT72zH6WImQW-‐ hoSICA&id=syrqsTQVWC8C&dq=%22patch+corridor+matrix+model%22&q=%22patch+corridor+matrix+m odel%22#v=snippet&q=%22patch%20corridor%20matrix%20model%22&f=false Lindenmayer, D, & Fischer, J. (2006). Habitat Fragmentation and Landscape Change ʹ An Ecological Conservation Synthesis. Retrieved from: Logan City Council. (2010). Logan City Council: Rochedale. Retrieved from: http://www.logan.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/74768/6558576-‐Handout21-‐Rochedale.pdf MacDonald, M.A. (2003). The role of corridors in biodiversity conservation in production forest landscapes: a literature Review. Retrieved from: http://live.greeningaustralia.org.au/nativevegetation/pages/pdf/Authors%20M/3_MacDonald.pdf

Mahairas, M. (2012), Kangaroo Remnants. Retrieved: 28.03.2012 Mountains to Mangroves. (2012). South East Queensland ʹ History Overview. Retrieved from: http://www.mountainstomangroves.org/m2m/01_cms/details.asp?ID=114 R, Michael E. (2011). The Physical Environment: an Introduction to Physical Geography. Retrieved from: http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/ritter/geog101/textbook/title_page.html Strachan, A. (2010). Catchment needs time. Retrieved from: http://south-‐east-‐ advertiser.whereilive.com.au/news/story/catchment-‐needs-‐time/ SUNMAP topographic image map 9542-‐41, Capalaba, QLD. State Government Department of Lands, 1995. Wiens, J. A. (1976). Population responses to patchy environments. Annual Review of Ecological Systems, 7(1), 81-‐120. Willmott, W. (2004). Rocks and Landscapes of the National Parks of Southern Queensland. QLD: Australia: Kingswood Press.