• Change text size
• Skip to content

Australian Natural Resources Atlas

Natural Resource Topics

• About us
• Contact us

Search

Biodiversity and Vegetation - Australia

Australia

The National Vegetation Information System framework

The National Vegetation Information System framework provides an easily accessible and nationally consistent framework for describing and compiling data and information all vegetation types in Australia. Its application and adoption means that Australia has a robust and flexible system for collecting, compiling, analysing and reporting on vegetation information from regional to national levels.

The framework specifies guidelines to describe:

• structural and floristic characteristics of the vegetation for mapped areas and individual sites;
• data quality;
• sources of vegetation information collected in Australia; and
• vegetation condition.

As the basis for collaborative and collective work across Australia, the National Vegetation Information System was designed to meet an agreed set of guiding principles. These principles were established as part of the initial scoping of the tasks and provide an excellent frame of reference for continued cooperative development.

Classifying Australia's native vegetation

The National Vegetation Information System information framework defines a hierarchical classification system for describing the structural and floristic patterns of groups of plants in the landscape. Collectively, the different levels in the classification provide a description of vegetation that can be directly related to precise spatial areas as a vegetation map.

This system benefits data collection and use by:

• standardising the level of detail within a data set, and within and between jurisdictions;
• enabling existing and new vegetation data and information to be described;
• facilitating the addition of new levels of data for particular applications (e.g. forestry);
• providing a flexible framework for generating outputs such as map products at various levels; and
• providing users with a range of vegetation descriptions for various applications.

The hierarchy is based on six levels (Table 1), presenting broad vegetation classifications at national scales (Levels I-III) to a detailed level of information for users at regional scales (Levels IV-VI).

View an example of a mapped region classified using the NVIS Information Hierarchy.

Table 1: National Vegetation Information System hierarchy definitions

Level	Description	National Vegetation Information System structural/floristic components required	Example
I	Class	Dominant growth form of the ecologically dominant stratum	Tree
II	Structural Formation	Dominant growth form, cover and height of the ecologically dominant stratum	Open forests
III	Broad floristic formation	Dominant growth form, cover, height and broad floristic code usually dominant land cover genus of the uppermost or dominant stratum	Acacia open forests
IV	Subformation	Dominant growth form, cover, height and broad floristic code usually dominant genus and family of the three traditional strata (upper, mid and ground)	Acacia open forests/mixed tall open shrubland/grassy sparse tussock grassland
V	Association	Dominant growth form, height, cover and species (three species) of the three traditional strata (upper, mid and ground)	U+ Acacia harpophylla, Casuarina cristata, Eucalyptus orgadophila/tree/7/c; M Eremophila mitchellii, Geijera parviflora, Capparis lasiantha/shrub/4/i; G Ancistrachne uncinulata, Aristida ramosa, Paspalidium caespitosum/tussock grass, forb/2/r
VI	Sub-association	Dominant growth form, height, cover and species (five species) of all layers / strata	U1+ Acacia harpophylla, Casuarina cristata, Eucalyptus orgadophila, Eucalyptus populnea, Atalaya hemiglauca/tree/7/c; M1 Eremophila mitchellii, Geijera parviflora, Capparis lasiantha, Canthium oleifolium, Santalum lanceolatum/shrub/4/i; G2 Ancistrachne uncinulata, Aristida ramosa, Paspalidium caespitosum, Paspalidium criniforme, Sporobolus caroli/tussock grass,forb/2/r; G1 Carissa ovata, Enchylaena tomentosa, Myoporum deserti/shrub, chenopod shrub/2/r

Dominant

A characteristic of a species that has the greatest possible influence in the vegetation type being described.

Ecologically dominant stratum

The stratum, which because of its physiognomy and relative continuity, dominates the rest of the vegetation type in the sense that it conditions the habitats of other strata (Beadle & Costin 1952).

A series of decision rules about the height and foliage cover of the vegetation can assist with assigning the ecologically dominant stratum in a vegetation type. The consistent assignment of this is important to ensure compatibility of vegetation information across data sets.

These decision rules become important when existing vegetation mapping standards have defined dominance in different ways (e.g. the Beard-Webb versus the Specht systems). Classifications begin to vary considerably (e.g. when considering vegetation types as shrublands and grasslands with very sparse emergent trees: by the Specht scheme these would be classed as open woodlands whereas by the Beard-Webb Scheme they are classed as shrublands or grasslands).

Growth form

Habit of a plant, identified most precisely by the position of its perennating buds (e.g. tree, mallee, shrub) (Beadle & Costin 1952).

Stratum

Layer in a vegetation type produced by the occurrence (at approximately the same level) of an aggregation of plants of the same habit (Beadle & Costin 1952).

Cover

Cover produced by the foliage of any vegetation within a defined area.

Height

Measurement from the base to the top. Can be calculated for a given vegetation type to derive the average height for a given stratum.

Broad floristic

Usually the genus of the dominant species in the dominant stratum.

A combination of growth form, height and cover is used to describe the vegetation structure for each stratum for levels II to VI. A description of the height class then allows for a more common structural description of the vegetation (e.g. low open woodland has a tree growth form with a height class of less than 10 m and less than 10% foliage cover). Appendix 7 includes the information used to derive this description.

Australian Vegetation Attributes

Supporting the NVIS information hierarchy are a series of attributes that can be summarised to report on the hierarchy or combined in other ways to develop user-based classifications of vegetation.

The Australian Vegetation Attributes provide consistent definitions and guidelines that were used by the lead agencies in each State and Territory to translate and compile a selection of existing native vegetation data sets. Using the attributes, information can be compiled on:

• the mapped data set (e.g. mapping methods and attribute accuracy) which may assist in an assessment of its reliability for a particular use;
• the dominant vegetation within a mapped unit and information on its strata, growth forms and species; and
• other co-dominant or subdominant vegetation types within a mapped unit and information on the strata, growth forms and species.

Relationships between the attributes are complex and comprehensive and describe the range of vegetation layers (strata), growth forms and species descriptions required for a detailed vegetation description for all components of a mapped unit. They allow for multiple descriptions of vegetation types within a mapped unit, often referred to as mosaics of vegetation.

A worked example of the Vegetation Attributes

Figure 2 from the Australian Native Vegetation Assessment 2001 shows the type of information available for one vegetation polygon mapping unit for a South Australian data set. This map unit is a vegetation mosaic with two vegetation descriptions. All available levels of information are presented for vegetation description 1.

Vegetation description 1 has three strata:

• Stratum 1 has one growth form and one taxon description
• Stratum 2 has two growth forms and two taxon descriptions
• Stratum 3 has five growth forms and five taxon descriptions

As an example, the data set description and all attributes related to vegetation description 1 as entered into the National Vegetation Information System database are found in Appendix 6 of the Australian Native Vegetation Assessment 2001 report. The Australian Vegetation Attributes should be used in association with this table for a definition of these attributes and units of measurement.

The need for a vegetation classification system

The material below is an extract from the Australian Native Vegetation Assessment 2001 report. For ease of cross reference, figure, table and section references pertain to the chapter structure of this report.

Australian Native Vegetation Assessment 2001 presents the first regional level, comprehensive guidelines for assessing and reporting Australia's native vegetation resources, their extent and change since European settlement.

It highlights examples and applications of the native vegetation information at scales appropriate for Australia-wide policy development and program evaluation, and reports on the application of the information framework for:

• mapping Australia's vegetation (including structural and floristic characteristics and quality of the mapping); and
• documenting sources of vegetation information.

Upper slopes Mount Bellenden Ker, Qld - Murray Fagg

Lessons of the past: prior to Australian Native Vegetation Assessment 2001 a number of attempts were made to develop a consistent, comparable and Australia-wide approach to native vegetation mapping and compilation through forums such as Australian Biological Resources Study. Some major compilation activities focused on describing or delineating the occurrence of vegetation associations found in Australia (i.e. Specht et al. 1974, Beadle 1981, AUSLIG 1990, Specht & Specht 1999) or a summary overview of Australia's vegetation (e.g. Read 1994). While there have been significant contributions to this goal the impetus for a national system was generally limited, due to:

• a lack of comprehensive agreement and commitment to a national framework for describing Australia's vegetation;
• a limited commitment of resources across Australia;
• the availability of efficient information technologies to store and process the information; and
• a lack of national leadership and short-term recognition of the benefits, the efficiencies and effectiveness of such an Australia-wide system and its application to the broader discipline of natural resources management.

Other impediments to developing a consistent, comparable and Australia-wide approach to vegetation information included:

• no sustainable long term vision or dedicated resources facilitated through a national coordinator;
• protection of individual mapping standards and classification schemes;
• restricted or difficult access to information;
• patchy coverage of data suitable for region-scale decision making; and
• the diversity of differing requirements for vegetation information making the task complex and multi-client in nature.

Australia-wide vegetation information prior to the National Vegetation Information System

• Limited information capacity reflecting current status of native vegetation at a range of scales
• Reporting mechanisms variable and poorly coordinated at broader or finer scales
• Data management capacity variable and generally poor limiting capacity to access and use comparable vegetation data
• Data content and quality extremely variable and often not comparable across mapping areas or State/Territory boundaries
• Limited use made of Australia's knowledge-base including the wealth of scientific expertise, competence and technical capacity to quantify and describe Australia's vegetation and the substantial investment to date in collecting vegetation data

The Environmental Indicators report on biodiversity developed for Australian State of the Environment Reporting (Saunders et al. 1998) stated that:

... a priority for state of the environment reporting should be the production of a consistent vegetation classification system throughout Australia, which should include marine vegetation; mangroves, seagrasses and macroalgae. The classification should be hierarchical, with lower-level classes (local and subregional) nested within higher-level classes (regional and continental). If local-scale classifications, capable of being agglomerated hierarchically, existed across the continent, national reporting and monitoring could be made wholly compatible and consistent with reporting and monitoring at the local government scale. A national classification should incorporate both structure and floristics, with floristics as attributes at lower levels. Higher-level classes based on structural attributes could be mapped at the IBRA or IMCRA region, or even national, scale and lower level classes could be mapped at more local scales.

They concluded that:

Many existing local and subregional scale classifications are likely to be amenable to agglomeration into higher-level classes such as structural types. The first step in producing a consistent national-level classification is a study to assess the feasibility of such a classification, including the compatibility of existing classifications and their suitability for higher-level agglomeration.

The National Forest Inventory developed agreed standards and protocols for compiling, analysing and reporting forest types over the last decade. These standards and protocols formed one of the inputs in developing the guidelines for the National Vegetation Information System. The precedent set by the National Forest Inventory in developing an agreed set of 64 forest types has enabled forest vegetation across Australia to be compiled and reported for the last decade.

Information capacity limited: prior to Australian Native Vegetation Assessment 2001 the only available Australia-wide data of Australia's native vegetation was compiled by J.A. Carnahan and published in Volume 6 of the Atlas of Australian Resources (AUSLIG 1990). These maps are a snapshot of vegetation at a national scale based on interpreting patterns of vegetation observed in 1980s satellite imagery and are built on the considerable vegetation mapping activities available within the respective State or Territory. They are not suitable for regional level planning.

Mechanisms are now available to:

• maintain and update national and regional level data and information products;
• review user requirements for additional information;
• engage State and Territory vegetation practitioners; and
• ensure the information provided meets the needs of decision makers.

Because of the compatibility between the attribute frameworks that underpin the AUSLIG assessment and reporting of Australia's vegetation, the Audit has translated the mapping using the National Vegetation Information System hierarchy. Figure 1 shows the Australian Land Information Group mapping published at 1:5 000 000 scale, represented by the major vegetation groups classification.

Figure 1. Present Vegetation (1988) mapped by J.A. Carnahan.

Ensuring quality in the National Vegetation Information System

The material below is an extract from the Australian Native Vegetation Assessment 2001 report. For ease of cross reference, figure, table and section references pertain to the chapter structure of this report.

Minimum requirements for the National Vegetation Information System were developed as part of the framework for data compilation. They were then implemented as part of data collation. Some key requirements include scale, currency of mapping and attribute detail.

Scale

Two scale thresholds are needed for current and future native vegetation mapping: 1:100,000 scale or finer mapping in the intensive land use zone, and 1:250,000 scale mapping or finer in the extensive land use zone (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Intensive and extensive land use zones of Australia.

These thresholds also define the scale of data sets required for regional planning and management: greater detail is required in areas with intensive land use and clearing. Within these areas the majority of the decisions relating to natural resource and environmental management are made. They include key areas for biodiversity loss, dryland salinity, soil erosion, urban expansion and degradation to key ecosystems such as rivers and estuaries.

As a general rule, less detail and precision is required for vegetation information in the extensive land use zone either because there have been fewer human impacts or the areas are remote and not used. This extensive use zone broadly conforms with that part of Australia known as rangelands. Through the rangelands theme, the Audit has recommended a specific set of monitoring activities that build upon the scale of vegetation mapping, are compliant with National Vegetation Information System guidelines and will provide key information for the natural resource management for these lands.

For pre-European vegetation mapping 1:1,000,000 scale data was recommended as a suitable scale for broad assessments across Australia. This recognises that, compared with current vegetation mapping, relatively little spatial detail is available or possible for pre-European vegetation types.

Currency

Currency of present vegetation mapping compiled in the National Vegetation Information System was specified to a minimum of 1997 for undertaking a year 2000 data compilation exercise. This applies equally to maps (spatial units) and associated attributes. Application of this threshold is flexible and depends on rate of land use change for a region (e.g. preferably a region undergoing rapid changes to the native vegetation should have its vegetation information updated on an annual or biannual basis to ensure change is monitored and the community kept up-to-date with major issues such as the extent of clearing and location and size of areas of remnant vegetation).

Helipterum albicans, Tetratheca spp: Brindabella Ranges Murray Fagg

Attributes

Level V (vegetation association) of the National Vegetation Information System hierarchy was specified as the target for incorporating native vegetation data into the National Vegetation Information System. The Level V target defines the detail required by decision makers such as those involved in regional planning and management.

The Australian Vegetation Attributes, Version 5.0 (NLWRA 2000a) identified 81 mandatory attributes to be compiled for each data set. Mandatory attributes were grouped into four categories:

Ma: Mandatory required for National Vegetation Information System hierarchy
Mb: Mandatory required for data quality
Mc: Other essential information required to define a data set
Md: National attributes (e.g. National Vegetation Information System identification)

Implementing the National Vegetation Information System

The material below is an extract from the Australian Native Vegetation Assessment 2001 report. For ease of cross reference, figure, table and section references pertain to the chapter structure of this report.

Data compilation

Guidelines for classifying Australia's vegetation were agreed and potential sources of vegetation mapping for inclusion in the data collation program were documented. Each State and Territory nominated vegetation maps to be used, preferably those that met minimum requirements of the National Vegetation Information System. Where mapping was unable to comply with standards but otherwise provided an important coverage of part of a State, the best available mapped information was provided as 'interim coverage'.

State and Territory compilation activities were supported by expert advice on translation and interpretation of vegetation mapping and on information products required by decision makers.

Activities were constrained by available financial resources and time frames. Time frames were extended by a year beyond that specified in the Audit strategic plan, doubling the actual resources dedicated to the initiative. Data sets incorporated into the National Vegetation Information System are summarised in Appendix 8; methods used to implement the various components of the framework are documented in Appendix 9.

Quality assurance

Activities in building, checking, editing, documenting and finalising the database (Version 1) for Levels I-III included:

• reviewing and resolving loading errors from the data compiler to the database;
  
• providing data custodians with detail of errors and requesting resupply of outstanding map units;
  
• preparing plots of Levels I-III to visualise the data and attempt to resolve spatial errors;
  
• checking database entries against known code sets; and
  
• incorporating changes into the database in consultation with data custodians.

Great Cumbung Swamp Murray-Darling Basin Commission

The majority of inconsistencies in classification and mapping across jurisdictions were unable to be resolved with data custodians in the time frame for the project. This required an intensive process of consultation with vegetation experts across each jurisdiction resulting in a resolution to change vegetation descriptions and mapped boundaries.

Version 1 of the database was used in the development of products for the Australian National Vegetation Assessment 2001.

Information gaps

Detailed vegetation mapping available for the 2001 assessment was incomplete for the entire continent and a number of gaps occur in our knowledge and on the coverage at regional scales (see Knowledge, data and information gaps section). An analysis of these gaps by users provides a rigorous basis for setting priorities for further investment in native vegetation mapping.

Reporting on Australia's native vegetation

Additional, readily available information was compiled to develop the major vegetation groups to enable Australia-wide assessments.

The assessments of the status and extent of Australia's native vegetation detailed in this report have been based on information from the National Vegetation Information System as well as sourcing other information to complete the assessment of Australia's present and pre-European vegetation.

The level of detail that can be used to describe the vegetation at broad scales constrained the description of Australia's vegetation to:

• 23 major vegetation groups; and
• a further 42 major vegetation subgroups being developed.

These products are designed for broad use at national and State-wide scale and are very useful for simple vegetation descriptions at regional scales. Appendix 10 outlines the development of these groups.

Within these limitations these assessments have provided the first hierarchical classification of Australia's native vegetation at an Australia-wide scale with the ability to access comparable finer-scale regional information where it exists.

Version control

The long-term success of the National Vegetation Information System is based on continuing collaboration and partnership with all States and Territories. The first steps are complete and Australia has an agreed set of attributes and systems for transferring, storing, validation, analysing and reporting vegetation information.

A review of these guidelines and systems and incorporation of identified changes will ensure that the National Vegetation Information System is a success in the long term. As new information is collected and existing data is compiled, validated and updated, the National Vegetation Information System will continue to change and improve. Through the development process, it has become evident that a national coordinator is vital to support activities of data custodians and continue the coordination and facilitation role of the Audit. This coordinator would:

• continually improve and manage the National Vegetation Information System framework;
• evaluate and develop improved systems for storage and reporting of data and their progressive implementation by all data custodians;
• oversee and validate data and information as new versions and information products are developed; and
• coordinate and disseminate technical advances in vegetation mapping.

References

View the references used in the Australian Native Vegetation Assessment 2001.

Partnerships

Australian Native Vegetation Assessment 2001 was facilitated and coordinated by the National Land and Water Resources Audit and prepared in partnership with State, Territory and Commonwealth agencies:

Australian Capital Territory

Department of Urban Services
www.urbanservices.act.gov.au

New South Wales

Department of Land and Water Conservation
www.dlwc.nsw.gov.au

NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service
http://www.npws.nsw.gov.au

NSW Botanic Gardens
www.rbgsyd.gov.au

Northern Territory

Department of Lands, Planning and Environment
www.lpe.nt.gov.au

Queensland

Environment Protection Agency
http://www.epa.qld.gov.au

South Australia

Planning SA
http://www.planning.sa.gov.au

Tasmania

Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment
http://www.dpiwe.tas.gov.au

Victoria

Department of Sustainability and Environment
http://www.dse.vic.gov.au

Western Australia

Department of Conservation and Land Management
http://www.calm.wa.gov.au

Agriculture WA
http://www.agric.wa.gov.au

Commonwealth

Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australia
http://www.daff.gov.au

Australian Greenhouse Office
http://www.greenhouse.gov.au

Environment Australia
http://www.ea.gov.au

Further information

View the Australian Native Vegetation Assessment 2001 report.

• ANRA home
  • Map maker
  • Natural resource topics
  • Data Library

• Natural resource topics
  • Agriculture
  • Coasts
  • Dryland Salinity
  • Invasive species
  • Irrigation
  • Land
  • Natural resource economics
  • People
  • Rangelands
  • Soils
  • Vegetation and biodiversity
  • Water
  • Publications

• Vegetation and biodiversity
  • Overview
  • Assessment
    • New South Wales
    • Victoria
    • Queensland
    • South Australia
    • Western Australia
    • Tasmania
    • Northern Territory
    • Australian Capital Territory
  • Landscape health
  • NVIS framework
  • Extent
    • New South Wales
    • Victoria
    • Queensland
    • South Australia
    • Western Australia
    • Tasmania
    • Northern Territory
    • Australian Capital Territory
  • Clearing
    • New South Wales
    • Victoria
    • Queensland
    • South Australia
    • Western Australia
    • Tasmania
    • Northern Territory
    • Australian Capital Territory
  • Management