Planting for Pollinator Habitat Guide by WildthingsAustralia

Planting for Habitat Pollinators Guide Gippsland Plain Bioregion

Produced by Wildthings Australia www.wildthingsaustralia.org.au

A blue banded bee - Amegilla cingulata Photo: Alison Mellor

Fabaceae Daviesia latifolia - Hop Bitter-pea Photo by Christian Hauser

© 2021 by Wildthings Australia Editing: Andrew Coghill, Molly Hosking, Lesley Hosking, Catherine Coghill and Kylie Robertson, Wildthings Australia Formatting & layout: Andrew Coghill, Wildthings Australia The copyright for all photographs, icons, and designs is retained by Wildthings or the creators. None of the photographs or artwork may be reproduced without permission from the creators. This guide can be downloaded for free from the Wildthings Australia website at http://www.wildthingsaustralia.org.au Hard copies can be ordered at http://www.wildthingsaustralia.org.au

Acknowledgment of Traditional Owners Wildthings acknowledges the traditional custodians of the lands that make up the Gippsland Plain Bioregion. We pay our respects to their Elders both past and present.

Acknowledgments Produced for the Wildthings project Planting for Pollinators, this guide is funded by the Victorian Government Landcare Program and Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment Management Authority. Wildthings would like to thank the following people and organizations’ for their incredible assistance in producing our guide. Seeds Bushland Services & Conservation Collective (Nursery) - Kylie Robertson and her team for their great support of the project Flora Victoria - Kate Hill in particular for the great support of the project and providing the case studies in this guide. Catherine Clowes - Author of the childrens’ book on native Australian plants “Plantastic”. Provided a great selection of plant photos. Christian Hauser - for providing great local native plant photos Dr Catherine Phillips - for her article titled Anticipating Varroa destructor Dr Roger Farrow - for his article on flowers and insect relationships Alison Mellor, Paperbark Native Bees - has provided great insect photos for the guide Professor James Cook, Western University - for his highlights on the broad system of pollinators Dr Megan Halcroft - for illustrating the variety of plant families which can be useful in identifying suitable plants for bee habitat Dr Julian Brown, Dr Saul Cunningham and Joshua Coates, Fenner School of Environment & Society, Australian National University for their case study on how native bees can increase agricultural production. John Karasinki, Curtin University - for an extract from his paper on the economic value of Australia’s insect pollinators South Gippsland Seed Bank - for the information on the direct seeding preparation methods used on farm revegetation projects

The team at Wildthings including Rachel Devlin, Kylie Robertson, Catherine Coghill, Molly Hosking and Andrew Coghill have worked hard to deliver long lasting results from the grants activities. We hope you enjoy the guide and spread the word on the importance of native biodiversity.

Contents Introduction 5 Gippsland Plains Bioregion 5 Our Inspiration 7 Biodiversity and Habitat Restoration 7 Insects and Flowers - Roger Farrow 9 Pollinators 19 Pollination Services for Farmers - John M Karasiński from Curtin University

Anticipating Varroa destructor - Dr Catherine Phillips

Wildlife Management Activities

Native Bee Pollinators

The Berries and the Bees - A case study - Dr Julian Brown, Dr Saul Cunningham and Joshua Coates

Choosing Plants to Attract Native Bees - Dr Megan Halcroft

Identify and Protect What You Already Have

Ecological Vegetation Classes

Grassy Woodland Benchmark - EVC 175

Planning Revegetation Sites

Site Preparation

Planting

Direct Seeding

Case Study One - Dianella Amoena Receptor Site Understory Rehabilitation - Flora Victoria

Case Study Two - Riparian and Grassy Woodland Revegetation - Flora Victoria

Rippa Seeder - Site preparation method 77 Mouldboard Ploughing - Site preparation method

Scalping with Blade - Site preparation method

Monitoring

Gippsland Plain Bioregion Gippsland Plain Bioregion © State Government of Victoria 2021

Introduction

Gippsland Plains Bioregion

Wildthings, a not-for-profit community group focused on conservation and improving native biodiversity through education and on-ground work.

The Gippsland Plains Bioregion of South Eastern Victoria is the focus of the guide, which provides information on: • The native biodiversity in the region

Inspired by the diversity of our native flora and insects, we have developed a guide for our project “Planting for Pollinators”. Sourcing information from Australia and across the globe, we have sought to include the research and best practice methods for improving native habitat for insect pollinators. This guide has been developed for planting pollinator habitat in the Gippsland Plain Bioregion of Victoria. Our native insects rely on habitat, particularly plants for nectar, pollen and shelter to survive. Native plants offer our beneficial insects the best habitat to thrive, thereby improving resilience in our ecosystems and improving crop pollination.

• Revegetation processes The Gippsland Plains Bioregion supports a diverse range of flora and fauna species. The variety of species maintains the balance and resilience in our ecosystems, providing multiple benefits for the local environment, local community and surrounding land owners. Due to development, farming and changing environmental factors, the region’s native vegetation has been significantly disturbed. The ability to successfully restore degraded land and implement effective land management strategies is important for our native ecosystems and farming landscapes, now and into the future.

Halictidae Syrphidae Drone fly - Eristalis tenax Lasioglossum - The Photo by Alison Mellor Photo by Alison Mellor

sweat bee genus

Our Inspiration This project was inspired by research from a number of scientists across Australia. Topics included: pollination, the importance of native habitat for pollinators within agriculture and increased crop yields, integrated pest management, and successful revegetation methods. A diverse range of insects in the landscape can provide valuable pollination services to farmers crops when provided with a nearby native diverse habitat. The overall take home message of this research is that biodiversity in flora increases the diversity of insects which benefits both the farmer and the environment.

Biodiversity and Habitat Restoration Biodiversity is the variety of plants and animals interacting as a community within a certain habitat or “biosphere”. Diversity of plant species within a community and the resulting complex interplay between species improves resilience and is highly sought after when seeking to improve the health of a natural area. Local or indigenous plant species are particularly resilient in the areas in which they have evolved over time and should be considered the preferred species to source when improving a natural area. This guide will discuss specific plant and insect interactions to highlight the benefits of using native Australian plants to provide habitat for insect pollinators. Fauna biodiversity in a landscape, the amount of birds, insects and other animal can indicate the health of the environment and helps maintain a viable ecosystem. Furthermore, they help to manage potential pests by keeping the system in balance by providing food and shelter for a diverse range of native flora and fauna. Insects perform several roles within our local ecosystem including biological control, waste decomposition, pollination services and are a valuable source of food for other invertebrates and vertebrates.

Syrphidae Hover Fly Photo by Alison Mellor

Insects and Flowers Roger Farrow Insects are a familiar sight on the flowers of our native plants and their role in the pollination of flowering plants is well known. How did this relationship develop? This article describes some of the different ways in which insects currently relate to flowers and how this may reflect the evolutionary processes that have occurred between insects and flowers. This type of process is often described as co-evolution because each partner in the relationship has functional adaptations to exploit the relationship. Ancestral members of most of the currently recognised major Insect Orders appeared in the Carboniferous and Permian Eras of the Palaeozoic, starting 300 million years ago (mya), long before the appearance of the Angiosperms or flowering plants which occurred as late as the Cretaceous era 100 mya. The Carboniferous and Permian was dominated by spore- and conebearing plants including spore and seed-bearing ferns, club mosses, cycads, and primitive conifers. Following the mass extinctions at the end of the Permian the remaining Orders of Insects appeared in the Triassic and Jurassic 230 -180 mya when the forests were dominated by pollen-producing cycads and conifers. What were the insects of the Palaeozoic feeding on? There was a predominance of species with sucking mouthparts, much greater than in today’s fauna. These were suitable for imbibing spores and pollen or sucking juices from tissues including cones and seeds. A few were predators and detritus feeders. Most disappeared at the great Permian extinction. In the Triassic and Jurassic all the modern Orders were present and

a wide range of food sources were utilised and for example ancestral moths had jaws and fed on pollen, like some modern species, although most modern moths have highly specialised sucking mouthparts for imbibing nectar and appeared in the Cretaceous after the rise of the Angiosperms. It was generally assumed until recently that all non-flowering plants were wind pollinated. While this it is true for modern and probably ancestral conifers it has been recently shown that modern cycads are pollinated by a particular group of weevils in whatever continent they have been investigated. Weevil pollination of the stem less cycad Bowenia in our tropical rainforests has been extensively studied. The relationship is more than a simple pollination process as the weevils lay their eggs in the male cones and the larvae cannot develop anywhere else. This is an intimate relationship which benefits both beetle and cycad is known as a symbiosis (1). Beetles including weevils coexisted with cycads in the Triassic and Jurassic and it is probable that they were involved in the pollination process. One of the primitive rainforest angiosperms of our rainforests, the Bolwarra, Eupomatia laurina, a small tree which, by the way has cauliflorous flowers (borne on the trunk), also has a symbiotic relationship with a weevil pollinator. Beetles are thought to be the first pollinators of the angiosperms, possibly as predators of other flower-inhabiting insects or as pollen feeders. Most insects are covered in hairs and bristles and pollen grains are naturally trapped in these structures. Most insects fly and are pre-adapted for the transport of pollen between plant reproductive structures.

INSECT CLASSIFICATION Flowering Plants belong to one Order the Angiospermae and are broken up into numerous families, but insects belong to number of characteristic Orders each of which comprises a variable number of families. The principle orders discussed here are: •

Grasshoppers

ORTHOPTERA

•

Bugs

HEMIPTERA

•

Beetles COLEOPTERA

•

Wasps and bees

•

Flies DIPTERA

•

Butterflies & Moths

HYMENOPTERA

LEPIDOPTERA

The Bugs and Grasshoppers belong to a Suborder in which the immature stages are similar to the adults, the wings develop externally and they usually feed on the same host. In contrast, Beetles, Wasps, Flies, and Moths belong to another suborder characterised by a grub-like larval stage, quite different from the adult, in which the wings develop internally and which may feed differently from the adult.

Fig 1 - Cycad weevels on Bowenia sp.

CLASSIFYING FLOWER VISITORS I have divided visitors that are commonly seen on flowers and that I have photographed into: 1) petal and anther feeders; 2) pollen feeders and collectors; 3) nectar feeders; 4) pseudo-copulators; 5) predators; 6) accidentals.

1. Petal and Anther Feeders Grasshoppers, beetles and moth larvae are often seen feeding on flower structures but are not directly involved in the pollination process. They basically have simple chewing mouthparts. (2, 3, 4)

2. Pollen feeders and collectors It is often difficult to distinguish between some pollen and nectar feeders especially those feeding in flowers where the stamens and nectaries are close together such as the Myrtaceae. Most beetles have simple chewing mouthparts and feed on the anthers trapping pollen grains in their hairs and bristles and transferring them from flower to flower (5,6,7). Bees take this a step further by collecting pollen in specialised baskets of bristles on their legs and abdomen to feed their larvae (8). Although flies have sucking mouthparts many such as the hover flies principally feed on pollen (9,10,11) and transfer pollen on their mouthparts. Many pollen-feeding species are also attracted to wind pollinated plants because of the abundance of pollen.

3. Nectar feeders

Most flowers use nectar to attract pollinators. Nectaries are positioned to ensure that the visiting insect brushes against anthers and stigma. Moths and butterflies have co- evolved with the Angiosperms through the development of extensible sucking mouthparts. Bees and some wasps and flies also have sucking mouthparts adapted to nectar feeding (12).

All bugs have sucking mouthparts but few feed on flowers. Nectar is a great energy source for flying insects and a wide range of wasps and flies utilise nectar as a primary energy source (13) . Some may actually rob the nectary and by-pass the anther and stigmas (14). Most moths are night-flying and my photos only record those seen by day, mostly species distasteful to predators (Family Arctidae,15,16). Note the proboscis of the butterflies (17,18) and moths.

4. Pseudocopulation Besides colour, flowers also attract pollinating insects by the release of scent. Many insects also use a scent or pheromone to attract the opposite sex. One family of plants, the orchids, have taken this one step further, by producing a pheromone-mimicking scent to attract males of a specific insect species, many of them parasitic wasps. There are also physical attributes of the flower which mimic the female of the insect species so the male attempts to copulate with the flower and receives the pollinia which are transferred to another flower of the same species by the same process. Unfortunately I have no photos of this event but watch this space!

5. Predators Where insect prey is available predators will lurk and so it is with flowers. Ambush predators such as spiders (19) and assassin bugs (20) often wait on or next to flowers to capture unsuspecting prey.

6. Accidentals Some insects are seen wandering over flowers when they have no specific purpose there such as the grasshopper shown (21). Others may climb there for a vantage point to take-off in flight.

Petal and anther feeders Photos: Roger Farrow

Fig 2 - The beetle Dicranolaius on Velleia paradoxa.

Fig 3 - Katydid Caedicia simplex on Ranunculus

Fig 4 Caterpillar Heliothis punctigera on Xerochrysum

Pollen feeders and collectors

Fig 5 - Jewel beetle on Crepis

Fig 6 Pollen beetles Mordellidae on Brachyscome

Fig 7 - Scarab Diphucephala on Callotis

Fig 8 - Solitary bee on Xerochrysum

Fig 10 - Hoverfly Syrphidae on Linum

Fig 9 - Tephritid on Craspedia

Fig 11 - Tachinid fly on Leptospermum

Nectar feeders

Fig 12 - Scoliid wasp on garlic

Fig 15 - Pollanisus moth on snow gum

Fig 13 - Ichneumonid wasp on Bursaria

Fig 14 - Wasp robbing Impatiens nectary

Fig 16 - Utetheisa moth on Podolepis

Fig 17 - Meadow argus on Xerochrysum

Fig 18 - Grass skipper on Xerochrysum

Predators

Accidentals

Fig 19 - Spider on Xerochrysum

Fig 20 - Assassin bug lurking below gentian flower

Fig 21 - Gumleaf grasshopper numph on Dilwynnia

Syrphidae Drone fly - Eristalis tenax Photo by Alison Mellor

Pollinators

Professor James Cook

As research continues to discover new insights into the important roles our native pollinators play in our forests, grasslands and agricultural enterprises, looking after our pollinators and their habitat is crucial. Australian Pollinator Week raises awareness on the important role of pollinators to ensure we are doing what we can to help them prosper. Professor James Cook of the Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment at Western Sydney University shares his top five native pollinating superheroes: 1. Native bees: with around 2000 species of native bees in Australia, these little beauties are well-adapted to our native flowers and many are surprisingly active on our fruit crops. Many of them live on their own in the ground or in plant stems – you can even build them a home with a Bee Hotel. 2. Flying Foxes: these nocturnal pollinators love the sweet nectar of native flowers. Flying foxes can be absolutely covered in pollen and are essential in the health of native forest ecosystems and as pollinators. 3. Flies and Butterflies: even those pesky blowflies that bother us in summer are actually important pollinators – in fact, they are important pollinators of avocados and coffee plants! Your Saturday brunch just wouldn’t be the same without them! 4. Moths: flowers of some fruit crops like Pawpaw only open at night and attract moths as pollinators. Mothpollinated flowers are often white or translucent and can be fragrant to attract moths by their scent. 5. Birds: Many native bird favourites such as lorikeets and honeyeaters perform pollination services for native plants, often emerging covered in pollen that they move between flowers as they feed on the nectar of native trees.

Thymelaeaceae Pimelea humilis Photo by Christian Hauser

Asphodelaceae Bulbine bulbosa - Bulbine Lily Photo by Christian Hauser

Stylidiaceae Stylidium graminifolium Photos by Catherine Clowes

Pollination Services for Farmers

John M Karasiński

The Economic Value of Australia’s Insect Crop Pollinators in 2014 – 2015 report presents the results of an economic study which quantified the total economic value of Australian insect pollinators spanning 53 insect pollinated agriculture crops. The results confirm widely held industry and stakeholder belief of the economic importance of both groups of insect pollinators in Australia. In 2014 – 2015, both major groups of pollination agents made an identical contribution to the total economic value. To gain further insight into the contribution made by both pollinator groups an economic value ratio (EVR) was calculated. The EVR confirms the contribution made to the overall economic value in Australian in 2014-2015 were identical. On a state by state basis the results vary with Victoria reporting the highest overall economic value of $A 8.7 bn followed by New South Wales with $A 6.1 bn and Queensland with $A 5.6 bn. This study also quantified the total economic value of the Avon Valley strawberry industry. The contribution made by both major pollinators while similar was not identical. On an EVR basis honey bee insect pollinators contributed 38% of the overall economic value and non-honey bee insect pollinators contributed 62%. The results contained in this paper confirm the need to regularly measure the total economic value of Australia’s insect pollinators. The Economic Value of Australia’s Insect Crop Pollinators in 2014 – 2015. John M Karasiński

The Economic Value of Australia’s Insect Crop Pollinators in 2014 – 2015. John M Karasiński

Syrphidae Hover Fly Photo by Alison Mellor

Apidae 2 mites Varroa destructor on a drone of the western honey bee recently hatched Photo by Waugsberg

Anticipating Varroa destructor

Dr Catherine Phillips - Senior Lecturer at the University of Melbourne

Honey bees (Apis mellifera) play vital roles in contemporary agriculture as honey producers and as pollinators. The elevated death rates observed in several regions around the world have raised questions about the stresses on honey bees and worries about future food security. The causes of high honey bee losses are still being investigated with suggestions including current agricultural practices, extensive pesticide use, increasingly intensive beekeeping, land use change, and spreading pests and diseases. In these assessments of honey bee mortality, Varroa destructor is now considered a major culprit. V.destructor alone does not account for the observed increased death rates but it is considered “the most serious threat to apiculture” in global and national assessments (de Barro et al. 2007, 2014; UNEP 2010). V.destructor is not yet established in Australia. But the threat of this mite’s arrival and impact have had wide reaching implications for beekeeping. As part of a broader ethnographic research project on beekeeping, I have explored the responses to the threat of V.destructor. These responses are practical and emotional, and involve individual, industry, and governmental initiatives. V.destructor is a parasitic mite. Originally from Asia, where it lived on Apis cerana, the mite can now can live on multiple species, including honey bees (Navajas 2010). Global trade and the mites’ skill in dispersing between colonies has enabled them to spread to all regions where honey bees are managed, except Australia. In places to which V.destructor has migrated, honey bees and apiculture have incurred significant negative impacts. For bees, living with mites has meant shorter lives, decreased brood survival, malformations, altered behaviour, exhaustion, and increased vulnerability to other stressors (Boecking & Genersch 2008; Traynor et al. 2020). Based on experiences in other countries, it is expected that with the mite’s establishment feral honey bees will largely disappear, beekeeping will be more intensive and costly (leading to decreased numbers of beekeepers), and industry will restructure away from honey toward pollination services. The projected costs to Australian industry of V.destructor’s impacts are estimated at $0.63-1.31 billion over 30 years (Hafi et al. 2012). This is a significant enough estimate but it does not account for any recreational, ecological, or ethical concerns that might emerge in relation to V.d.’s impacts and management. Among those I spoke with, there is a sense of anxiety about this mite and its potential effects on bees, beekeeping, and industries that rely on pollination services. The common feeling among beekeepers, as well as government and industry officials, is that V.destructor’s arrival is not a question of if, but when. CSIRO (2014) assesses the mite as “megashock” threat that must be anticipated, and almost everyone I interviewed thought incursion and (eventually) having to live with this mite was inevitable. Yet the particulars of timing and impact remain uncertain. Unease in the face of these uncertainties has prompted efforts to prepare for and to delay V.destructor.

Apidae Female Varroa destructor on the head of a bee nymph Photo by Gilles San Martin

Apidae A varroa mite Varroa destructor on a honeybee pupa Photo by CSIRO ScienceImage 7014

Anticipating Varroa destructor continued

In addition to provoking unease and concern, the threat of V.destructor has enabled an ongoing reconfiguration of beekeeping biosecurity with altered decision-making and funding, surveillance measures, and beekeeper participation. Each of the measures aim to delay what is felt to be inevitable and to mediate senses of anxiety, uncertainty, and/or incapacity. First, responsibility for coordinating honey bee biosecurity now rests with Plant Health Australia meaning that honey bees are no longer governed as livestock under Animal Health Australia but as service providers for select plant sectors. Further, all the plant industries affected by pollinator availability now contribute to biosecurity funding and decisions are made through governmentindustry collaboration. For instance, the almond sector is now part of financing and governing bee biosecurity. Second, surveillance measures to detect incursions have moved to a risk-based model and increased significantly. For example, sentinel hive numbers have risen from 26 in 2011 to 178 in 2018, with the riskiest ports being allocated more hives (PHA 2018; see also BeeAware). Finally, beekeepers are being enrolled in biosecurity in new ways. This includes measures like requirements to register and train in the new Code of Practice as well as reliance on beekeepers to monitor sentinel hives or their own hives (e.g., sugar shake programs). In Victoria, beekeepers – especially amateurs – have also joined the state biosecurity emergency response team. There are reasons to critique each of these aspects of remaking beekeeping biosecurity, but it is clear that there is increased funding and momentum to manage bees and threats to them. V.destructor has become a future risk for Australian beekeeping. The hope that comes with delaying through adopted measures is twofold: that we continue to benefit from being free of the mite for as long as possible; and, that during the delay a sustainable solution is found. After all, there are many experiments exploring different possible solutions, from treatment with chemical or natural agents (e.g., fungi) to breeding resistant bees. As we work to determine how to best deal with V.destructor’s impending arrival, it is important to remember that the measures we adopt accomplish more than simply anticipating a (potential) pest. Whether we agree or disagree with different measures, there is need for careful consideration of their implications and alternatives to ensure the future wellbeing of bees, current and future beekeepers, and all of us that rely upon them.

For more details on this aspect of my beekeeping research, you might read: Phillips, C. (2020). The Force of Varroa: anticipatory experiences in beekeeping biosecurity. Journal of Rural Studies, 76: 58-66.

Wildlife Management Activities Activities on agricultural land and surrounding landscapes can impact native beneficial insects including pollinators. Consideration should be given to how land managers care for these areas.

Habitat Control Land managed with pollinators in mind will lead to benefits for both the farmer and the environment. Grazing, mowing and other land management techniques have the potential to eliminate food, shelter, nests or the insects from the landscape. Grazing Management plans include:

Riparian Management

• An assessment of the stocking rates which the land can sustain

• Implementation of a grazing plan that provides planned periodic rest for pastures by controlling grazing intensity and duration

• Excluding livestock from sensitive areas to prevent trampling, allow for vegetative recovery or eliminate competition between grazing animals and pollinators for food and cover

• Complete fencing of riparian areas • Partial fencing of riparian areas • Deferment from livestock grazing

Landscape Improvement - Habitats for Native Insect Pollinators:

• Plant diversity is an intrinsic feature in the design of native pollinator habitats

• At least three different native flowering plants within each of the three flowering seasons are recommended (spring, summer, autumn)

• Improvements for native pollinators should involve grasses and herbs native to the area

• Establishment of vegetation for native insect pollinators • Flowering annual and perennial native herbaceous plants, shrubs, and trees

• Native plants and seed should be sourced from local nurseries • Conduct a survey of existing native flowering plant diversity on your property

Megachilidae

Colletidae

Leafcutter bee

Masked bee - Hylaeus

Photo by Alison Mellor

Megachile maculariformis on Goodia lotifolia

Megachilidae Leafcutter bee Megachile.sp Photo by Alison Mellor

Hesperiidae Skippers - Hesperiidaes Photo by Alison Mellor

Native Bee Pollinators The needs of native bees are pretty simple. Nectar, pollen, plant resin and a place to call home. Sites with a diverse range of native herbs, grasses and woody plants with consistent flowering from spring into autumn are optimal. Certain species of native bees are active for only weeks while some can be active throughout the year. Consideration of the timing of certain flowering plants alongside the activity of native bees can improve the success in providing habitat to a diverse range of native bee species. Native bees require a diverse range of habitats to call home depending on the family of native bee. Known as central place foragers, most female bees generally conduct all their collecting trips from a central location, their home. Bees can be classified into three general classes; Native Bee Groups and Families include; •

Solitary ground-nesting bees - self-made burrows in bare soil • Halictidae: Sweat Bees • Colletidae: Plasterer and Masked Bees • Apidae: Blue-banded bees, Cuckoo bees

•

Solitary tunnel-nesting bees - use holes made by other insects in dead trees or logs and chew their own cavities into dead wood or pithy stems • Colletidae: Masked Bees • Megachilidae: Leaf-cutter bees • Apidae: Carpenter Bees

•

Social cavity-nesting bees

For detailed information on Australian native bees, go to www.padil.gov.au

Apidae Reed bee, Exoneura sp Photo by Alison Mellor

The Berries and the Bees - A case study

Research by Dr Julian Brown, Dr Saul Cunningham and Joshua Coates, Fenner School of Environment & Society, Australian National University. This project is supported by funding from the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment as part of its Rural R&D for Profit program Pollination is important to production of many crops, including berries. European honeybees are useful pollinators of raspberries and blackberries, but native bees also play an important role that has been overlooked. We studied which native bee species visit flowers of rubus berry crops, how important they are as pollinators, and how growers can encourage native bees. Our research was undertaken in the Yarra Valley, Victoria, and is likely to be applicable to areas that are similar in having patches of agriculture and moist forest in the same landscape.

Reed Bees (Exoneura species) Reed bees were the most common flower visitor in some berry orchards. Reed bees are small (approximately 7mm long), and usually have a black upper body and a red-brown abdomen. There are many species in Australia, mostly found in wetter temperate regions (from the tropic of Capricorn in the north, south to Tasmania and west to southwest WA). Reed bees visit a range of crop plants (apples, blueberries, and more) as well as native plants, including some rare species such as orchids. They are known as reed bees because the females nest in hollowed out pithy stems of plants such as reeds, tree ferns, and grass trees.

Why are native pollinators important? While some rubus berry cultivars produce fruit without pollination, all are likely to increase yield and fruit quality with bee pollination. We found that native bees are just as effective as honeybees at pollinating blackberries. A single visit by any bee species (honeybee or native) triples the number of drupelets, therefore increasing fruit size. Which native bees pollinate berries? Our study identified a number of native bee species visiting raspberry and blackberry flowers. The most common native bees detected visiting flowers and carrying pollen, were reed bees (Exoneura species) and white-banded bees (Lasioglossum species). Honeybees are declining in many countries due to disease, pesticide use and loss of habitat. Actions to increase the abundance of native bees will reduce the risk of relying on honeybees alone and support better quality and yield of fruit.

They have also been found nesting in non-native plant species such as lantana, brambles and berry canes. Some species have social behaviour, where several females nest in a single stem and work together to raise and protect their brood.

Apidae Reed bee, Exoneura sp Photo by Alison Mellor

How to Encourage Native Bees

The Berries and the Bees - A case study - continued

You can encourage a diversity of bees by providing flowers for their feeding and materials for their nesting.

Places to nest Reed bees were found nesting in the canes of raspberry and blackberry. This means that the rubus berry orchard environment provides both a home (nests) and food (flowers) for them to prosper! In one site the density of bees was estimated at 3,000 reed bees per hectare. We found that reed bees will nest in canes that they can enter at a damage point or an opening created by pruning. New nests are established in spring, but nests are present in the orchard year round. Because they do not tunnel through live tissue they do not harm the plant. Bees prefer canes that are more upright and not too thick (stems less than 9mm diameter were preferred). Further research is required to find out if changes to the pruning strategy can help bee nesting. We encourage growers to make their own observations. We found that areas of the orchard with more nests in canes also had more reed bee visits to flowers, confirming that the bees live and work locally. They also like nesting in tree ferns and so reed bees were more common in orchards when tree ferns were nearby. White-banded bees nest in the soil so their nesting opportunities are less limited. They can be quite abundant in farming landscapes. Insecticides are harmful to bees, so avoid using them, especially during flowering times. If insecticide use is necessary, favour those that are less harmful to bees. Check the label for advice.

Megachilidae Fire-tailed Resin bee - Megachile ustulata Photo by Alison Mellor

Places to Forage The Berries and the Bees

- A case study - continued

Reed bees actively forage for most of the year (less so in winter), and so require floral resources outside of crop flowering times. We found reed bees foraging on native plants such as Acacia and Hakea before crops were flowering, and Kunzea and Pultenaea after crops finished flowering.

Keep in mind that reed bees might forage hundreds of meters from their nest. Your local area may provide many of these flowering resources at different times of year – your local bushland can support your on farm pollination. Example calendar: Flowers used by reed bees, Yarra Valley.

You can also provide nesting habitat for reed bees by creating artificial ‘bee hotels’ using cut pieces of rubus canes. We found that bees will sometimes use these, but more research is needed to find out if this boosts the local population above what will nest in the crop itself.

Fabaceae Kennedia prostrata - Running postman Photo by Christian Hauser

Choosing Plants to Attract Native Bees

(Dr Megan Halcroft)

Although most native bees are ‘generalist’ foragers, collecting pollen and nectar from a variety of flowers, it is advisable to incorporate some native plants into your garden. Native plants not only attract bees, they attract other beneficial insects such as predators and parasitoids. Predators hunt and eat many pest insects such as aphids, caterpillars, grasshoppers and katydids. Parasitoids lay eggs inside many soft-bodied pests. The balance between beneficial and pest insects is a delicate one, and if we provide the ideal habitat garden for the beneficial insect the balance will swing more toward controlling the pests. This doesn’t mean that you must use native plants exclusively, but that their inclusion will help with pest management. There are many exotic plants that attract bees and provide good quality pollen and nectar.

Australian Native Plants Choose local plant species if possible, as they are more likely to do well in your area. Some examples of bee-attracting flowers are shown below, but they are not limited to this list.

Myrtaceae With their large bowls of easily-accessible nectar, Myrtaceae are a particular favourite with many Australian native bees. Our short-tongued bees, in the family Colletidae, are the most diverse in the world because they have evolved with these bountiful food resources.

Myrtaceae Eucalyptus obliqua - Messmate Stringybark Photos by Christian Hauser

Proteaceae Banksia marginata - Silver Banksia Photos by Christian Hauser

Proteaceae

Choosing Plants to Attract Native Bees continued

Proteaceae have quite complex floral structures and some of our bees are able to ‘unlock’ the pollen presenter to access the protein-rich resource. These flowers also provide a sugarrich nectar which is attractive to many small and large pollinators.

Fabaceae Native peas are very attractive to bees in the Megachilidae family. This includes resin bees and leaf-cutter bees. A female bee lands on the keel of the flower, enabling her to access the hidden pollen and store it in hairs (scopa) under her abdomen.

Asteraceae Native daisies are compound flowers with multiple simple flowers within a single inflorescence. These shallow flowers are visited by small, short-tongued bees and other nectar-seeking pollinators. The pollen is usually quite abundant.

Other assorted genera Native bees have evolved with an assortment of flowering plants. Flowers with tubular petals and deep floral structures, such as Correa, are pollinated most effectively by long-tongued bees, such as blue-banded bees. Ground nesting bees, such as Lasioglossum, Lipotriches and Amegilla are effective buzz-pollinators of porcidal anthers, such as Dianella.

Choosing Plants to Attract Native Bees by Dr Megan Halcroft, this article was produced by Bees Business as an educational resource, 2016.

Fabaceae

Glycine clandestina - Twining Glycine

Bossiaea cinerea - showy bossiaea

Photo by Christian Hauser

Goodeniaceae

Thymelaeaceae

Brunonia australis, blue pincushion

Pimelea humilis

Photo by Christian Hauser

Identify and Protect What You Already Have Determining what you have in relation to the requirements of native bees and other insect pollinator habitats on your site is an important step in preparing your plan. Survey your site and determine the variety of plants including flowering shrubs, trees and native grasses, areas with native flowering plants. This information will be important, allowing you to manage and protect valuable areas as part of your overall property management plan. Tips when assessing sites with native vegetation: • Allow dead trees to stand (so long as they do not pose a risk to property or people) and protect shrubs and herbaceous plants with pithy or hollow stems (e.g., cane fruits, sumac, elderberry), as these provide nesting habitat for tunnel-nesting native bees • Retain dead or dying branches whenever it is safe and practical (wood-boring beetle larvae often fill dead trees and branches with narrow tunnels into which tunnel-nesting bees will establish nests) • Retain rotting logs where some bee species may burrow tunnels in which to nest • Protect sloped or well-drained ground sites where plants are sparse and direct access to soil is available. These are

the areas where ground-nesting bees may dig nests

• Turning the soil destroys all ground nests that are present at that depth and hinders the emergence of bees that are nesting deeper in the ground Management Recommendations for Native Insect Pollinators in Texas © 2016 Texas Parks and Wildlife Department

Asparagaceae

Asteraceae

Thysanotus patersonii

Coronidium scorpioides Photo by Catherine Clowes

Ecological Vegetation Classes Across the Gippsland Plain region, vegetation landscapes can be categorised by a variety of methods, including the geology of the area formed over millions of years and the current local context in relation to rainfall and nutrient availability. The most common and widespread EVC’s across the Gippsland Plain as discussed in the Flora of Melbourne, 4th Edition are:

• Plains Grassland • Plains Grassland Woodland • Valley Grassy Forest • Grassy Dry Forest • Valley Healthy Forest

• Herb-rich Foothill Forest • Damp Forest • Wet Forest • Damp Sands Herb-rich Woodland

The plants which inhabit these Ecological Vegetation Classes do overlap considerably. They are a great guide to finding plants to plant for beneficial insects including pollinators. NatureKit, a site provided by the Victorian Government provides a website with a variety of tools to help determine the EVC in a specific area, provides links to benchmarks, and includes a list of plants which are likely to occur within the EVC. Care needs to be taken, as these mapped EVC’s and plant lists are basic and need to be assessed on the ground to ensure their accuracy.

Asparagaceae Arthropodium strictum - Chocolate Lily Photo by Christian Hauser

Predicted pre-1750 Ecological Vegetation Classes Mornington Peninsula and Westernport Bay

2005 EVCs

2005 Ecological Vegetation Classes Mornington Peninsula and Westernport Bay

Predicted pre-1750 Ecological Vegetation Classes West Gippsland © State Government of Victoria 2021

2005 Ecological Vegetation Classes West Gippsland © State Government of Victoria 2021

Grassy Woodland Benchmark - EVC 175 A variable open eucalypt woodland to 15m tall or occasionally Sheoak woodland to 10m tall over a diverse ground layer of grasses and herbs. The shrub component is usually sparse. It occurs on sites with moderate fertility on gentle slopes or undulating hills on a range of geologies. Previously widespread and locally extensive but now largely cleared for agriculture. Remnants are generally heavily grazed. Grassy Woodland has affinities with a number of EVCs including Herb-rich Foothill Forest, Valley Grassy Forest, Valley Heathy Forest, Grassy Forest and Plains Grassy Woodland. Compared to Herb-rich Foothill Forest, it is much drier and lower in stature with a more open overstorey and the floristic composition is that of a less mesic environment. Valley Grassy Forest mostly lacks sclerophyllous shrubs other than some Acacia species but a range of small sclerophyllous shrubs are typically present in Grassy Woodland (eg. Silky Guinea-flower Hibbertia sericea s.l. and Common Flat-pea Platylobium obtusangulum). Grassy Woodland occurs on more fertile soils and is more open and not as rich in ericoid species as Valley Heathy Forest. The Grassy Woodland flora is often dominated by Kangaroo Grass Themeda triandra and is indicative of more fertile sites.

Published by the Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and Environment April 2004 © The State of Victoria Department of Sustainability and Environment 2004

http://www.vicveg.net.au

A selection of plants present across the Gippsland bioregion, all present in the Grassy Woodland EVC, with flowing time illustrated Collated from a variety of sources including the planting guides produced by the wheen bee foundation called Powerful Pollinators

Plants list for EVC 175 Grassy woodland Lifeform

Groundcovers Groundcovers Groundcovers Groundcovers Wildflowers Wildflowers Wildflowers Wildflowers Lilies & Irises Lilies & Irises Lilies & Irises Lilies & Irises Lilies & Irises Sedges & Tussocks Sedges & Tussocks Sedges & Tussocks Sedges & Tussocks Vines & Climbers Vines & Climbers Shrubs / Small Shrubs / Small Shrubs / Small Shrubs / Small Shrubs / Small Shrubs / Medium Shrubs / Medium Shrubs / Medium Shrubs / Medium Shrubs / Medium Shrubs / Medium Shrubs / Large Shrubs / Large Trees / Small Trees / Medium Trees / Medium Trees / Medium Trees / Large Trees / Large

Common name

Sheep’s Burr, Bidgee Widgee Running Postman Native Violet Small Grass Tree Cut-Leaf Daisy Blue Pincushion Austral Stork’s Bill Tall Bluebell Pale Vanilla Lily Chocolate Lily Bulbine Lily Black Anther Flax Lily Tasman Flax Lily Tall Sedge Wattle Mat-rush Spiny-headed Mat Rush Grass Tree Mountain Clematis Twining Glycine Showy Bossiaea Native Fuchsia Smooth Parrot Pea Common Heath Common Rice Flower Hop Bitter Pea Hop Goodenia Prickly Tea Tree Snowy Daisy Bush Tree Everlasting Kangaroo Apple, Poroporo Kurwan, Sweet Bursaria, Blackthorn Yarra Burgan Silver Banksia Blackwood Drooping Sheoak Bundy Swamp Gum Manna Gum

Scientific name

Acaena novae-zelandiae Kennedia pr ostr ata Viola heder acea Xanthor r hoea minor Br achyscome multifida Br unonia austr alis Pelar gonium austr ale Wahlenber gia str icta Anthr opodium milleflor um Ar thr opodium str ictum Bulbine bulbosa Dianella r evoluta Dianella tasmanica Car ex appr essa Lomandr a filifor mis Lomandr a longifolia Xanthor r hoea austr alis Clematis ar istata Glycine clandestina Bossiaea ciner ea Cor r ea r eflexa Dillwynia glaberrima Epacr is impr essa Pimelea humilis Daviesia latifolia Goodenia ovata Leptosper mum continentale Olear ia lir ata Ozothamnus fer r ugineus Solanum avicular e Bur sar ia spinosa Kunzea er icoides Banksia mar ginata Acacia melanoxylon Allocasuar ina ver ticillata Eucalyptus goniocalyx Eucalyptus ovata Eucalyptus viminalis

Family Rosaceae Fabaceae Violaceae Asphodelaceae Asteraceae Goodeniaceae Geraniaceae Campanulaceae Asparagaceae Asparagaceae Goodeniaceae Asphodelaceae Asphodelaceae Cyperaceae Asparagaceae Asparagaceae Asphodelaceae Ranunculaceae Fabaceae Fabaceae Rutaceae Fabaceae Ericaceae Thymelaeaceae Fabaceae Goodeniaceae Myrtaceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Solanaceae Pittosporaceae Myrtaceae Proteaceae Fabaceae Casuarinaceae Myrtaceae Myrtaceae Myrtaceae

Height 0.3 m < 0.3 m < 0.3 m < 0.3 m < 0.5 m 0.3 m 0.5 m 0.3 m <1m 0.3 m 0.3 m 1m 1m 1–2 m < 0.3 m 100 cm 2m 2–4 m >2m < 1.5 m 0.5–3 m 0.5–2 m 1.2–2 m 0.3 m 1–5 m 2m 3m <4m 2–5 m 2–3 m 4–6 m 2– > 5 m 5–11 m 8–20 m 5–11 m < 15 m < 20 m 25 m

Flower colour J F M A M Cream Red White & Purple White-Cream Mauve Blue Mauve Blue White-Mauve Pink-mauve Yellow Indigo Indigo Yellow-brown White-Cream White-cream Cream Cream Purple Red & Yellow Pink-Red Yellow & Red White or Pink White-cream Red & Yellow Yellow White White-Yellow White Purple White White Yellow Pale Yellow Red & Yellow Cream Cream White

J A S O N D

Aspect Sun to semi-shade Sun Semi-shade to shade Sun to semi-shade Sun Sun Sun Sun Sun Sun Sun to semi-shade Sun to semi-shade Sun to semi-shade Sun Sun to semi-shade Sun to semi-shade Sun to semi-shade Sun to semi-shade Sun to semi-shade Sun Sun to semi-shade Sun Sun to semi-shade Sun to semi-shade Sun to semi-shade Sun to semi-shade Sun to semi-shade Semi-shade Sun Sun to semi-shade Sun to semi-shade Sun to shade Sun Sun to semi-shade Sun Sun Sun Sun

Soil Moisture Moist to dry Dry Wet to moist Moist to dry Moist to dry Dry Moist to dry Moist to dry Moist to dry Moist to dry Moist to dry Moist to dry Moist to dry Moist to wet Moist to dry Moist to dry Dry Moist to dry Moist to dry Dry Moist to dry Dry Moist to dry Moist to dry Dry Moist Moist to dry Moist to dry Dry Moist to dry Dry Wet to moist Wet to moist Dry Dry Dry to moist Moist to wet Moist to dry

Pollinator reward Pollen

⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤* ⬤ ⬤* ⬤* ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤* ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤

Nectar ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤

Visitation by pollinator Honey Bees ⬤ ⬤ ⬤

Native Bees

Wasps

⬤

⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤

Butterflies ⬤ ⬤ ⬤

⬤

⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤

⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤

Hoverflies

⬤

Moths

Beetles

⬤

⬤ ⬤ ⬤

⬤ ⬤

⬤

⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤

⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤

⬤

⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤

⬤ ⬤

Flies

⬤

⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤

⬤

⬤ ⬤ ⬤

⬤

⬤ ⬤ ⬤

⬤ ⬤

⬤

⬤ ⬤

⬤

⬤ ⬤ ⬤

⬤ ⬤

⬤

⬤ ⬤ ⬤ ⬤

⬤ ⬤ ⬤

⬤

Planning Revegetation Sites For a successful revegetation project, a well-designed plan is crucial. The following areas should be considered: • Site selection • Design of the space • Native flora species - which plants to plant • Site preparation – weed management and fencing • Timing and available funding

Seek local advice before you begin Site selection Areas to consider: • The objectives of the plan, habitat, shelter etc • Existing vegetation

Before you start, talk to as many people as possible. The list of resources throughout this guide provide a great start; other sources of information include your local Landcare Groups, field days, training sessions, neighbouring landowners and advisory organisations.

• Weather such as frost and high winds • Soil type, depth and moisture availability for seedlings • Position in the landscape • Previous land use • Proximity to kangaroo and wallaby habitat • Access to the site and other infrastructure nearby, power lines or septic tanks etc

Fabaceae

Violaceae

Glycine clandestina

Viola hederacea

Photo by Catherine Clowes

Size and Shape The size of revegetation is site specific. Generally it is good practice to select sites which offer deep protection, meaning that sites are ideally 30m square or greater. It has also been shown that some of the smallest linear stretches of native vegetation can be useful. As research focusing on the benefits of native habitat to improve pollination services by a range of insects continues, the size of the area is important; however any protected native vegetation strip providing habitat to insects can improve biodiversity in the landscape. Objectives which aim to tackle other issues in the landscape may stress the importance on the size of certain revegetation projects, however this can hinder the implementation of vital conservation projects which could benefit both the farmer and the environment.

Flora Species Selection To improve pollinator habitat, particularly insects, a diverse range of flowering plants is important. This objective can influence species selection. Species can be chosen based on: • Local environmental conditions • The diversity and structure of the vegetation type • Ease of propagation • What grows locally • Availability from local nurseries • Area available for planting

Myrtaceae

Rutaceae

Eucalyptus ovata

Correa alba

Photo by Catherine Clowes

Site Preparation • Site assessment to determine the current values on the site including the existing vegetation

• Treatment of weeds in the planting area prior to planting or direct seeding (this may need to repeated to reduce weed competition)

• Treatment should take place six months to two years before planting in the weed growing season with follow-up a month before planting to improve success • Control pest animals like rabbits and hares • Fertiliser is not recommended when preparing the area

Weed control Weed control will ensure the revegetation project can establish with minimal competition. Projects over the past 20 years highlight the importance of weed control in the success of their long term viability. Regular maintenance is recommended for the short to medium term on most projects. The amount of weed seed and the surrounding environment will influence a site’s ability to withstand weed invasion.

Timing The timing of the revegetation project is an important consideration. The factors to be considered are: •

Soil type, temperature and moisture at a given time

•

Weed seed in the soil

•

Competition of weeds in the landscape

•

12 to 24 months is an ideal timeframe to plan a revegetation project

Fabaceae Glycine clandestina Photo by Catherine Clowes

Asphodelaceae Dianella brevicaulis Photo by Catherine Clowes

Planting The choice of planting technique such as direct seeding or planting tubestock will depend on a variety of site factors e.g., the size of the site and the species selected could benefit a direct seeding project. • The site selected could make it difficult for machine access required for direct seeding • The site‘s seasonal conditions and species being planted can be checked with your seed provider or local nursery • The type of soil present at the site as some soils are not ideal for direct seeding • Species selection where seed availability may make it difficult to provide ample seed for direct seeding • The site‘s existing native ground flora could be impacted by the choice of revegetation method • There may be sites which can utilise the advantages of both tube stock and a direct seeding approach

Source of Seed Source seeds and plants well in advance (up to a year) depending on the species and quantities needed. • Source all tube stock or seed from species indigenous to the site

• Source seeds or plant material as locally as possible, from the same soil and vegetation type (permissions or permits will be required for collection on public land) • Keep accurate records for annual reporting, including collection date, location and information on the vegetation type, position in landscape (creek, valley, hilltop), soils, rainfall and aspect

Fencing Fencing may be required to ensure the area is closed off from livestock or to keep out other pests and native animals, which like to graze new shoots of native plants. Insect damage can be an issue in some projects and should be considered in the plan. Plants can recover from an attack, if the issue is ongoing, consult your local native nursery. Fencing for the protection from stock or browsing native animals may be required depending on the site: • A four-wire fence with one electric wire would be adequate to keep out most livestock • Ring lock fencing or chicken wire can be used with an electric wire (recommended for animals such as wallabies) • Guards and stakes around separate plants could be beneficial

Post Planting Management The maintenance of the site includes: • Weed control around new plants • Prescribed control of native, exotic, and feral species to maintain the population density of native wildlife • Control of pest and feral animals to minimise the negative impact on native species

• Control grazing and browsing by introduced and native herbivores including deer, rabbits, kangaroos and wallabies (ensure necessary approvals are obtained)

Fabaceae Acacia myrtifolia Photos by Catherine Clowes

Direct Seeding Direct seeding methods have developed over the past 40 years. Direct seeding is an effective tool to increase the biodiversity of a site, cost effective and viable in the long term with less maintenance. The direct seeding approach is a great option for large areas, prepared appropriately with selected plant species based on specific site conditions. Seeds will germinate into the site directly, allowing for a strong root system to establish quickly compared to tube stock. Site maintenance is required to minimise weed competition in the initial 18 months. The site for direct seeding will require a focus on seed, weed control and fencing. For a successful direct seeding project: • Sow into cultivated weed free soil • Test soil fertility • Use high quality weed free seed • Use an adequate seeding rate (20kg/ha or more) • Maintain weed control for 18 to 24 months • Use appropriate erosion control • Consider rabbit control • Be prepared to wait 6 months to see the native grass and 18 months for the full result

Case Study One

Dianella Amoena Receptor Site 3

Understory Rehabilitation Location: Plenty Gorge Park, South Morang Revegetation Methods: Direct Seeding Background Dianella receptor site 3 was one of the sites chosen for the translocation of Dianella amoena, (Matted Flax Lily) growing in the path of the new rail extension to South Morang, a suburb on the northern fringe of Melbourne. Dianella amoena is listed as endangered under the EPBC act. Dianella receptor site 3 is situated on Parks Victoria land, and we were told that only about 20 years ago the site used to be weed-free and had a diverse understorey of grasses and wildflowers. Our first visit to this 2 Ha site was in early June 2010 just before the millennial drought broke. The boundary was not fenced at this time and it was dominated by all sorts of weeds and grazed heavily by kangaroos and rabbits. While conducting an assessment to prepare a plan to rehabilitate this site, as it was noted that weeds had replaced more than 90% of the indigenous vegetation. In January 2014 we begun site preparation works on site at which time a kangaroo and rabbit proof fence had been constructed around the site. The Project The plan was to aggressively control weeds, retain all remnant vegetation and replace weedy areas with native grass. We use every technique we can to reduce weed propagules in the fastest way possible, especially when preparing to sow native grass seed. Our best preparation option for this site was to spray and cultivate selected areas and use other specialist weed control techniques across the site. The revegetation plan divided the site into zones of different management so the crews had specific instructions and could be more focused on small areas. Our aim in these situations is to stop all weeds from setting seed from the time we start site prep until we sow, then follow up with more weed control while maintaining the site. Most of the translocated Dianella amoena were originally in small rabbit exclusion plots and were to be managed more conservatively, but others had been planted in the zones where our more extreme weed control took place, so it was interesting to see how these plants coped under the different conditions. Because the exclusion plots contained most of the Dianella amoena and the best swards of Themeda triandra (Kangaroo grass) on the site, their weed control was limited and precluded burning, allowing the grasses to swamp the Dianella amoena and retard its growth. Plants outside the plots enjoyed almost no weed competition for two years and thrived. In October 2015 Themeda triandra was sown in zone 1 and 4 and in March 2016 the Poa labillardieri (Common tussock grass), Rytidosperma spp. (Wallaby grass) and Austrostipa spp. (Spear Grass) across the site. This gave us the longest possible period for preparation. In the winter/ spring of 2016 Melbourne had extremely good rainfall making weed control a huge challenge.

Figure 1. Nassella neesiana (Chilean Needle Grass), Holcus lanatus (Yorkshire Fog Grass) and Phalaris aquatica (Toowoomba canary grass) dominated the site back in 2013

Figure 3. Cultivation is often an important component of our site preparation for sowing native grass seed. The zone 2 exclusion plot can be seen on the right.

Figure 2. The site divided into separate management zones. Zones 2 and 7 are the original Dianella amoena exclusion plots.

Figure 4. The same view as Figure 3 after the establishment of native grass.

Figure 5. Nassella neesiana (Chilean Needle Grass) had almost taken over a small population of Themeda triandra (Kangaroo Grass) on this stony rise in December 2013.

Figure 6. By February 2017 the tables had more than turned.

Outcome By the pre-handover meeting in early February the sown areas had filled out with native grasses, the exclusion fences had been removed from zone 2 and 7, and the site was looking like a different place. The Matted Flax Lily has thrived at receptor site 3. Hopefully, this site will be used as a safe place for more of this endangered species in the future. Receptor Site 3 was handed over to Parks Victoria in April 2017.

Figure 8. The same view in February 2017. The native grasses thriving

Figure 7. Another view of the receptor site covered in Fog Grass looking toward the gate in December 2013.

Case Study Two

Riparian and Grassy Woodland Revegetation

Location: Moorabool River, Fyansford Revegetation Methods: Direct Seeding and Planting Background Located along the Moorabool River in Fyansford approx. 5km from the centre of Geelong. Part of the residential subdivision in Fyansford. Stages 1 and 2 of the river corridor revegetation area totals an area of just under 1.5 hectares. The natural area and landforms had been highly modified due to the site formally being home to a quarry with historic dumping of fill material. The site has been extensively rehabilitated and remediated prior to landscape and revegetation works commencing. The revegetation design was completed along with the broader open and play space areas by the Landscape Architects to tie all the areas together. The historic EVC was used as a guide for species selection, and it was decided that to achieve the best results and combination of direct seeding and planting would be used. The Project An intensive weeds control program over an 18-month period began in Summer 2017/18. Initial the weedy biomass and woody weeds were removed, then regular weed control visit followed to reduce the weed load prior to seeding works. Some planting of larger trees and shrubs occurred during this first stage of preparation also. Areas that were to be planted only were planted out after approximately 12 months. This included the installation of mulch on flat areas and jute matting on the riverbanks to reduce erosion and suppress weeds. Areas that could not be jute matted on the riverbanks were prepared for seeding, this included sections that were rocky or where elm thickets had been removed. In Autumn 2019 the remainder of the site was direct seeded with native grasses. The mix included Rytidosperma spp. (Wallaby Grass), Themeda triandra (Kangaroo grass), Austrostipa spp. (Spear Grass), Microlaena stipoides (Weeping Grass) and Poa Labillardierei (Common tussock Grass). Following the seeding of native grasses, the remaining plants were installed. This included the remaining trees and shrubs as well as some smaller plants and ground covers. Bulbine bulbosa (Bulbine lily), Arthropodium strictum (Chocolate lily), Dianella admixta (Black anther Flax Lily) were amongst some of the wildflower planted in the grassy areas above the riverbanks. Unfortunately, some unforeseen civil works had to take place shortly after the revegetation work were completed and some of the site had to be re-seeded and planted a few months later. There was a delay in these disturbed areas establishing, however the following season saw these fill in and establish well.

Figure 1: (November 2017) Prior to weed control beginning the site was covered in weeds such as Mustard Weed, Carpet Weed, Boxthorn and Various species of Thistle.

Figure 3: (September 2020) Looking north - The site has established well and starting to look like a natural landscape.

Figure 2: (May 2019) Planting continues and the direct seeding areas to the right ready for sowing.

Outcome Over

17,000

plants

have

been

planted and 12kg of mixed native grass seed sown as part of the project. The site has established well and will continue to change over time as the trees and shrubs grow. Many local residents that moved into the area enjoy the space and regularly comment on the site’s aesthetics. The areas of open space, playground and now sporting facilities

with

adjacent

wetland

that surround the space all work in well and contrast each other well. The river corridor feels natural and alive again, the birds appreciate the newly created space.

Poaceae Rytidosperma racemosum Photos by Andrew Coghill

Myrtaceae Eucalyptus obliqua Messmate stringybark Photo by Catherine Clowes

Rippa Seeder - Scalping Method • Simple machine to operate. • The blades of the rippa seeder remove the top 10- 15 cm of soil. • This removes the bulk of the weed seed layer, exposing a cleaner surface of soil.

• Seed is then placed on this prepared surface. • Without weed seed, the indigenous seed can germinate and grow with limited competition.

Photo by Bassc Coast Landcare

Photo by Bass Coast Landcare

Mouldboard Ploughing • Requires competent operator to undertake. • Inverts top 20-30cm of soil, exposing sub soil free from weed seed.

• Seed is distributed over top of soil.

• Many cracks and crevices for seed to nestle into, creating different microclimates. • Rough surface with random plant spacing.

Photo by Bass Coast Landcare

Photos by Bass Coast Landcare

Scalping with blade

• Simple operation using a more common farm implement.

• Aims to remove the top layer of soil from where seed is distributed.

• Leaves smoother more groomed site com pared to other methods.

Photo by Bass Coast Landcare

Megachilidae Fire-tailed Resin bee - Megachile ustulata Photo by Alison Mellor

Monitoring The maintenance and upkeep of the site is important for any revegetation site. A regular program of weeding is required to ensure the long term survival of a diverse revegetation project. Successful projects in Victoria with management programs have a higher degree of biodiversity. Management programs ensure a variety of species are able to establish and thrive within the site. Keeping records of your work will assist you and the wider community to learn and develop techniques on what works and what does not on your site. You can use iNaturalist to record your own observations, get help with identifications, collaborate with others, and access the observational data collected by other iNaturalist users. A smart phone iNaturalist app (Android/iPhone) is available and enables users to capture images of species and upload them for identification. Digital images can also be uploaded to iNaturalist directly through the website as well. Use of iNaturalist is free and only requires signing up and establishing a user profile.

Tips •

Direct seeding can take at least two to three seasons for the optimal germination of seeds on a site

•

Some seeds which germinate in the first season might die, this is common and not unexpected. There will be seeds in the site which have not germinated, these will be available for germination in the second or third season

•

Weeds start to overpower seedlings. Spray or hand weeding the site will be important

•

Test certain areas of the site if particular actions could affect the sites success (water run-off, erosion)

•

Monitor and record all your activities on the site

•

If limited growth from seeds occurs, a low intensity weed spray or slashing in late winter may help to stimulate the site before spring

Observations