This project has been assisted by the NSW Government through its Environmental Trust.

MONITORING & EVALUATION

Monitoring is recording and measuring the state of a community and associated natural resource management practices. Evaluation is a linked but distinct process which analyses monitoring data to assess the efficacy of a natural resource management project. It is important to record, monitor and evaluate the progress of any rehabilitation project. This is necessary to demonstrate the outcomes achieved from the work carried out and the relative success or otherwise of different methods that have been used. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) provides the information required to learn from experience and improve on methods thereby facilitating adaptive natural resource management. Most funding bodies seek reporting processes that incorporate monitoring to show progress. The system used will depend on the resources available, the scale of the project, the reporting requirements and the usefulness of the data for other purposes. Deciding on some key performance indicators and then setting up baseline and follow-up surveys is critical to ensure that the success of the project can be demonstrated.

Developing a monitoring strategy To effectively monitor a project the following needs to be determined prior to starting on-ground works:

• Aims of the project,

• Available budget, skills and resources (including staff,

contractors, volunteers),

• An appropriate sampling strategy (what data is collected, how

it is collected and how often),

• The health (structure, composition and condition) of the

vegetation community,

• The on-ground work methods and the restoration plan,

• Establish some key performance indicators, and

• How the achievements (successes/failures) are to be

measured.

The progress and final outcomes of the work (how the vegetation community changed during and following on-ground works) are then able to be assessed relative to the initial condition. Key areas for evaluation of rehabilitation works and examples of associated indicators include:

• Weed control outcomes (changes over time of number of

weed species, density/cover of priority weeds; cost/hectare of weed control),

• Improvements in vegetation structure (changes over time in

the size of the largest stems and % cover and abundance of both native and weed species; number and height range of strata within a vegetation community),

• Floristic changes (changes over time in species diversity and

composition including recruitment),

• Fauna usage and habitat enhancement (changes over time in

the presence and abundance of fauna species /specific habitat attributes/resources), and

• Enhancement of other habitat variables (bank stability, water

quality - turbidity, total dissolved oxygen etc.). Relevant performance indicators should be monitored by recording field data. This can then be supported by a photographic record.

Recording field data Measurements that record progress and outcomes with qualitative and quantitative data are more formal and systematic and can be analysed to show problems or progress. Field data is generally recorded in quadrats, circular plots or along transects which can be of various dimensions dependent on the variables being recorded (5m x 5m, 10m x 10m, 5m diameter, 10m x 2m, 50m) that have been established prior to the commencement of on-ground work. These sampling areas should be clearly marked with stakes, steel pickets or tape. Photos should be taken of the area to provide visual information to compliment the field data. Data recorded can include:

• Species presence and % cover and abundance,

• Growth stage (juvenile, sapling, adult),

• Percentage ground cover of weeds,

• Canopy cover (e.g. percentage cover), and

• Depth and % cover of leaf litter.

Skills required to conduct effective monitoring include the ability to identify native and weed seedlings and mature trees to species level. Knowledge of fauna habitat requirements and identification are also valuable. If a threatened flora or fauna species is found the location should be recorded and reported to the Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECC) to contribute to knowledge of species distribution.

Photo points Successive photographs taken from the same fixed points in a remnant provide a visual record of weed infestation and density of vegetation. Photo point pictures are taken at intervals of 3, 6 or 12 months, as well as after major events such as plantings, large storms or fire. Baseline photos must be taken prior to commencing on-ground works. Photograph locations should be marked using a flagged star-picket and the photo orientation is re-aligned by matching the landscape (e.g. tree trunks) with the baseline (initial) photo, so that any future photos can be directly compared. Photographic records are limited in their ability to contribute to evaluation as they do not provide quantitative information related to changes in weed and native species abundance and diversity.

Monitoring bush regeneration activities Regeneration daily record sheets record work completed, methods, chemical usage, weather details and field observations. This information can be evaluated to guide effective future bush regeneration strategies.

Monitoring revegetation areas When adequate records of plantings are recorded, these records can show trends of success for planting techniques, plant survival and growth rates (species suitability) and weed control (cost effectiveness). Data that should be recorded includes:

• Time, area and type and number of species planted,

• Planting techniques used,

• Fertilizer type and application rate/time,

• Death rates (species, quantity, time and cause),

• Weather during planting and follow-up weed sprays,

• Maintenance - type, effectiveness, herbicide application rates,

and

• Site observations of natural regeneration (emergence and

growth, time of fruiting/flowering, changes in soil health and leaf litter and arrival of seed dispersers).

MONITORING & EVALUATION TOOLS Recently there has been development of some ‘tools’ for

landholders, community groups, and rehabilitation practitioners

from government agencies or authorities to monitor the

outcomes of restoration projects. These tools and the

associated documentation should assist implementation of M&E

and minimise the problems experienced by many community

groups that have been identified in Freeman (2004). Use and

trial of these ‘tools’ together with appropriate resourcing will

enable them to be refined, improved and adapted for wider

usage.

Rainforest monitoring toolkit The Monitoring Revegetation Projects in Rainforest

Landscapes: Toolkit Version 2 (Kanowski et. al. 2008) produced

by Griffith University contains detailed documentation and

information, protocols and proformas on: designing monitoring

programs; recording project details; assessing site condition;

monitoring forest structure; monitoring plant species

composition; estimating carbon sequestration; and managing,

analysing and evaluating data. To facilitate this, Version 2 of the

toolkit has four Microsoft Excel spreadsheets to monitor floristic

composition, forest structure, plant attributes and wood density.

Revegetation projects are defined as ‘reforestation of cleared

land, the enhancement or restoration of remnant vegetation and

the manipulation of regrowth to promote rainforest regeneration.’

MERV Database package Big Scrub Rainforest Landcare Group, Byron Shire Council and

EnviTE NSW have developed a customised database package

based on Microsoft Access database software for monitoring

and evaluating the restoration of vegetation (MERV). The

package consists of a desktop version and a PDA version

(under development) for field data capture. MERV was originally

conceived to assist NRM projects in north east NSW. A NSW

Natural Resources Advisory Council funded trial of the database

is scheduled to commence in late 2008 / early 2009 amongst

the NRM community to assess its utility and applicability to a

broader geographic area and identify priority areas for future

refinement. A simple user manual and hard copy data sheets as

well as questionnaires will form part of the trial documentation.

The database is able to be used for restoration works across a

diverse range of vegetation communities and can be used at a

variety of levels dependent on needs (e.g Landcare & other

community groups, contract implementers, agency

representatives, university students etc). It draws on

standardised settings and pick lists which facilitate data entry

and these can be modified and customised as required. The

MERV package allows the capture, storage, display and

reporting of relevant natural resource information. MERV

consists of seven modules: Set Up; Sites and Plots; M & E

Surveys; Restoration Work; Charts; Reports; Import & Export to

Pocket PC. This information can then be used to monitor

changes in vegetation structure and floristics associated with

restoration works such as bush regeneration works and

revegetation projects. Changes in faunal habitat and other

habitat variables can also be recorded, tracked and assessed.

Information on the restoration activity (i.e herbicide and manual

weed control activities, planting works) can also be recorded.

Basic reporting and charting functions are integrated into the

package and data can be exported to Excel if required.

Use of the MERV Database or Rainforest Monitoring Toolkit is

recommended for the monitoring and evaluation of rehabilitation

work, and also for recording site data in Big Scrub remnants and

other lowland subtropical rainforest remnants in north-east New

South Wales and south-east Queensland. This will facilitate the

mapping and data aggregation of remnant lowland subtropical

rainforest vegetation on a landscape scale, which will be

valuable for a variety of purposes. These toolkits can be

adapted for other rainforest types in other areas.

Both these ‘tools’ enable a more standardised approach than

previously was the case in recording monitoring and evaluation

data. If a number of groups are working in the same area it is

useful to establish standardised monitoring and reporting to

allow comparisons across the sites.

References / further reading Freeman, A. 2004. Constraints to community groups monitoring

plants and animals in rainforest revegetation sites on the

Atherton Tablelands of far north Queensland. Ecological

Management and Restoration 5, 199 -204.

Kanowski, J., Catterall, C.P., Freebody, K. And Harrison, D.A.

2008. Monitoring Revegetation Projects in Rainforest

Landscapes. ToolKit Version 2. Report to the marine and

Tropical Sciences Research Facility. Reef and rainforest

Research Centre Limited, Cairns (76 pp). Downloadable from

http://www.rrrc.org.au/publications/downloads/495-GU-

Kanowski-et-al-2008-Monitoring-Toolkit-Version-2.pdf

Hnatiuk,R.J.,Thackway,R. & Walker. J 2008. Field Survey For

Vegetation Classification Version 1 National Land & Water

Resources and Bureau of Rural Resources Downloadable from

http://www.affashop.gov.au/product.asp?prodid=13881

Reference Manual: Subtropical Rainforest Restoration: A practical manual and data source for landcare groups, land managers and rainforest regenerators, 2nd edition. 2005 Big Scrub Rainforest Landcare Group.

MERV vegetation structure module

MERV vegetation structure module