Planning for World Heritage: Experiences and Future Directions for Use of Geographical Information Systems

?l
Plawting for World Heritage:
Erperienees & future direetions for use
of Geographie al Inforrnation Sys tems
Robert Prestont, Jerr57 Vanclayt, Geoff Gibsont' nnd Glen Daletr
t Department of Forestry, GPO Box 944, Brisbane, 4001.
frDepartment of Forestry, PO Box zL0,Atherton, 4883.
Sunnary
Even ts leading to the World Heritage li stin g of north Queen slan d rainfore st s
and subsequent ban on timber harvesting result ftom a number of factors
including insufficient education of an increasingly articulate and
environmentally aware public. Foresters should meet this challenge by
renewing efforts to collect reliable information on the multi-resource values
of forest areas. GIS has the potential to contribute to this process,
particularly when applied as part of a multi-resource decision support
system. Source data for multi-resource management could be collected in
conjunction with timber inventory, provided additional funding is made
available. Use ofa GIS as a map overlaying tool can be prone to error unless
its users are fully aware of limitations that can arise with this approach.
Any mul ti -re sourc e stratery sh oul d be ph ased into exi stin g timber inven tory
programmes. Full scale adoption of a multi-resource decision support
system in forest services is not likely to occur until the full cost of land use
conflicts is included in the cost benefit equation.
Erperiences from north Queensland
The cessation oftimber han'estingin the rainforests
of north Queenslirnd brought about by World
Heritage listing is a landmark for the Australian
forestry profession. This move by the Federal
Government was intended as a step toward better
conservation management, but calls from
international environmentalists for sustainable
utilisation of the world's tropical forests have cast
aspersion on the logging ban. At a recent
international conference sponsored by fime
Magazine to define solutions to global
environmental problems, distinguished experts
calle d for action on sustain abl e utilisation ( Linden,
1989).
"Development should be sustainable,
meaning that it should use up resources no
further than they can be regenerated by
nature. Governments ... should organise
projects to show that forests can be used
without being obliterated. If trees are cut
selectively, forests can yield profrts and
surwive..."
Rather than have their management condemned,
foresters andforest officers ofthe north should take
credit for the development and implementation of
sound silvicultural practices that have left, the
rainforest in a state of such high integrity that it
remains worthy of international recognition.
Continued selection logging in at least part of the
World Heritage area could provide an important
and successful example of balanced and sustained
resource use.
Although we will not know'whether rainforest
logging will resume until finalisation of current
court proceedings on the issue, it is now timely to
reflect on the reasons why the dispute escalated to
such proportions.
S olutions and syrnptoms
In the present climate, a forester's response to the
question "what should members of the profession
learn from this experience?' is usually one of
indignation. When asked to enlighten guests at a
recent In stitute of Forester's fun ction with hi s view s
on this matter, Dr. Peter Bridgewatert suggested
that Foresters should learn to become better political
lobbyists!
Though one could argue that Dr Bridgewater is
not the most appropriate authority to consult on
t not o forcster, but tlwn of the Commonutealth Dept. of
Arts, Sport, tlv EnuironttT.ent, Tourism &Territories

matters of IFA policy, his opinion on this point at
least coincides with the view of a majority of
Institutemembers. Almost ninety percent of
foresters think that the IFA should take on a
greater advocacy role with respectto forestland use
and allocation. "Lack of public knowledge about
forestry and the forestry professiono is considered
the second most important issue facingthe profession
(Neville and Ellis, 1989). The problem is easily
confirmed by an evening television session or a brief
read of the daily newspaper.
However in contrast to the opinion of Dr.
Bridgewater and most foresters, experience of the
north Queensland issue is that public relations
campaigns and political lobbying have only limited
results, and perhaps no real effect. The problem is
that our capacity to win the hearts and minds at this
late stage of the dispute amounts only to band-aid
treatment of the symptoms. Deeper solutions
include a long term public education component.
For example the Queensland Forestry Department
ForEd kit provides an excellent medium for brin grn g
se c on dary s ch ool students in to contact with forestry
and conservation issues in an unbiased format.
Through our own efforts on public education, the
achievements of Ciovernments and the consen'ation
movement, increased public awareness of forestry'
and environmental issues has placed the forestry
profession under increasing scmtiny. We are now
required to articulate management strategies to an
audience with an ear unsympathetic to rhetoric.
Questions are sometimes uncomfortably precise, for
example "Wh at areas will the Department be login g
in two years time, and how much timber will they be
cuttingfrom each area?" OVildlife Presenration Soc.
Qld., 1986).
We also need to add substance to our case. To
achieve. this, reevaluation of our attitudes toward
assessment and research on the multiple values of
native forests will be required. Multi-resource
research and inventory should take on the same
strength of focus as production oriented research
aimed at improvement of silvictrltural practices and
minimisation of logging damage. Reports on the
values and positive uses of our forests must be
authoritative and subjected to independent review.
The assessment and research of multiple forest
values is a fertile area for the employment of new
technologies including Ceographic Information
Systems. If we are able to embrace the capabilities
of these new techniques, the forester will be in a
better position to demonstrate that rainforests can
be managed for sustainable utilisation with
maintenance of conseruation values.
In the following discussion, we have drawn on the
perspective of events leading to the cessation of
loggingto give us insight into the appropriate use of
new technolory.
2
Ttpelue years notice
With north Queensl:Dd, as in most land use
disputes, it is possible to look back in the wisdom of
hindsight upon key events which, if handled
differently, may have averted the current
confrontation.
Within modern history, the sequence of events
leading to World Heritage listing of north
Queesland's rainforests canbe tracedback about 12
years. On the not too dusty library shelf is a paper
presented at the L977 IFA conference held in
Caloundra. Geoff Stocker, Don Gilmore and Dave
Cassells presented "The Future of our Rainforests
in the Face of Economic and Political Reality". This
paper identified the increasing land use pressures
on rainforests including agriculture, mining,
resreation, watershed protection, timber hanresting,
rrrban development, and total preservation. The
authors recognised the rising community awareness
of environmental issues, and laid a challenge for
foresters to recogRise and balance these
requirements. But Stocker and other foresters were
rrnable to predict the uprising of the conservation
movement and their success in motivatingpoliticians
to act on land use decisions.
The first active displays of the conservation
movement's presence were the blockades at Mount
Windsor and Downey Creek in late L982 and mid
1983 to 85 respectively. In response, the Queensland
Government approved the implementation of
Forestry Department standing recommendations
for greater restrictions to be placed on logging
operations (QDF, 1983). These environmental
guidelines for timber harvesting were based on the
hydrological research ofGilmore, Bonell and Cassells
in the Wyrnrri experimental catchment to the north
of Innisfail (eg. Gilmore, L977). Positive steps were
also taken by dedication of Scientific Areas to
preserve large reference samples of habitat types.
But some State and Local C'overnment responses
were antagonistic to the conservation movement
and to professional forest managers. Construction
of the Cape Tribulation to Bloomfield road in late
1983 was a scar on the landscape, a mortal wound to
future Stat€ Government control over the rainforests,
and a symbol to the conservation movement of the
type of wilderness destnrction that would continue
without inten'ention.
In late 1984 a joint State/Federal Working Group
on Rainforest Conservation was set up under the
steward ship of B arry C oh en. With si gn ifrcan t inp ut
from Government representatives, conservation
groups, the timber industry, and rainforest experts
from academic institutions and CSIRO, the working
group tried to come to gnps with the problem by a
pnocess of reconciliation. The working group
pre sented a report outlin ing th e Nation al Rainfore st

Conservation Program in late 1985. Productive
steps toward compromise positions were reached on
rainforest management and research directions for
each State, but the issue of timber han'esting in
north Queensland proved to be a stumbling block.
In pursuit of electoral favour during the lead up to
the 1987 Federal elections, the Commonwealth
Government announced their intention to
unilaterally proceed toward World Heritage
nomination of the entire Wet Tropics belt in a move
to halt rainforest logging.
The major State Government response was to
establish the Northern Rainforest Management
Agency (NORMA) to draw up a conceptual plan
based on the biosphere resenre concept of core
consewation resenres with surroundingbuffer zones
in which sustainable resource use could ocsur. The
two major wings of NORIIIA were a Rrblic
Consultative Committee, which included Iocal
Ciovernment and business representatives, and a
Scientific Committee of invited scientists from
academic institutions and State Government
agencies. Consen'ation groups rejected NORIVIA as
lacking independence from the State Government,
and did not participate in the NORMA consultative
process.
A confidential and indicative zoning plan pro-
duced by the NORMA Scientific Committee was
reviewed by State Government Departments with
management interests in the region prior to June
1988. After their consideration, a formal State Gov-
ernment plan was released identifring Multiple
Use Areas, and Presenration Areas as an alterna-
tive World Heritage Area. The State Government
PIan and the NORI\,IA scientific report formed the
basis of protracted but rrnsuccessful State/Tederal
negotiations. A Geographic Information System
was used extensively in preparation of the Stat€
Government Plan and the NORMA Scientific Com-
mittee report, but in the time available, a consider-
able amount of investigation was carried out using
manual scientific procedures.
Federal politicians rejected all Queensland Gov-
ernment zoning proposals and proceeded with suc-
cessful nomination of almost the full rainforest
estate under State tenure. Soon after nomination of
the\MetTropics on the list ofWorld Heritage list, the
Federal Government introduced regulations rrnder
the World Heritage Properties Consenration Act
which outlawed commercial logging operations
within the World Heritage Area.
The State Government has since entered a High
Court Challenge to the validity of regulations per-
taining to the ban on logging on grounds that selec-
tion logging on a sustained yield basis does not
affectWorld Heritage values ofthe area. Hearingof
the court case is scheduled to commence within the
next few months.
While the loggingissue remains unresolved, State
and Commonwealth Ciovernments have independ-
ently indicated their intention to proceed with rrni-
lateral management of the area, ffid have com-
menced work on separate management plans for the
area. Despite the best intentions of each Govern-
ment, continuance of this attitude is unfortr:nate.
Results can only be sub-optimal.
However while both Governments pursue diamet-
rically opposed strategies in alleged pursuit of their
constitutional obligations, politics will continue to
dominate the agenda of forest management in the
Wet Tropics region.
Criteria for conseruation assessrnent
At the current stage of proceedings, the north
Queensland World Heritage experience provides
little guidance on how best to assess consenration
values. Observations that current World Heritage
oreosmay or may not contain World Heritage ualues
has not been of assistance. Neither does the Austra-
lian Governmenf,s approach stand up under scru-
tiny. Taking into account the great biological vari-
ability and complex history of land use of the north
Queensland rainforest area, itis difficult to see that
the whole area could possess World Heritage values.
Experience from the Tasmanian Lemontyne In-
quiry on the delineation of World Heritage areas
(Anon, 1988b) does not encourage foresters to seek
legal clarification.
But this conjecture is of little use to forest admin-
istrators who must develop strategies and develop
budget proposals for land use programs and re-
source inventories.
Outside the World Heritage arena, there is a good
deal of consensus on base criteria which should be
used for the design and placement of conservation
resenres (Margules and Usher, 1981; Miller et. al.,
1987, and Mackey et. al., 1988). These criteria
appear to be consistent with the assessment of
World Heritage values. Forest managers should
embrace the need to assess consen'ation factors of
proven importance (Table 1).
I nformation fo, multi-resource
rnanagefnent
Terminology
The philosophy ofmulti-resource is best illustrated
by example. "In a timber cmise ... at least two
variables are measured or observed; species and
size or basal area. Thongh the inventory was
conducted for a single purpose, the resulting data
could be reinterpreted for a variety of other uses. A
wildlife biologist may reinterpret the species and
basal area data to derive some habitat values. Thus,

Table 1. Critcria for the Consen'ation Assessment of Natural Areas t
Scientific
criteria Analysis approach
Representativeness
Diversity
Rarity
Naturalness
Species/area
The composition of a regional landscape analysed in terms of different
successional stages, vegetation tyryes, degrees ofhuman impact etc.
Determination of how a regional reserve can best represent the patterns
characteristic of a region.
Analysis of species diversity patterns across the region (with emphasis on rare
and endangered species for the critical taxa). Analysis of the dominant and
critical environmentaldiversity patterns (eg. climate. topographic, geologic,
etc.)
Determined from regional species distribution patterns or from previously
existing government and private listings of rare species. A definition of the
scale of rarity will need to be made.
Historical and current land use records used to determine the various levels
of human impact experienced by regional landscape components.
Analysis and determination of species area patterns for taxa under
consideration.
(t from Miller et.al. (1987)
a timber cnri se could be c on sidered a multi-resource
inventory."
Full integration of multi-resource information is
an important obj ective ( Figure 1 ). Model s developed
by Lund (1986) to describe the integration of
inventory data are equally applicable to the
integration of all geographically referenced data.
Multi-lrcotion integrotbn requires that basic
management units or sunrey units must be able to
be compared or aggregatd. Incations must be
mutually exclusive (ie. boundaries of units do not
overlap). Multilevel integrafaon requires that data
at a large scale must be fully compatible with and
linked to data at a smaller scale. Decisions may
range from those needed to curb acid depositation
on a global basis, to those needed to set the selling
price for timber on a 2 hectare tract oflan d. Temporol
integratinn requires measuringofthe same variables
at the same location over time to observe changes
and thus to predict trends. Vanclay (1989) outlines
an inventory stratery using temporary and
pennanent plots to achieve integrated multi-resource
assessment.
Resource attributes and uses
The relative importance of resource attributes
and uses in any managementprocess will vary from
one region to the next, and will vary with time.
Greatest attention shouldbe paidto tliose resources
of highest value, and those of potential conflict. But
because of the need for complete integration of the
information collection and reporting processes, a
4
minimum set of resources for natural resource
management should be identifi ed after consultation
with associated organisations.
Re sorrrce attribute s ( Figure 2) can be group ed into
those pertaining to the physical environment
(topogaphy, geoJory and soils, climate), the biotic
environment (vegetation, fauna), and the human
environment (roads, boundaries).
Resource uses are definedby human interpretation
of resource attributes. Resource uses include the
actual and potential use for production of; timber,
wildlife, recreation, mining, agriculture, educational
significance, visual significance, and conservation
significance.
A multi-resource decision support system
There are at least three emerging trends which
affect attitudes toward the collection ofinformation
and the use of technolory in multi-resource
management.
. Technolory (including Ge ographical Information
Systems (GIS) and remote sensing) is providing
many interesting possibilities for more rapid and
efficient assessment and monitoring, but it is not
without some often considerable "up front'costs.
o There is an increasing pressure to supply more
detailed information over larger areas and multiple
resources.
. Assessment and monitoringprograms are being
challenged to become more effrcient as labour
costs rise, availability offunds diminish, and terms

Future
Present
T
c l$s I
= E I> s I
Figtue l.Information Integration for Multi-Resource Management (source, Lund, H. Gyde, 1986)
of reference become progressively broader.
The movement of multi-resource information
through the process ofcollection, analysis, and output
can be viewed as a model incorporating familiar
computer components. This model can be
implemented to form a Decision Support System
when used in a management problem solving
environment (Figure 3). Covington et. al. (1988)
have developed a decision support system CfEA1VIS)
as a tactical planning system to aid forest managers
in developing site specific treatment schedules. At
an early stage in the constnrction of such a system,
a decision must me made as to the level of detail
necessary for identification and analysis of features
and attributes of interest.
From this perspective, it still remains that infor-
mation required for multi-resource management
must be identifi ed, before (or iO it is' collected. In the
formulative stage of a multi-resource project reliant
on computer techniques, it is important to clearly
define between the types of data required. Informa-
tion can be grouped into four categories
(i) source data,
(ii) resource attributes and uses produced by
analysis and integration of data sets,
(iii) information used as rules to identifr resource
use conflicts and management options,
(iv) information required as results or outcomes
of different management options.
(i) Source data
The first consideration of data collation is the
identification of non'divisible and homogeneous
planning units. Covington (1988) uses a forest
stand as the primary unit ofanalysis, where a stand
is defined as a contiguous area that is relatively
homogeneous in terms of site, structure, age class,
and density. Forest stands can be combined to form
Iarger management units. Mackay (1988) high-
lights the problems with delineation of ecological
trnits for a poorly described but, diverse resource,
and advocates that planning units should only be
allocated aft,er modelling of primary attribute data.
Source data for important resource attributes an d
uses is usually collected during inventory using
plots orpoints where certain parameters ofresource
attributes (eg. vegetation, soil, or climate) are
measured using prescribed measurement rules and
procedures at specific locations. These data are