Continuing net loss of native hollow-bearing trees and coarse woody debris due to firewood harvesting practices

Advice to the Minister for Environment and Heritage from the Threatened Species Scientific Committee on a public nomination of a Key Threatening Process under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
Department of the Environment and Heritage, 17 November 2005

The Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Senator the Hon Ian Campbell has considered the Threatened Species Scientific Committee's advice regarding the eligibility of 'Continuing net loss of native hollow-bearing trees and coarse woody debris due to firewood harvesting practices' for listing as a Key Threatening Process. The Minister has also considered the existing mechanisms that are in place to address the threat of firewood harvesting to native species.

The Minister agrees with the Committee that the process is eligible to be listed as a Key Threatening Process. However, he has found that there would be no conservation benefit from listing the process under the EPBC Act given that there are existing mechanisms in place to address it. The Minister has therefore decided not to list 'Continuing net loss of native hollow-bearing trees and coarse woody debris due to firewood harvesting practices' as a Key Threatening Process under the EPBC Act.

1. Scientific name, common name (where appropriate), major taxon group

Continuing net loss is where the number of native hollow-bearing trees or amount of native coarse woody debris decreases faster than new hollow-bearing trees or coarse woody debris are formed. Firewood harvesting activities include the removal of native coarse woody debris and/or the removal of or damage to native trees with hollows. 'Coarse woody debris' is dead plant material excluding twigs (

The threatening process includes firewood harvesting activities, which affect younger native trees and seedling recruitment, and which prevent or reduce the replacement of hollows and coarse woody debris lost through natural attrition.

Description

Firewood is harvested from both public and private land. The firewood industry includes commercial, semi-commercial, private and own-use collectors and suppliers, public suppliers, and consumers. Approximately half of the firewood supply in Australia is collected privately from local forest and woodland on private property, roadsides and travelling stock routes. Much of this firewood comes from remnant vegetation in inland agricultural areas of the south-eastern States. Data on the precise amount of firewood harvested in Australia each year is variable and scarce. Estimates range from 3 million to 6 million tonnes (ANZECC 2001).

Many Australians, particularly in rural areas, rely heavily on firewood as a low cost source of heating. Impacts from firewood harvesting are highest in New South Wales and Victoria where more than 60% of firewood is sourced from woodlands and box-ironbark forests. In NSW, the forests and woodlands of the Western Slopes and Tablelands have been most affected by dead wood removal because they contain popular firewood species. Recent studies of forests and woodlands of these bioregions have found that the number of trees large enough to contain hollows has declined dramatically and the proportion of standing dead trees has also been reduced (NSW SC 2004). Removal of dead wood may also affect other forest communities, including wet sclerophyll forests and rainforests, particularly in small and easily accessible remnants (NSW SC 2004).

Removal of standing dead wood reduces the availability of hollows and input of material to the litter layer. Loss of this process is exacerbated by the failure of regeneration of these plant communities and the resulting reduction in natural accumulation of dead wood.

Old and dead trees (often with hollows) and fallen timber are preferred sources of firewood, as they tend to burn well and produce less smoke. 'Firewood collection generally involves removal of relatively undecayed fallen logs, the repeated loss of this material from woodland sites will over the long term, reduce or eliminate the availability of old fallen logs as habitat (NSW SC 2004).' Old standing trees with hollows, and dead wood on the ground, are an important resource for foraging and habitat for many species of birds, mammals, reptiles and invertebrates as well as being essential for maintaining forest and woodland nutrient cycles. Deadwood is at least as important as the living overstorey, leaf litter and soil components for conserving biodiversity and maintaining ecological processes.

Regulatory role of States/Territories and the Commonwealth

At the State and Territory level there is a range of regulatory controls in place to manage firewood harvesting in public and private land. Western Australia has comprehensive systems in place to manage the harvesting of firewood on private land, with harvesting subject to licensing under the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950. Victoria controls collection within the Box-Ironbark forests and has listed 'loss of hollow-bearing trees from Victorian native forests' and 'loss of coarse woody debris from Victorian native forests and woodlands' as potentially threatening processes under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988. New South Wales has listed 'removal of dead wood and dead trees' as a Key Threatening Process under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 but, like Victoria, has not yet prepared a plan (Threat Abatement Plan) to address the threatening process.

Dead native vegetation is not protected in either Victoria or South Australia, but local government laws offer some protection for dead hollow trees in much of the range in Victoria, through their covenanting provisions. The Victorian Action Statement (1993) includes as a threat 'firewood collection, particularly where River Red Gums and dead standing trees are cut down'. South Australia and Tasmania have limited controls on the harvesting of firewood on private land, with restrictions relating to listings of species under state threatened species legislation.

Firewood harvesting has also been the focus of a whole of government initiative. The 'National Approach to Firewood Collection and Use in Australia' provides a national approach to commercial and private firewood collection and includes six strategies designed to target ecosystems at most risk from commercial and private firewood collection practices. These strategies broadly cover research into firewood collection, education, implementation of market mechanisms, increasing the effectiveness of regulations, development of a sustainable firewood industry, improved efficiency of firewood use and encouraging users to find alternative sources.

The 'National Approach' covers both commercial suppliers of firewood and the activities of private firewood collectors. For example, actions include targeted education campaigns in the States and Territories for private collectors, consumers and firewood merchants. Within this Approach sits the Voluntary Code of Practice for Retail Firewood Merchants (the 'Code').

The 'National Approach' requires each State and Territory, as well as the Commonwealth, to develop its own action plan to implement relevant parts of the agreed national approach document. To date, the Commonwealth and Western Australia have prepared final action plans; South Australia and the ACT have prepared drafts; while New South Wales, Tasmania, Victoria and Queensland have not yet prepared action plans.

Species potentially affected by firewood harvesting

Tree hollows tend to occur in mature, senescent and dead trees. Many standing dead trees, whether from ringbarking or killed by bushfires, form a critical resource for fauna (Law et al. 2000). The useful habitat life of these trees is limited by natural factors such as decay, wind throw, purposeful destruction by further clearing, and use for firewood (Wall & Reid 1993). There are indications from current studies in NSW that the decline in the number and quality of dead standing trees is ongoing (NSW SC 2004).

Almost all of Australia's parrots, including the cockatoos and lorikeets, use tree hollows for nesting (Phillips 2001). Of all the different kinds of nest sites used by birds in Australia, the most threatened are the natural hollows in the trunks and branches of old trees in forests and woodlands. The loss of woodland birds in south-eastern Australia has been linked to harvesting of firewood (Reid 1999).

Not only bird species but also a range of arboreal mammals, bats and dasyurids require hollows for shelter and food, nesting hollows, perching places and forage substrate. In Australia about 290 vertebrate species use tree hollows, many rely exclusively on tree hollows (Smith & Lindenmayer 1988, Lindenmayer et al. 1991, Gibbons & Lindenmayer 1997). In NSW alone, about 120 vertebrate species use tree hollows and most utilise dead trees as nest sites (Gibbons & Lindenmayer 2002).

Fallen dead wood also provides important habitat for a suite of invertebrate species dependent on decaying wood for their survival. These species play an important role in recycling nutrients in forest and woodland ecosystems. They include a range of species that feed, breed, or shelter in dead wood or may be predators, or parasitoids dependent on species that live on dead wood. Fallen wood, which includes the bark, sapwood and heartwood, comes in a variety of shapes and sizes, permitting habitat specialisation with some species utilising only parts of the fallen wood, or even decaying logs with a particular exposure to sun. Microbial organisms and fungi are also important in the breakdown of timber (Araya 1993) and recycling of nutrients back into the soil. Invertebrates can also feed on, or in, wood-decomposing fungi (Grove 2002).

Nationally listed species

Firewood harvesting has the potential to impact on a number of species listed as threatened under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), in particular, those species dependent on hollow-bearing trees. Listed species where the loss of hollow-bearing trees is known to be a threat include the Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo (south-eastern) (Calyptorhynchus banksii graptogyne) (endangered), the Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolour) (endangered) and the Superb Parrot (Polytelis swainsonii) (vulnerable).

There is also concern that firewood harvesting could be having an adverse impact on the native species that are not currently listed as threatened under the EPBC Act. These include:

  • Squirrel Glider (Petaurus norfolcensis)
  • Tree Martin (Hirundo nigricans)
  • Brown Treecreeper (Climacteris picumnus)
  • Red-browed Treecreeper (Climacteris erythrops)
  • Crimson Rosella (Platycercus elegans)
  • Boobook Owl (Ninox boobook)
  • Owlet Nightjar (Aegotheles cristatus)
  • Barking Owl (Ninox connivens)
  • Yellow-tailed Black Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus funerus)
  • Rainbow Lorikeet (Trichoglossus haematodus)
  • Australian King Parrot (Alisterus scapularis)
  • Sacred Kingfisher (Todiramphus sanctus)
  • Dollarbird (Eurystomus orientalis)

2. How judged by TSSC in relation to the EPBC Act criteria.

Section 188(4) of the EPBC Act states:

A threatening process is eligible to be treated as a key threatening process if:

  1. it could cause a native species or an ecological community to become eligible for listing in any category, other than conservation dependent; or
  2. it could cause a listed threatened species or a listed threatened ecological community to become eligible to be listed in another category representing a higher degree of endangerment; or
  3. it adversely affects 2 or more listed threatened species (other than conservation dependent species) or 2 or more listed threatened ecological communities.

A. Could the threatening process cause a native species or an ecological community to become eligible for listing as Extinct, Extinct in the Wild, Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable?

There is concern that firewood harvesting may impact on several native species that are not listed under the EPBC Act, including the Squirrel Glider and woodland birds such as the Tree Martin and the Brown Treecreeper.

Squirrel Glider (Petaurus norfolcensis)

The Squirrel Glider has been listed under the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 and is listed as vulnerable under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. A subpopulation of Squirrel Glider (at Barrenjoey Peninsula) has been listed as endangered under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 as well.

The Squirrel Glider lives in the dry forests, woodlands and riverine plains of central and northern Victoria. It has a patchy distribution, occurring in forests and in isolated habitat and farmland, often confined to roadsides and stream frontages (DSE 2004).

Hollows in trees are essential as den sites, allowing the Squirrel Gliders to sleep during the day and become active at night. They use a range of hollows at various heights in living or dead trees, but prefer hollows with a tightly fitting entrance hole about 50mm in diameter. They usually nest alone and several den sites within its foraging range are often used alternately (DSE 2004).

Marked changes have occurred to the Squirrel Glider's habitat since European settlement. Most of the box woodland has been cleared, and the remaining ironbark and Red Gum forests have vastly different structures in terms of tree age, size and spacing; so even in extensive areas of native vegetation, the distribution of Squirrel Gliders is often patchy (DSE 2004).

On privately managed land, large trees with hollows are often present, but the scarcity of saplings and small trees raises concern over the recruitment of future hollow-bearing trees and the survival of the remnant (DSE 2004).

Public land forests have ample young trees but relatively fewer hollow-bearing trees due to timber harvesting activities. These forests thus support proportionally fewer arboreal mammals. Recruitment of hollow-bearing trees is a slow process so a continuing decline in the number of homes available to gliders is expected over the next century as veteran trees die and collapse (DSE 2004).

According to the Action Plan for Australian Marsupials and Monotremes (Maxwell et al 1996) habitat of the Squirrel Glider is undergoing a 'steady attrition of quality and extent of habitat remnants due to removal of timber for both sawn products and firewood; lack of suitable hollows in most habitat remnants on the inland slopes; lack of regeneration of trees and shrubs due to grazing by stock, rabbits and macropods and inappropriate fire regimes; removal of habitat during prospecting and mining for gold; tree decline in rural lands and outbreaks of leaf-skeletonising caterpillars in riverine forests; and further coastal development in NSW and south-east Queensland.'

Avian species

There are 12 bird species that are not listed under the EPBC Act, which could potentially be affected by firewood harvesting. These species are: Tree Martin (Hirundo nigricans), Brown Treecreeper (Climacteris picumnus), Red-browed Treecreeper (Climacteris erythrops), Crimson Rosella (Platycercus elegans), Boobook Owl (Ninox boobook), Owlet Nightjar (Aegotheles cristatus), Barking Owl (Ninox connivens), Yellow-tailed Black Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus funerus), Rainbow Lorikeet (Trichoglossus haematodus), Australian King Parrot (Alisterus scapularis), Sacred Kingfisher (Todiramphus sanctus) and the Dollarbird (Eurystomus orientalis).

Of these 12, two are listed under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 as 'vulnerable'; they are the Brown Treecreeper and Barking Owl. The Barking Owl is also listed as threatened under the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988. Both species rely on hollows for nesting, shelter and foraging and these two species are identified in the Australian Bird Action Plan (Garnett and Crowley 2000) as being at risk from firewood harvesting resulting in loss of habitat.

The remaining ten species are reliant on woodlands but are also considered to utilise habitat outside of woodlands and are not expected to be as affected by tree clearing activities as those that rely entirely on woodland ecosystems. Most of the species are wide-ranging and able to occupy a variety of habitats. While some are known to nest or roost in hollows, they are also known to roost in tree forks or even on the ground.

Conclusion to Criterion A: Firewood harvesting may contribute to these species becoming eligible for listing as threatened species. However there is insufficient data to quantify the extent of this threat and therefore it is not eligible under this criterion.

B. Could the threatening process cause a listed threatened species or a listed threatened ecological community to become eligible to be listed in another category representing a higher degree of endangerment?
C. Does the threatening process adversely affect 2 or more listed threatened species (other than conservation dependent species) or 2 or more listed threatened ecological communities?

There are three species listed under the EPBC Act that are either likely to reach a higher level of conservation category as a result of firewood harvesting, or can be considered to be adversely affected by firewood harvesting. For each of these listed species, the assessment against criteria B and C is presented together.

Avian species

Almost all of Australia's parrots, including the cockatoos and lorikeets, use tree hollows for nesting (Phillips 2001). Three species that have been identified as at risk from firewood harvesting are the South-eastern Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo, Swift Parrot and Superb Parrot.

South-eastern Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus banksii graptogyne)

The South-eastern Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo is listed as endangered under the EPBC Act.

The total population of the South-eastern Red-tailed Black Cockatoo is estimated to be 500-770 adults (Hill 2000). On average 23% of a flock comprises juveniles or sub-adults (Hill 2000). There are no previous population estimates to allow an assessment of any population decline, but a continuing decline is inferred due to habitat loss. It is estimated that 57% of all suitable habitat has been cleared within the existing range of the species and 54% of the principal feeding habitat, stringybark woodland, has been cleared.

The South-eastern Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo is restricted to stringybark woodlands in the Glenelg Plain, Wimmera, and Naracoorte Plain Bioregions and adjacent woodlands of E. camuldulensis, E. leucoxyon and A. luehmannii. Evidence suggests that the Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo requires very old, large hollow eucalypts for nesting, preferring dead trees, but also using live trees where dead trees have been cleared.

The Draft Recovery Plan for South-eastern Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo Calyptorhynchus banksii graptogyne (Burnard, T & R. Hill 2002) discusses hollow-availability (and therefore breeding opportunities) as being threatened by firewood harvesting, clearing for agricultural intensification, and the lack of regeneration of hollow-bearing trees across the entire range of the cockatoo. The Victorian Action Statement (1993) includes as a threat 'firewood collection, particularly where River Red Gums and dead standing trees are cut down.'

Other threats to the South-eastern Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo include agricultural intensification, particularly plantation forestry on private land, and removal of scattered trees for centre-pivot irrigation schemes.

Most nests for the South-eastern Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo occur in dead hollow trees on private land. The loss of dead hollow trees is a threat to the species, with 4-7% of known nest trees collapsing naturally per annum, and there is also an extensive loss of these trees on farmland resulting from firewood harvesting. In addition, there also appears to be no seedling recruitment of suitable nesting habitat for the Red-tailed Black Cockatoo (Burnard & Hill 2002). The National Action Plan for Australian Birds 2000 (Garnett and Crowley 2000) recommends management actions including protecting habitat from, or controlling and reducing, firewood harvesting.

Assessment against criterion B: The Red-tailed Black Cockatoo is known to be declining, with a continued loss of available habitat through human-induced or natural clearance. The number of breeding pairs is low and the continued loss of breeding habitat to firewood harvesting will impact on the species ability to successfully breed each year. It is considered that continued impacts from firewood harvesting may cause this species to become eligible for listing as critically endangered.

Assessment against criterion C: Loss of nesting habitat continues to adversely impact on the Red-tailed Black Cockatoo. It is considered that the continued harvesting of firewood is adversely affecting this species.

Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolour)

The Swift Parrot is listed as endangered under the EPBC Act.

According to the Swift Parrot Recovery Plan Lathamus discolour (2001), breeding season survey data for the species suggests that the population is at best stable with an estimated 1000 breeding pairs, but may be continuing to decline because of continued habitat loss. Records for this species tend to indicate that there are no more than 1500 to 2000 pairs.

This species breeds in Tasmania and migrates to the mainland to overwinter. Tree-hollows are used for nesting, either in trunks, branches or spouts of living, senescing or dead eucalypts. Trees commonly used are over-mature, often damaged by fire and with abundant hollows.

Breeding habitat in Tasmania has been significantly reduced and fragmented through the clearance of Blue Gums for agriculture and residential development, sawlog production and clearfelling for woodchips (Brown 1989). Availability of nest hollows in remaining habitat continues to decline due to forestry operations, particularly firewood harvesting (Swift Parrot Recovery Team 2001).

The Recovery Plan for Swift Parrot Lathamus discolour (2001) states that, in addition to land clearance restricting habitat, 'forestry operations and firewood collection are altering the age structure of forests across its range, resulting in the loss of older trees which provide a substantial food resource as well as hollows for nesting'. The ACT Action Plan for the Swift Parrot no.16 (1999) includes firewood harvesting as a threat to the species' woodland habitat. The National Action Plan for Australian Birds 2000 (Garnett and Crowley 2000) recommends management actions including protecting habitat from, or controlling and reducing, firewood harvesting.

Assessment against criterion B: Swift Parrot numbers are known to be declining, with a continued loss of available habitat through forestry and firewood harvesting. It is considered that continued impacts from firewood harvesting may cause this species to be eligible for listing as critically endangered.

Assessment against criterion C: Loss of suitable foraging and nesting habitat continues to adversely impact on the Swift Parrot. It is considered that the continued harvesting of firewood is adversely affecting this species.

Superb Parrot (Polytelis swainsonii)

The Superb Parrot is listed as vulnerable under the EPBC Act.

The total breeding population for the Superb Parrot is probably around 6,500 pairs (Garnett & Crowley 2000). The breeding range of the Superb Parrot is mostly in the South-west Slopes and Riverina Bio-Regions of NSW and in northern Victoria. The major threat is widespread clearing, degradation and fragmentation of box-woodland throughout the species' range and has resulted in a contraction of the range as well (Webster 1988).

The Superb Parrot nests in hollow limbs or holes in the trunk of usually large eucalypts, mainly near water. Trees most often used are River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis), but the Superb Parrot will also use Blakely's Red Gum (E. blakelyi), Grey Box (E. macrocarpa), Red Box (E. polyanthemos) and Inland Red Box (E. intertexta) (Webster 1988). This species requires nesting trees and foraging trees to be in close proximity. In some areas that contain typical River Red Gum breeding habitat, there is now little or no box-woodland within about ten kilometres of this habitat (e.g. along the Murray River, between Tocumwal and Yarrawonga). Therefore, nesting no longer occurs, even though suitable nest trees are still available. Continued removal of box-woodland is likely to result in further fragmentation of the breeding range (Webster 1998).

Although box-woodlands within the breeding range are not generally regarded as valuable for sawlogs, they are extensively utilised as fencing and firewood timbers and this may reduce foraging resources (Webster 1998).

The ACT Action Plan for Superb Parrot Polytelis swainsonii (1999) lists 'clearing of both living and dead trees (for agricultural expansion, urban development and firewood collection) as a continuing threat to the species' woodland habitat'. The National Action Plan for Australian Birds 2000 (Garnett and Crowley 2000) recommends management actions including protecting habitat from, or controlling and reducing, firewood harvesting.

Assessment against criterion B: The range for the Superb Parrot is known to be declining due to a loss of available habitat. Its habitat has become fragmented through clearing for agriculture and forestry. Evidence suggests that this habitat loss is expected to continue as firewood harvesting on private land is still being practiced. However, there is currently no available data to quantify that firewood harvesting will cause the Superb Parrot to be eligible for listing as endangered.

Assessment against criterion C: Loss of suitable foraging and nesting habitat continues to adversely impact on the Superb Parrot. It is considered that the continued harvesting of firewood is adversely affecting this species.

Conclusion to Criterion B

Based on the information available and summarised above, the Committee considers that the threatening process:

  • has the potential to cause two nationally listed threatened species to become eligible for listing in another category representing a higher degree of endangerment. These species are the Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo (south-eastern) (Calyptorhynchus banksii graptogyne), and Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolour).

Therefore the threatening process is eligible under this criterion.

Conclusion to Criterion C

There is considerable data indicating that firewood harvesting has resulted in impacts on nesting sites and foraging habitat for species reliant upon hollow-bearing trees and woody debris. These changes represent compositional alterations to threatened species habitat, and this activity is adversely affecting threatened species.

The Committee considers that:

  • this threatening process is adversely affecting two or more species listed under the EPBC Act. These species are the Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo (south-eastern) (Calyptorhynchus banksii graptogyne), Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolour) and the Superb Parrot (Polytelis swainsonii).
  • the threatening process is likely to impact on a much larger range of species which rely on hollow-bearing trees for habitat. If a Threat Abatement Plan is developed then it should consider the broad range of species likely to be threatened.

Therefore the threatening process is eligible under this criterion.

Conclusion

The threatening process 'Continuing net loss of native hollow-bearing trees and coarse woody debris due to firewood harvesting practices' meets s188(4)(b) and s188(4)(c) of the EPBC Act.

3. Threat Abatement Plan

Firewood harvesting has also been the focus of a whole of government initiative - the National Approach to Firewood Collection and Use in Australia. This national approach to commercial and private firewood collection includes six strategies designed to target ecosystems at most risk from commercial and private firewood collection practices. These strategies broadly cover research into firewood collection, education, implementation of market mechanisms, increasing the effectiveness of regulations, development of a sustainable firewood industry, improved efficiency of firewood use and encouraging users to find alternative sources.

The 'National Approach' requires each State and Territory, as well as the Commonwealth, to develop its own action plan to implement relevant parts of the agreed national approach document. To date, the Commonwealth and Western Australia have prepared final action plans; South Australia and the ACT have prepared drafts, while New South Wales, Tasmania, Victoria and Queensland have not yet prepared action plans.

The National Approach is being reviewed in 2005 to assess it effectiveness in reducing the impact of firewood harvesting.

Conclusion

The Committee does not consider a Threat Abatement Plan to be a feasible, effective and efficient way to abate firewood harvesting, as it would duplicate government processes currently underway. However, the Committee notes that the review of the 'National Approach' should assess the success of outcomes relevant to threatened species and identify if there are gaps in the approach, particularly relevant to private land, which should be addressed through either additional activities under the approach or through a TAP.

4. Recommendations

A. The Committee recommends that the list referred to in section 183 of the EPBC Act be amended by including in the list as a key threatening process:

  • 'Continuing net loss of native hollow-bearing trees and coarse woody debris due to firewood harvesting'

B. The Committee recommends that a Threat Abatement Plan is not considered a feasible, efficient, or effective way to abate the process.

The Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Senator the Hon Ian Campbell has considered the Threatened Species Scientific Committee's advice regarding the eligibility of 'Continuing net loss of native hollow-bearing trees and coarse woody debris due to firewood harvesting practices' for listing as a Key Threatening Process. The Minister has also considered the existing mechanisms that are in place to address the threat of firewood harvesting to native species.

The Minister agrees with the Committee that the process is eligible to be listed as a Key Threatening Process. However, he has found that there would be no conservation benefit from listing the process under the EPBC Act given that there are existing mechanisms in place to address it. The Minister has therefore decided not to list 'Continuing net loss of native hollow-bearing trees and coarse woody debris due to firewood harvesting practices' as a Key Threatening Process under the EPBC Act.

Publications used to assess the nomination

  • Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) (2001) A National Approach to Firewood Collection and Use in Australia, The Department of the Environment and Heritage, viewed 2004, http://www.deh.gov.au/land/publications/firewood-approach/references.html
  • Araya K (1993) Relationships between decay types of dead wood and occurrence of lucanid beetles (Coleoptera: Lucanidae). Applied Entomological Zoology 28, 27-33.
  • Brown, P.B (1989). The Swift Parrot Lathamus discolor White: A report on its ecology, distribution and status, including management considerations, Tasmanian Department of Lands, Parks & Wildlife, Hobart
  • Burnard, T and Hill R (2002) Draft South-eastern Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo Recovery Plan, Birds Australia http://www.redtail.com.au/pdf/jano2.doc
  • Department of Sustainability and Environment Victoria (DSE) (2004) Squirrel Glider Petaurus norfolcensis viewed 2004, http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/dse/nrenpa.nsf/FID/-76CC12A60D4718CA4A2568090026A17A?OpenDocument
  • Environment ACT (1999) Action Plan No. 16 Swift Parrot Lathamus discolor - A Vulnerable species. Australian Capital Territory Government, Canberra.
  • Environment ACT (1999) Action Plan No. 17 Superb Parrot Polytelis swainsonii - A Vulnerable species. Australian Capital Territory Government, Canberra.
  • Garnett S and Crowley G (2000) Red-tailed Black Cockatoo (south-eastern subspecies) Calyptorhynchus banksii graptogyne Recovery Plan, Birds Australia, Melbourne.
  • Garnett S.T and Crowley G.M (2000) The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2000. Environment Australia, Canberra.
  • Gibbons P and Lindenmayer DB (1997) Conserving hollow-dependent fauna in timber-production forests. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service: Hurstville, N.S.W.
  • Gibbons P and Lindenmayer DB (2002) Tree hollows and wildlife conservation in Australia. CSIRO Publishing:Melbourne.
  • Grove SJ (2002) Tree basal area and dead wood as surrogate indicators of saproxylic insect faunal integrity: a case study from the Australian lowland tropics. Ecological Indicators. In press.
  • Hill, F.A.R (2000) The Conservation Biology of the South-eastern Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo, Unpublished report to the Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo Recovery Team.
  • Lindenmayer DB, Cunningham RB, Tanton MT and Smith AP (1991) Characteristics of hollow-bearing trees occupied by arboreal marsupials in the montane ash forests of the central highlands of Victoria, south-east Australia. Forest Ecology and Management 40, 289-308.
  • Maxwell, S, Burbidge A and Morris K (eds) (1996) The 1996 Action Plan for Australian Marsupials and Monotremes, The Director of National Parks and Wildlife, Canberra.
  • NSW Scientific Committee Final Determination, Removal of dead wood and dead trees - key threatening process declaration, NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service viewed 2004 http://www3.environment.nsw.gov.au/npws.nsf/Content/deadwood_removal_ktp
  • Phillips, H (2001) Nestboxes for Natives, Birds Australia, viewed 2004, http://www.birdsaustralia.com.au/infosheets/info5.html
  • Reid, J.R.W (1999) Threatened and declining birds in the New South Wales Sheep-Wheat Belt: I. Diagnosis, characteristics and management. Consultancy report to NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service. CSIRO Wildlife and Ecology, Canberra.
  • Smith AP and Lindenmayer D (1988) Tree hollow requirements of Leadbeater's possum and other possums and gliders in timber production ash forests of the Victorian central highlands. Australian Wildlife Research 15, 347-62.
  • Swift Parrot Recovery Team (2001) Swift Parrot Recovery Plan 2001 - 2005. Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment, Hobart.
  • Venn D.R and Fisher J (1993) Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act - Action Statement No 37, Red Tailed Black Cockatoo Calyptorhynchus banksii graptogyne, Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Victoria.
  • Webster, R (1988) The Superb Parrot: a survey of the breeding distribution and habitat requirements, Australian National Parks & Wildlife Service, Canberra