Publications
Sue Berwick, Adrian Moorrees and Fiona Coates
Department of Natural Resources & Environment, Victoria
Environment Australia, March 2000
Current Species Status
Calochilus richiae (Bald-tip Beard Orchid) is an extremely rare orchid, known only from a single site that occupies an area of approximately 10 m x 10 m (Jones 1969; Shoknecht 1991). It is listed as Endangered under the Commonwealth Endangered Species Protection Act 1992, and is considered Endangered by Gullan et al. (1990), ANZECC (1993), Backhouse & Jeanes (1995), Briggs & Leigh (1995), and the Department of Natural Resources and Environment (unpublished list 1997). C. richiae is also listed as a threatened taxon in Schedule 2 of the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988.
It is unlikely to survive in the long term without habitat protection, intensive population management, and augmentation of the existing population using cultivated plants.
Habitat Requirements and Limiting Factors
Calochilus richiae occurs in dry sclerophyll vegetation (Heathy Dry Forest close to the ecotone with Box-Ironbark Forest) which is common across the lower northern slopes of the Great Dividing Range. However, little is understood of the ecology of this ecosystem, and the habitat requirements of rare species, in particular orchids, are poorly known. Rarity in C. richiae appears to be a consequence of loss of habitat due to mining and forestry operations; poor seedling establishment and survival; a lack of appropriate stimulus for seed germination, and an absence of 'safe sites'. The causes of the recently observed decline in the remaining population are unclear, but are likely to be a consequence of browsing by native and introduced fauna, significantly altered disturbance regimes and ongoing habitat degradation (Shoknecht 1991; Muir et al. 1995). These have caused severe disruptions to ecological processes and species distributions in Box-Ironbark forest since the mid 19th century (Muir et al. 1995). In addition, major current threats also include trampling, collecting and browsing. Potential threats are disturbance associated with timber removal and mineral exploration and extraction. Threats relating to inappropriate fire regimes, loss or decline of pollinators, extended periods of drought, or to the soil fungal composition have not been evaluated.
Recovery objectives
The overall objective of the Recovery Plan is to lessen the probability of extinction of C. richiae in the wild by increasing plant numbers in the existing population and establishing a sound ecological foundation for future self-sustainability of the species. The specific objectives are:
1. Restrict visitor access.
2. Assess the distribution of C. richiae and evaluate its habitat requirements.
3. Develop and implement a monitoring program.
4. Maximize seed production.
5. Maximize seedling recruitment.
6. Propagation.
7. Augmentation of existing population.
8. Manage the recovery program for C. richiae.
Recovery Criteria
The criteria for assessing the achievement of the overall objective are:
Actions Needed
1. Manage site access to minimize habitat disturbance.
2. Habitat and population evaluation.
3. Population management to maximize seed production.
4. Habitat management to maximize seedling recruitment and establishment.
5. Establish ex situ collections.
7. Reintroduction.
8. Establish Recovery Teams.
Total Estimated Cost of Recovery ($000's)
|
Objective |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
Total |
|||
|
Cost |
Cost |
Cost |
Cost |
Cost |
Cost |
||||
|
1 |
11 |
3.5 |
2.5 |
2.5 |
2 |
21.5 |
|||
|
2 |
8.6 |
8.6 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
23.2 |
|||
|
3 |
11 |
13 |
11 |
11 |
11 |
57 |
|||
|
4 |
7.5 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
23.5 |
|||
|
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
25 |
|||
|
6 |
6.5 |
15.5 |
23 |
14 |
14 |
73 |
|||
|
7 |
0 |
0 |
16 |
13 |
4 |
33 |
|||
|
8 |
3 |
4 |
5.5 |
4.5 |
4 |
21 |
|||
|
Total |
52.6 |
53.6 |
69 |
56 |
46 |
277.2 |
|||
Biodiversity Benefits
Calochilus richiae belongs to a group of threatened orchids that occur throughout the Box-Ironbark forest ecosystem. In spite of a relatively sound knowledge of their distribution, effective management of these populations is hampered by an extremely poor understanding of their conservation biology and ecology. The Recovery Plan will contribute to existing knowledge of threatened orchid ecology and will test and assess the suitability of a range of management techniques relevant to other threatened orchid populations distributed within this ecosystem. Collection of environmental data is also likely to provide insights into micro-habitat evaluation and management.
Reducing human disturbance from commercial and recreational activities will enhance conservation values in State Forest. Raising community awareness of orchid values will increase the value placed on areas of Box-Ironbark forest by local communities.
Successful propagation and reintroduction will require the development or refinement of techniques which may be applicable to other threatened orchid species.
Calochilus richiae has a single stout, fleshy leaf, 30 cm long by 15 mm wide, which is V-shaped in cross section, ribbed and dark green. Its flowering stem is erect, reaching a height of 35 cm. Up to five yellowish green to reddish brown striped flowers are arranged in a loose raceme. The ovate dorsal sepal grows to 15 mm long, forming a hood over the column. Spreading to incurved lateral sepals grow to 15 mm long, broaden at the base then narrow to a pointed apex. Petals are ovate and usually strongly incurved, up to 8 mm long. C. richiae is readily distinguished by the ovate labellum, which may be up to 15 mm long, with its basal and central parts covered with short purple spike or hook shaped calli. The tip is also unique, having narrow with inrolled margins imparting a channelled appearance.
Calochilus richiae is endemic to the north-central Goldfields, near Rushworth in Victoria (Shoknecht 1991; Backhouse and Jeanes 1995). It was first discovered by Mrs Edith Rich of Rushworth in 1928 and described by W. H. Nicholls in 1929. However, it was not relocated until 1968, by a field naturalist, J. Jamison, when twelve plants were found in an extremely localised area amongst eucalypt leaf litter (Jones 1969). However, anecdotal evidence suggests that this population was previously unknown, whereas the population known to Mrs Rich has since been destroyed as a result of illegal collection.
Calochilus richiae grows in Heathy Dry Forest (Muir et al. 1995) close to the ecotone with Box Ironbark Forest, dominated by Eucalyptus macrorhyncha, E. polyanthemos and E. tricarpa. The understorey consists of low shrubs including Grevillea alpina, Brachyloma daphnoides, Cassinia arcuata, and occasionally Xanthorrhoea australis, with an open grassy ground layer (predominantly Chionochloa pallida). Other associated orchids include Calochilus robertsonii, Caladenia dilatata, Caladenia gracilis (formerly Caladenia angustata), Thelymitra aristata, Thelymitra rubra and Microtis unifolia (Jones 1969). The population occurs on a gentle south-facing slope, on well drained, shallow, fine sandy loam soil.
Calochilus richiae is a terrestrial, deciduous orchid. It is dormant in the summer months, with growth occurring from winter to spring, and flowering in late October. Regeneration is predominantly by seedling establishment, rather than by tuber division (Backhouse and Jeanes 1995). Foliage and fruit appear to be highly palatable and actively sought by browsing animals, and seed capsules are frequently lost to predation (Shoknecht 1991; Backhouse and Jeanes 1995). Seed has been successfully germinated in laboratory trials, but seedling establishment in soil has so far been unsuccessful (M. Clements, pers. comm.).
Detailed investigations of the ecology of C. richiae is urgently required for recovery and management of the population. The precise details of its life history, or seasonal variation in flowering and fruiting is not known. Plant longevity, length of dormancy, population structure and demography have not been determined. Pollination biology, mycorrhizal relationships and response to fire are also unknown. Similarly, the long term consequences of predation are poorly understood. Conditions for seed germination and seedling establishment also require investigation.
Calochilus richiae is only known from a single, extremely small population, at a highly localised site that occupies an area of approximately 10 m x 10 m. After its discovery in 1928, some searches in the area failed to re-locate the population, or any additional populations, suggesting the species is confined to a single site. Although its past distribution is unknown, the long history of environmental impacts within Box-Ironbark forest (Muir et al. 1995) also suggests that if additional populations of C. richiae existed prior to European settlement, they are unlikely to have survived elsewhere in this ecosystem. Anecdotal evidence from field naturalists and orchid enthusiasts over the last fifty years indicate that the numbers of plants in the population fluctuate annually, and the orchid is extremely vulnerable to habitat disturbance. The site is reserved as State Forest but unreserved for conservation.
There has been an observed steady decline in numbers from 21-23 plants seen in 1980-1981. Eight of these flowered in 1988 and six flowering plants were seen in 1995. However, only one flowering plant was seen in 1996 (G. Backhouse, pers. comm. 1997). No plants were seen in 1997 or 1998. It is likely that illegal collecting of whole plants has contributed to this decline. Critically low population numbers also suggest that natural environmental fluctuations such as extended periods of low rainfall, are a potential threat to the species' future survival. The reproductive capacity of the population, the potential to set seed, and thus the likelihood of seedling recruitment is similarly threatened by low numbers of individuals.
Nicholls (1969) recognised C. richiae as 'very rare' and recommendations for its protection have also been made since 1969 (Jones 1969). It is listed as Endangered under the Commonwealth Endangered Species Protection Act 1992, and is considered Endangered by Gullan et al. (1990), ANZECC (1993), Backhouse & Jeanes (1995), Briggs & Leigh (1995), and the Department of Natural Resources and Environment (unpublished list 1999). C. richiae is also listed as a threatened taxon in Schedule 2 of the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988.
Current immediate threats urgently requiring management are trampling by visitors to the site which results in damage to plants and soil compaction and disturbance, removal of whole plants, flowers or seed and browsing by native and introduced animals. Accidental disturbance resulting from fire suppression activities must also be considered.
The overall objective of the Recovery Plan is to lessen the probability of extinction of C. richiae in the wild by increasing plant numbers in the existing population and establishing a sound ecological foundation for future self-sustainability of the species.
The extremely small size of the C. richiae population means that successful recovery is entirely dependent on an integrated approach which combines in-situ and ex-situ actions. These are aimed at threat management as well as intensive population management at the micro-site scale targeting individual plants, and ex situ conservation and reintroduction of plants over the five year term of the Recovery Plan. Recovery is also dependent on the re-appearance of plants in forthcoming years, and the appropriateness of knowledge acquired. Broader ecological issues such as the consequences of fire on population dynamics, soil requirements or maintenance of habitat openness, will not be directly addressed in the Recovery Plan as experimental work requiring statistical analysis is not possible given the current population size. Similarly, demographic trends will not be assessed statistically until periods of dormancy and longevity of plants is known and data has been collected for an appropriate period of time. The specific objectives of the Recovery Plan are to:
1. Restrict visitor access.
2. Assess the distribution of C. richiae and evaluate its habitat requirements.
3. Develop and implement a monitoring program.
4. Maximize seed production.
5. Maximize seedling recruitment.
6. Propagation.
7. Re-introduction.
8. Manage the recovery program for C. richiae.
The criteria for assessing the achievement of the objectives are:
There is an urgent need to minimize damage to the population as a result of habitat disturbance, trampling and illegal collection of plants. Legal protection of the site combined with community liaison and education will be the most efficient means of reducing human impacts. There is also an urgent requirement to manage other threats relating to commercial exploitation of the area. These include mining and firewood collection.
Action 1.1 Site Protection
Arrange for legal protection of the area where the site is located; erect signs to publicise restrictions to access and prosecution of offenders; publicise to local field naturalists and orchid societies and seek co-operation that the site will remain undisturbed for 5 years; rehabilitate the area on Tait-Hamilton road currently known to indicate access to the site.
Consider options available to permanently excise the area from mining and forestry activities, such as establishing a minimum 1 km x 1 km buffer zone following existing tracks and restricting vehicle access and other activities in the area through track closures.
Several instruments to improve the legal protection of the site are available including:-
Options considered will include costs, benefits, practicalities and standards of protection. A course of action will be negotiated with land managers, resource and conservation interests which may lead to implementation of one or a combination of the above.
Funds are sought to contribute to costs of rehabilitation, signs, gates and fences. The work will be undertaken by the Regional NRE Flora and Fauna Planner in consultation with the Forest Service and cost of maintenance will be met by NRE.
Responsibility: NRE, North East Region
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
7500 |
1500 |
500 |
500 |
0 |
Action 1.2 Site surveillance
Increase Forest Officer visits to two per week, including weekends, during late September and October when C. richiae is flowering. If necessary, conduct daylight watches of the site during the flowering period. The work will be undertaken by the Regional NRE staff.
Responsibility: NRE, North East Region
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
Action 1.3 Prepare fire protection plan
Prepare fire protection plans and strategies for the forest block which minimise site disturbance during wildfire suppression exercises. Ensure awareness of the plans through annual crew leader and duty officer training.
Responsibility: NRE, North East Region
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
2000 |
500 |
500 |
500 |
500 |
There is anecdotal evidence of searches for C. richiae and one search was conducted in the vicinity of the site in 1995. It is possible that populations may have been missed owing to lack of flowering or poor site visibility. Systematic survey and habitat evaluation are most likely to reveal any currently unknown populations, and identify sites suitable for reintroduction.
Action 2.1 Conduct searches
Intensively search areas of similar habitat within its current range. Air photos will be used to design a stratified approach and priority given to areas where environmental features are most similar to the known site, and where there has been minimal soil disturbance. Searches will be conducted over at least two years to account for seasonal variation. Representatives from community groups including local Field Naturalists will be approached for local site information. Funds are required to cover the salary of a Project Officer to conduct a survey, and travel and accommodation. NRE will contribute by conducting searches in following years, and with project supervision, office accommodation and database maintenance.
Responsibility: NRE, Project Officer
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
4300 |
4300 |
500 |
500 |
500 |
Action 2.2 Habitat evaluation
The location of any new populations will be mapped and contour maps of new sites produced. Using plant-centred sampling, areas where C. richiae is present will be compared with areas within the immediate area where it is absent. Data collected will include disturbance, soil properties, phytosociology and structure of vegetation, litter depth and site topographic variation at the micro-site scale. Data will be collected annually and if sufficient information is obtained, statistically analysed.
Funds are sought to cover the cost of employing a Project Officer. NRE will contribute with project supervision, office accommodation and database maintenance.
Responsibility: NRE, Project Officer
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
4300 |
4300 |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
A detailed record of the numbers and distribution of plants in the existing population is essential to assess the effectiveness of the Recovery Plan. Censusing over a period of years will eventually reveal the length of time that plants are dormant so that population dynamics can be accurately determined. Knowledge of the timing of life history events is also necessary to plan future management.
Action 3.1 Establish censusing
Permanently mark individual plants for intensive censusing during year 1 and tri-annual monitoring in subsequent years. The work will be undertaken by a Project Officer, supervised by NRE staff. Funds are sought to cover the cost of employing a Project Officer, materials, travel and accommodation. NRE will contribute with project supervision, office accommodation and database maintenance.
Responsibility: NRE, Project Officer
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
0 |
2000 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Action 3.2 Map plants
Record location of plants. The fates of individual plants will be recorded as a site map so that population trends can be assessed visually over time and correlated with environmental information. Funds are sought to cover the cost of employing a Project Officer. NRE will contribute with project supervision, office accommodation and database maintenance.
Responsibility: NRE, Project Officer
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
3000 |
3000 |
3000 |
3000 |
3000 |
Action 3.3 Collect phenological data
Monthly (increased to fortnightly during flowering and seed set) observation and recording of presence/absence of plants and their reproductive status; timing of life history events; measurement of leaf dimensions, flowers and fruiting capsules; collation of data as a phenological calendar; inclusion of data onto VROTpop data base. Funds are sought to cover the cost of employing a Project Officer. NRE will contribute with project supervision, office accommodation and database maintenance.
Responsibility: NRE, Project Officer
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
5000 |
5000 |
5000 |
5000 |
5000 |
Action 3.4 Monitor and map recruitment
Record seedling recruitment; amend map regularly to include any seedling recruitment. Funds are sought to cover the cost of employing a Project Officer. NRE will contribute with project supervision, office accommodation and database maintenance.
Responsibility: NRE, Project Officer
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
3000 |
3000 |
3000 |
3000 |
3000 |
The presence and abundance of pollinators is unknown at the site and there are insufficient plants at present for effective cross pollination to take place. Although plants are likely to be self-compatible (M. Clements, pers. comm.), artificially pollinating plants is likely to maximize seed set. Predation of seeds has been observed and plants are apparently palatable to browsing animals. Protection of plants from invertebrate and vertebrate predators will maximize seed production, and will prevent further damage to the site.
Action 4.1 Hand pollinate individual plants
Manually transfer pollen between plants to improve seed set; keep accurate records of fertilised plants and subsequent fruit development. The work will be undertaken by a Project Officer, supervised by NRE staff. Funds are sought to cover the cost of employing a Project Officer. NRE will contribute with project supervision, office accommodation and database maintenance.
Responsibility: NRE, Project Officer
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
Action 4.2 Protect plants
Construct a fence at the site to deter rabbits, wallabies and kangaroos. If necessary, place specially constructed wire cages around individual plants to further protect plants from damage by birds. The work will be undertaken by a Project Officer, supervised by NRE staff. Funds are sought to cover the cost of employing a Project Officer and the cost of purchasing cages. NRE will contribute with project supervision, office accommodation and database maintenance.
Responsibility: NRE, Project Officer
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
5000 |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
Action 4.3 Protect flowering and fruiting stems
Predation by flying insects will be prevented using bags constructed from fine mesh material such as millepore filter; additional protection to stems will be provided by applying Vaseline to stem bases to prevent further damage by caterpillars. The work will be undertaken by a Project Officer, supervised by NRE staff. Funds are sought to cover the cost of employing a Project Officer and purchase of materials. NRE will contribute with project supervision, office accommodation and database maintenance.
Responsibility: NRE, Project Officer
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
Establishing favourable conditions for seedling establishment and survival is a key action for population recovery. Introduced exotic species are opportunists capable of appropriating resources and limiting growth of indigenous taxa as a result of competitive exclusion. Maximizing recruitment is best accomplished by removing exotic plant species and providing 'safe sites' for seedling establishment. This can be achieved by creating bare ground so that protocorms and developing seedlings have improved access to light, nutrients and moisture, and are protected from predators.
Action 5.1 Weed removal.
Hand removal of weeds within the population and immediate area, ensuring minimal site disturbance. The work will be undertaken by a Project Officer, supervised by NRE staff. Funds are sought to cover the cost of employing a Project Officer. NRE will contribute with project supervision, office accommodation and database maintenance.
Responsibility: NRE, Project Officer.
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
Action 5.2 Soil scarification
Scarifying soil to overcome compaction, increase soil moisture absorption and create niches which will maximize germination and recruitment. The work will be undertaken by a Project Officer, supervised by NRE staff. Funds are sought to cover the cost of employing a Project Officer. NRE will contribute with project supervision, office accommodation and database maintenance.
Responsibility: NRE, Project Officer
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
Action 5.3 Coarse litter removal
Eucalypt leaves and woody material will be removed to increase the area available to seeds for germination. Fine litter will be left in place so that soil moisture is retained. The work will be undertaken by a Project Officer, supervised by NRE staff. Funds are sought to cover the cost of employing a Project Officer. NRE will contribute with project supervision, office accommodation and database maintenance.
Responsibility: NRE, Project Officer
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
Action 5.4 Hand watering (if required)
Should rainfall deficits occur at critical growth periods, particularly over winter, then watering by hand may be necessary. The work will be undertaken by a Project Officer, supervised by NRE staff. Funds are sought to cover the cost of employing a Project Officer. NRE will contribute with project supervision, office accommodation and database maintenance.
Responsibility: NRE, Project Officer
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
Action 5.5 Protection (if required)
Should seedlings develop, plants will be protected from predators using specially constructed cages. The work will be undertaken by a Project Officer, supervised by NRE staff. Funds are sought to cover the cost of employing a Project Officer and materials. NRE will contribute with project supervision, office accommodation and database maintenance.
Responsibility: NRE, Project Officer
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
It will be necessary to establish an ex situ population C. richiae to safeguard the survival of the species in the event of complete loss of plants in the wild. Some germination trials have been conducted at the Australian National Botanic Gardens, and by a private grower in Victoria. However, further effort is required to improve germination success. Preliminary trials showed that seedlings can take up to two years to develop (M. Clements, pers. comm.) but initial attempts to establish seedlings in soil have not been successful. Calochilus spp. seed has been germinated at Kings Park and Botanic Garden, Perth, but translocating plants to soil has been similarly problematic (K. Dixon, pers. comm.). Consequently, substantial and committed effort is needed to achieve this objective. However, there is a high degree of interest from government organisations, community groups and professional orchid growers both locally and interstate. Both symbiotic and asymbiotic methods will be trialed.
Action 6.1 Propagate plants from seed
When seed becomes available, distribute to Kings Park and Botanic Garden (KPBG), commercial growers and Native Orchid Growers Network members (NOGN). A range of growers will be approached so that both symbiotic and asymbiotic techniques can be trialed. Funds are sought to support the cost of engaging a specialist contractor.
Responsibility: NRE, KPBG, NOGN, RBG, Contractor
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
6500 |
6500 |
6500 |
6500 |
6500 |
Action 6.2 Establish ex-situ collections
If sufficient plants can be propagated, an ex situ collection will be maintained, preferably at two or three locations. This task will be undertaken in conjunction with the Australian National Botanic Gardens and skilled amateur growers belonging to the Native Orchid Grower's Network, which has recently been established between NRE, the Royal Botanic Gardens Melbourne. Funds are sought to engage a commercial grower with facilities to propagate and house plants.
Responsibility: NRE, ANBG, NOGN, RBG, contractor.
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
0 |
0 |
7500 |
7500 |
7500 |
Action 6.3. Identify mycorrhizal fungi
This will address the compatibility of mycorrhizal fungi from soil, litter and flora which co-occur at C. richiae sites, with germination of C. richiae seed. C. richiae is unlikely to require a specific fungus for growth and germination, but ex-situ propagation may rely on developing symbiotic germination techniques. The aim of this action will be to investigate alternatives to destructive sampling to obtain fungi for ex-situ cultivation. The results of this work would be particularly relevant to the cultivation of other rare orchids, where populations are too small to sustain destructive sampling to obtain mycorrhizal fungi.
Funds will be sought for postgraduate research into the development of symbiotic and asymbiotic cultivation techniques and trials to perfect techniques for establishing an ex-situ collection in soil. University contributions will include supervision by academic staff, provision of laboratory, office, library and computing facilities. NRE's contribution would include financial assistance for travel through the Botanic Guardians scheme, and laboratory expenses, as well as providing an advisory role including joint supervision, field assistance and provision of access to existing data.
Responsibility: NRE, University
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
0 |
9000 |
9000 |
0 |
0 |
Reintroduction of C. richiae back into the wild will be an extremely difficult task and will require intensive effort. It is unlikely that a large enough ex-situ collection can be established within the time frame of the Recovery Plan. Thus, augmentation of the existing population, where environmental conditions are most likely to be suitable, is a priority.
Action 7.1. Prepare a translocation plan
The plan will outline in detail the method to be used for augmentation of the existing population. It will detail site preparation, timing, numbers of plants and monitoring techniques. Funds are required to engage a suitable contractor with relevant experience, supervised by NRE staff.
Responsibility: NRE, contractor
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
0 |
0 |
3000 |
0 |
0 |
Action 7.2. Augmentation
Cultivated plants will be translocated into the existing population. Augmentation will proceed according to the reintroduction plan. Funds are sought to employ a specialist contractor with relevant botanical and horticultural expertise to carry out the work. NRE staff will supervise the work.
Responsibility: NRE, contractor
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
0 |
0 |
4000 |
4000 |
4000 |
Action 7.3. Direct seeding trials
This action will replicate laboratory trials in the field, using direct seed burial and inoculated soil. There is evidence in the literature that field trials are vital to separate ecological from potential specificity in regard to propagation using symbiotic treatments, and is extremely important to investigate in relation to recovery (Perkins and McGee 1995). Trials will be undertaken as Postgraduate research in conjunction with Action 6.3. NRE's contribution would include financial assistance for travel and laboratory expenses, as well as providing an advisory role including joint supervision, field assistance and provision of access to existing data. University contributions will include supervision by academic staff, provision of laboratory, office, library and computing facilities.
Responsibility: NRE, University
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
0 |
0 |
9000 |
9000 |
0 |
Action 7.4 Monitoring
The progress of this objective will be evaluated by regular recording of the fates of individual plants, in conjunction with the monitoring program outlined in objective 3. Costs will be absorbed by funding for action 3.2.
Responsibility: NRE, Contractor
Recovery of C. richiae will involve contributions from a number of parties and is likely to be a complex project. Consequently, it will be vital to co-ordinate actions and to achieve continuity through appropriate project supervision.
Action 8.1. Establish a Threatened Orchid Recovery Team
NRE has established a Threatened Orchid Recovery Team (TORT) to oversee threatened orchid recovery in Victoria, consisting of representatives from the Royal Botanic Gardens, Environment Australia, Universities, Botanists and Ecologists and the Australian Native Orchid Society. Its role is to develop and oversee a strategy for orchid conservation in Victoria, to evaluate recovery methods and to provide specialist advice. Member organisations and agencies will be responsible for covering their own costs of participation in TORT.
Responsibility: NRE
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
Action 8.2. Establish a C. richiae Recovery Team
Establish a C. richiae Recovery Team to oversee the Recovery Plan implementation. Membership will consist of North East and North West Region NRE staff and local community groups, specialist botanists, contractors and a Project Officer. Member organisations and agencies will be responsible for covering their own costs of participation.
Responsibility: NRE
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
1500 |
Action 8.3. Undertake recovery program review and evaluation
Progress and effectiveness of the Recovery Plan will be reviewed annually by the C. richiae Recovery Team in consultation with EA. The Recovery Plan will be implementing a number of procedures that have not been previously tested and ongoing review and assessment of the outcomes of actions will be necessary. Costs will be met by NRE.
Responsibility: TORT
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Costl |
0 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
1000 |
Action 8.4. Revise FFG Action Statement for C. richiae
The C. richiae Action Statement was published in 1991 under the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 and is due for revision. Revision will be most pertinent if carried out in conjunction with implementation of the Recovery Plan. Costs will be met by NRE.
Responsibility: NRE
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
0 |
0 |
1500 |
0 |
0 |
Action 8.5. Prepare recovery program termination criteria
Termination criteria will be developed to determine when the objectives have been met or whether recovery is considered no longer possible. Criteria will be developed which will reflect the success or failure of various recovery actions. Costs will be met by NRE and Recovery Team member agencies and organisations.
Responsibility: TORT
|
Year |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
Cost |
0 |
0 |
0 |
500 |
0 |
Successful recovery of C. richiae will rely substantially on effective communication between NRE, orchid enthusiasts, growers, collectors and land managers. At present it is vital for co-operative arrangements to be put into place so that site protection is maximized. Non-disclosure of the population location has been the key to protection in the past, together with low intensity visitor use and minimal resource exploitation. Following successful recovery of the population, monitoring by local naturalists will be encouraged via the Botanic Guardians Scheme. Local site information from Field Naturalists will also be invaluable for evaluating potential reintroduction sites in the future.
Calochilus is a difficult genus to propagate and liaison and communication between orchid growers, both professional and amateur, will also benefit the propagation and augmentation objectives of the Recovery Plan. TORT and NRE will co-ordinate information transfer between involved parties.
Backhouse, G. & Jeanes, J. (1995) The Orchids of Victoria. Melbourne University Press, Melbourne.
Briggs, J.D. & Leigh, J.H. (1995) Rare or Threatened Australian Plants. Revised edition. CSIRO Australia
Gullan, P.K., Cheal, D.C. & Walsh, N.G. (1990) Rare or Threatened Plants in Victoria. Department of Conservation and Environment, Melbourne.
Jones, D. (1969). Rediscovery of Calochilus richae. Vic. Ant. 86, 318-320.
Muir, A. M., Edward's, S. A. & Dickens J. M. (1995). Description and Conservation Status of the Vegetation of the Box-Ironbark Ecosystem in Victoria. Flora & Fauna Technical Report No. 136. Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Victoria.
Nicholls, W. (1969) Orchids of Australia (eds D. Jones & B. Muir). Thomas Nelson, Melbourne.
Perkins, A. J. & McGee, P. A. (1995) Distribution of the Orchid Mycorrhizal Fungus, Rhizoctonia solani, in relation to its Host, Pterostylis acuminata, in the Field. Aust. J. Bot. 43, 565-75.
Shoknecht, N.) 1991 Bald-tip Beard-Orchid (Calochilus richiae) Action Statement No. 5. Department of Conservation and Environment (1991).
Action 1.1 Site protection.
Action 1.2 Site surveillance
Action 1.3 Prepare fire protection plan
Action 2.1 Conduct searches
Action 2.2 Habitat evaluation.
Action 3.1 Establish censusing
Action 3.2 Map plants.
Action 3.3 Collect phenological data.
Action 3.4 Monitor and map recruitment
Action 4.1 Hand pollinate individual plants
Action 4.2 Protect individual plants
Action 4.3 Protect flowering and fruiting stems
Action 5.1 Weed removal
Action 5.2 Soil scarification
Action 5.3 Coarse litter removal
Action 5.4 Hand watering (if required)
Action 5.5 Protection (if required)
Action 6.1 Propagate plants from seed
Action 6.2 Establish ex situ collection
Action 6.3. Identify mycorrhizal fungi
Action 7.1. Prepare a reintroduction plan
Action 7.2. Reintroduce cultivated plants into the existing population.
Action 7.3. Direct seeding trials
Action 7.4. Monitoring
Action 8.1. Establish a Recovery Team
Action 8.2. Establish a C. richiae Recovery Team
Action 8.3. Undertake recovery program review and evaluation
Action 8.4. Revise FFG Action Statement for C. richiae
Action 8.5. Prepare recovery program termination criteria
|
Action |
Priority |
Feasibility |
Responsibility |
Cost Estimate ($1000s) |
|||||
|
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
Total |
||||
|
1 Site protection |
|||||||||
|
1.1 Protection |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
7.5 |
1.5 |
0.5 |
0.5 |
0 |
10 |
|
1.2 Surveillance |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
7.5 |
|
1.4 Fire plans |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
2 |
0.5 |
0.5 |
0.5 |
0.5 |
4 |
|
2 Distribution |
|||||||||
|
2.1 Search |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
4.3 |
4.3 |
0.5 |
0.5 |
0.5 |
10.1 |
|
2.2 Evaluation |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
4.3 |
4.3 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
13.1 |
|
3 Censusing |
|||||||||
|
3.1 Design |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
3.2 Map plants |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
15 |
|
3.3 Life history |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
25 |
|
3.4 Monitor |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
15 |
|
4 Increase seeds |
|||||||||
|
4.1 Pollination |
1 |
80 |
NRE |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
|
4.2 Protect plants |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
11 |
|
4.3 Protect seeds |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
7.5 |
|
5 Increase seedlings |
|||||||||
|
5.1 Weed removal |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
|
5.2 Scarification |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
|
5.3 Litter removal |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
|
5.4 Watering |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
|
5.5 Protection |
1 |
100 |
NRE |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
|
6 Propagation |
|||||||||
|
6.1 Germination |
2 |
70 |
NRE |
6.5 |
6.5 |
6.5 |
6.5 |
6.5 |
32.5 |
|
6.2 Cultivate plants |
2 |
70 |
NRE |
0 |
0 |
7.5 |
7.5 |
7.5 |
22.5 |
|
6.3 Mycorrhiza |
2 |
70 |
NRE |
0 |
9 |
9 |
0 |
0 |
18 |
|
7 Reintroduction |
|||||||||
|
7.1 Prepare plan |
3 |
100 |
NRE |
0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
7.2 Reintroduction |
3 |
50 |
NRE |
0 |
0 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
12 |
|
7.3 Direct seeding |
3 |
50 |
NRE |
0 |
0 |
9 |
9 |
0 |
18 |
|
7.4 Monitoring |
3 |
100 |
NRE |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
8 Recovery program |
|||||||||
|
8.1 Recovery Team |
2 |
100 |
NRE |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
7.5 |
|
8.2 Local Team |
2 |
100 |
NRE |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
7.5 |
|
8.3 Review |
2 |
100 |
TORT |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
4 |
|
8.4 Action statement |
2 |
100 |
NRE |
0 |
0 |
1.5 |
0 |
0 |
1.5 |
|
8.5 Termination |
2 |
100 |
TORT |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0.5 |
0 |
.5 |
|
Totals $(000s) |
52.6 |
53.6 |
69.0 |
56.0 |
46.0 |
277.2 |
|||
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this document are the views of the authors' and do not necessarily reflect those of Environment Australia or the Department of Natural Resources and Environment.
Citation
Berwick, S., Moorrees, A. and Coates, F. (2000) Recovery Plan - Bald-tip Beard-orchid (Calochilus richiae). Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Victoria.
Copyright
© The Director, Environment Australia, GPO Box 787, Canberra, ACT 2601.
This publication is copyright. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, photocopying or other, without the prior permission of the Director, Environment Australia.
Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any means without permission of the Director, Environment Australia.
Acknowledgments
The preparation of this plan was funded by the Environment Australia Biodiversity Group, Threatened Species and Communities Section
Gary Backhouse (NRE), Rolf Weber (NRE Shepparton), Rob Price (NRE Bendigo), Shirley Diez (NRE Bendigo), Mark Clements (Centre for Plant Biodiversity Research, Canberra), P. McCarthy (Forest Officer, Rushworth) and R. Orr (Bendigo Field Naturalists Club) provided invaluable comment and information during the preparation of this Recovery Plan, and are thanked for their contributions.