In February 2011 Cyclone Yasi passed through northern Queensland causing untold destruction. The local electrical authority engaged Greening Australia to do a professional assessment of tree damage with a view to improving vegetation management in order to minimise future damage to infrastructure.

The findings were that tree failure among plantings that utilised advanced stock was almost total even though their roots had apparently spread well beyond the original root ball. Damage among trees originating from smaller stock was substantially less.

Authorities who wish to follow the path of instant gratification by replanting with advanced stock place people and infrastructure at unnecessary risk.

Sometimes when trees are cleared for development it is a requirement of some authorities to undertake replacement or compensatory plantings. The philosophy is that there will be no net loss of canopy cover and habitat. Laudable sentiments.

However for some authorities the replanting approach is more about instant gratification. This approach not only predisposes the replanting to long term failure but could also be very dangerous.

The ‘instant’ solution means the replanting with advanced tree stock such as 25 litre tubs or – incredibly – 100 litre tubs. If such stock receive adequate maintenance and correct installation techniques then all may be well and good. But just what constitutes ‘adequate’ for maintenance and installation is in my experience totally underestimated by industry at large and the consequences are trees that frequently barely struggle to survive let alone reach mythical canopy sizes.

A far superior approach is to utilise tube stock for the following reasons –
1. Cheaper.
2. Virtually no follow up watering required.
3. Faster growth rates.
4. A larger tree that is healthier and more self-sustaining.

Please read the next posting under this heading for another compelling reason.

As of 2013 in Queensland the State Planning Policy pertaining to bushfires (SPP 1/03) is no longer in operation. This issue is to be dealt with on a Shire-wide basis through their respective Town Plans.

However the method of hazard assessment within SPP 1/03 forms the basis of the appropriate Code or Planning Scheme Policy of most Queensland Councils. So far, so good because the SPP 1/03 methodology is reasonably robust.

Unfortunately some Councils have adapted some peculiar interpretations of the original methodology. These interpretations only add to the complexity of what is after all only an arbitrary finding.

While this may keep out some of the cowboy practitioners it is most concerning that the assessors of submitted reports are often out of their depth when it comes to bushfires. It is not their fault - many environmental graduates are never given the opportunity to study what is one of the main determinants of the Australian biota.

It is clear that not everyone thinks that Camphor Laurels are an environmental problem.

As at 2012 two of Queensland's largest Councils still plant them as street trees.

Perhaps someone could be so kind as to take those responsible and show them most of the river systems in northern NSW and SE Queensland. It is there that they could enjoy Camphor Laurels to their hearts' content because they won't be able find too many other plant species that can gain a foothold.

Brisbane City Council has a protection mechanism for established trees called the Natural Asset Local Law (NALL). The trees are not necessarily native but are considered to contribute to the landscape character of the city.

To ascertain their eligibility for protection, certain species must meet a minimum diameter criteria. Originally these diameters were measured at a height of 1 metre. This height was unique to BCC and could give misleading readings because of butt swell and taper.

Since January 2014 the height for measurement is now set at 1.4 metres which is in keeping with industry practice. A wonderful and positive change which is to be applauded.

These trees were introduced to Australia a long time ago. They were ideal for planting around schools - lovely shade and no maintenance. Many are still there. Their crushed leaves have a lovely camphor smell and the timber is very decorative.

However they have become one of the country's worst weeds. Their prolific seeds are spread by birds and the tree now dominates most unmanaged waterways in SE Queensland and northern NSW - to the exclusion of most other native plant species.

Their method of domination is not to just shade out the competition. The trees are also reputed to exude chemicals which are antagonistic to other plant growth, possibly by contamination of the water.

Anecdotally, every part of this species is poisonous to fauna. In short these toxic pests are an environmental scourge.

So I recently found myself in the ambivalent position of having to save two of these trees because of construction activities. Their claim to fame was that they are heritage listed and must be retained even though a large section of their structural roots were to be removed.

There are many trees that deserve heritage listing. A known weed pest is not one of them.