The ecology of Sydney, located in the state of New South Wales, Australia, is diverse for its size, [1] where it would mainly feature biomes such as savannas and some sclerophyll forests, with some pockets of mallee shrublands, riparian forests, heathlands, and wetlands, in addition to small temperate and subtropical rainforest fragments. [2] [3]
There are 79 vegetation communities in the Sydney metropolitan area that are identified, described and mapped. [4] The combination of climate, topography, moisture, and soil influence the dispersion of these ecological communities across a height gradient from 0 to 200 metres (0 to 700 ft). [5] There are many hiking trails, paved and unpaved roads for exploring the many different biomes and ecosystems. [6] [7] [8]
Savannas (or grassy woodlands), the most predominant biome in the Sydney region, [9] mainly occur in the Cumberland Plain west of Sydney CBD, which generally feature eucalyptus trees that are usually in open, dry sclerophyll woodland areas with shrubs (typically wattles, callistemons, grevilleas and banksias) and sparse grass in the understory, reminiscent of Mediterranean forests. [10] The plants in this community tend to have rough and spiky leaves, as they are grown in areas with low soil fertility. Wet sclerophyll forests, which are part of Eastern Australian temperate forests, have narrow, relatively tall, dense trees with a lush, moist understory of fleecy shrubs and tree ferns. They are mainly found in the wetter areas, such as Forest District and the North Shore. [11]
It has been calculated that around 98,000 hectares of native vegetation remains in the Sydney metropolitan area, shaping the geography of Sydney, about half of what is likely to have been existing at the time of European arrival. [12] According to the Senseable City Lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), which measures canopy cover in the world's most prominent cities, the Sydney area had a Green View Index of 25.9%. Tying with Vancouver at that percentage, Sydney is the third prominent city in the world with the most trees after Singapore and Oslo, respectively. [13]
In 1787, the First Fleet personnel discovered a landscape that was alien to them, and unlike the green meadows and deciduous forests of England. Arthur Phillip expressed that: [14]
The coast, as well as the neighbouring country in general, is covered with wood...The necks of land that form the coves are mostly covered with timber, yet so rocky that it is not easy to comprehend how the trees could have sufficient nourishment to bring them to so considerable a magnitude.
This was a response to comparisons with the mostly deeper, fertile soils of the British Isles and how the rocky mountainous areas like the Scottish Highlands and Dartmoor lacked tree cover. [14]
The "neck of land" which separates the southern part of the harbour from the northern part was primarily sand. Between Sydney Cove and Botany Bay the first area is made up of woodland. The rest of the land consisted of heath, poor sand and several swamplands. Coastal areas featured mangroves in many inlets, estuaries at Port Jackson, in addition to decentralized areas of saltwater or freshwater marshes, and sheltered areas of subtropical rainforest along waterbody valleys. [14]
Most of the North Shore and inland areas featured sclerophyll forests and woodlands filled with eucalypts of many different species, ranging in different heights, and growing at immensely contrasting densities. Much of the wooded land had grass cover under the trees, but comparatively small understorey shrub or smaller tree growth. Cumberland Plain, which is inland, had sparser and fewer tree cover than the region near the coast. By May 1789 much of the thick forest around Port Jackson was cleared. [14]
First Fleet surgeon George Worgan described the environment of Sydney, particularly its terrain: [14]
...We meet with, in many parts, a fine black soil; luxuriantly covered with grass, & the Trees at 30 or 40 yards [27–37 m] distant from each other, so as to resemble Meadow land, yet these spots are frequently interrupt[ed] in their Extent by either a rocky, or a sandy, or a swampy surface, crowded with large trees, and almost impenetrable from Brushwood which being the case will necessarily require much Time and Labour to cultivate any considerable space of land together.
In 1819, British settler William Wentworth described Sydney's vegetation and landform in great detail:
The colony of New South Wales possesses every variety of soil, from the sandy heath, and the cold hungry clay, to the fertile loam and the deep vegetable mould. For the distance of 5 mi (8.0 km) to 6 mi (9.7 km) from the coast, the land is in general extremely barren, being a poor hungry sand, thickly studded with rocks. A few miserable stunted gums, and a dwarf underwood, are the richest productions of the best part of it; while the rest never gives birth to a tree at all, and is only covered with low flowering shrubs, whose infinite diversity, however, and extraordinary beauty, render this wild heath the most interesting part of the country for the botanist, and make even the less scientific beholder forget the nakedness and sterility of the scene.
Beyond this barren waste, which thus forms a girdle to the coast, the country suddenly begins to improve. The soil changes to a thin layer of vegetable mould, resting on a stratum of yellow clay, which is again supported by a deep bed of schistus. The trees of the forest are here of the most stately dimensions. Full sized gums and iron barks, alongside of which the loftiest trees in this country would appear as pigmies, with the beefwood tree, or as it is generally termed, the forest oak, which is of much humbler growth, are the usual timber. The forest is extremely thick, but there is little or no underwood.
At this distance, however, the aspect of the country begins rapidly to improve. The forest is less thick, and the trees in general are of another description; the iron barks, yellow gums, and forest oaks disappearing, and the stringy barks, blue gums, and box trees, generally usurping their stead. When you have advanced about 4 mi (6.4 km) further into the interior, you are at length gratified with the appearance of a country truly beautiful. An endless variety of hill and dale, clothed in the most luxuriant herbage, and covered with bleating flocks and lowing herds, at length indicate that you are in regions fit to be inhabited by civilized man. The soil has no longer the stamp of barrenness. A rich loam resting on a substratum of fat red clay, several feet in depth, is found even on the tops of the highest hills, which in general do not yield in fertility to the valleys. The timber, strange as it may appear, is of inferior size, though still of the same nature, i. e. blue gum, box, and stringy bark. There is no underwood, and the number of trees upon an acre do not upon an average exceed thirty. They are, in fact, so thin, that a person may gallop without difficulty in every direction. [15]
Early settlers compared the landscapes to the manicured parks of England which also featured well-spaced trees and a grassy understorey. [16] In 1787, Arthur Bowes Smyth from the First Fleet described the landscape in a favourable manner: [14]
...fresh terraced, lawns and grottos with distinct plantations of the tallest and most stately trees I ever saw in any nobleman's grounds in England, cannot excel in beauty those whose nature now presented to our view. The singing of the various birds among the trees, the flight of the numerous parraquets, lorrequets, cockatoos and macaws, made all around appear like an enchantment; the stupendous rocks from the summit of the hills and down to the very water's edge hang'g over in a most awful way from above, and form’g the most commodious quays by the water, beggard all description.
Captain John Hunter, who criticised Sydney for having "poor, sterile soil, full of stones", had a more positive view of Rosehill's and Parramatta's landscape, which are further west, for having arable lands, stating: [14]
...But near, and at the head of the harbour, there is a very considerable extent of tolerable land, and which may be cultivated without waiting for its being cleared of wood; for the trees stand very wide of each other, and have no underwood: in short, the woods on the spot I am speaking of resemble a deer park… but the soil appears to me to be rather sandy and shallow, and will require much manure to improve it… however, there are people… who think it good land… The grass upon it is about 3 feet [nearly a metre] high, very close and thick; probably farther back there may be very extensive tracts of this kind of country…
In 1791, Watkin Tench stated that many alien plant species, which included fruit and vegetable productions, thrived very well in the Sydney soil and its climate, although intense heat did affect gardens, and unestablished plants "were withered by the power of the sun". In the following diary entry, Tench positively describes the horticultural scene in western Sydney: [17]
Horticulture has been attended in some places with tolerable success. At Rose Hill I have seen gardens which, without the assistance of manure, have continued for a short time to produce well grown vegetables. But at Sydney, without constantly dressing the ground, it was in vain to expect them; and with it a supply of common vegetables might be procured by diligence in all seasons. Vines of every sort seem to flourish. Melons, cucumbers and pumpkins run with unbounded luxuriancy, and I am convinced that the grapes of New South Wales will, in a few years, equal those of any other country. 'That their juice will probably hereafter furnish an indispensable article of luxury at European tables', has already been predicted in the vehemence of speculation. Other fruits are yet in their infancy; but oranges, lemons and figs, (of which last indeed I have eaten very good ones) will, I dare believe, in a few years become plentiful. Apples and the fruits of colder climes also promise to gratify expectation. The banana-tree has been introduced from Norfolk Island, where it grows spontaneously. Nor will this surprise, if the genial influence of the climate be considered. Placed in a latitude where the beams of the sun in the dreariest season are sufficiently powerful for many hours of the day to dispense warmth and nutrition, the progress of vegetation never is at a stand.
First Fleet surgeon, Arthur Bowes Smyth, acknowledged the beauty of scenery: [14]
The general face of the country is certainly pleasing, being diversified with gentle scents, and little winding vallies, covered for the most part with large spreading trees, which afford a succession of leaves in all seasons. In those places where trees are scarce, a variety of flowering shrubs abound, most of them entirely new to an European and surpassing in beauty, and number, all I ever saw in an uncultivated state.
In 1827, Peter Cunningham described the western plains of Sydney as "a fine timbered country, perfectly clear of bush...through which you might, generally speaking, drive a gig in all directions, without any impediment in the shape of rocks, scrub or close forest.". [18]
After landing, the First Fleet thought that Botany Bay was an inhospitable, swampy piece of land which lacked a source of drinking water, in addition to the area featuring poor, sandy soils that did not have any substance. Arthur Phillips writes: [14]
The appearance of the place is picturesque and pleasing...but something more essential than beauty of appearance...must be sought in a place where the permanent residence of multitudes is to be established.
Regarding Phillips' statement, Australian environmentalist Tim Flannery wrote: "The vegetation the early Europeans found growing on the Sydney sandstone both delighted and appalled them...the hungry settlers realized in despair that this magnificent vegetation offered little sustenance". Moreover, the First Fleet's reaction to the Botany Bay area was so negative that Phillip and his crew almost instantly explored further north, towards Port Jackson and Broken Bay. [14]
Upon arriving in Port Jackson, First Fleet lieutenant David Blackburn wrote that Sydney Harbour was "either Immense Barren Rocks, tumbled together in Large Ridges which are almost Inaccessible to Goats, or A Dry Sandy Soil and A General Want of Water". First Fleet officer John Hunter also described Sydney Cove as "very bad, most of the ground being covered with rocks, or large stones". [14]
In July 1788, Lieutenant Ralph Clark, a member of the First Fleet, had a scathing view of Sydney's landscape, climate and as well its inhabitants, writing: [14]
I shall only tell you that this is the poorest country in the world, which its inhabitance [sic] shows they are the most miserable set of wretches under the Sun… there is neither river or Spring in the country that we have been able to find… all the fresh water comes out of swamps which the country abounds with… the country is overrun with large trees not one Acre of clear ground to be seen… the Thunder and Lightning is the most Terrible I ever herd [sic], it is the opinion of every body here that the Government will remove the Settlement to some other place for if it remains here this country will not be able to maintain its self in 100 years...
In a 1793 commentary map by Watkin Tench, the overall notion was that most of Sydney was agriculturally poor – The land around South Head was "exceedingly rocky, sandy & barren"; the area northwest of Botany Bay was "sandy barren swampy Country"; the coastline from Manly to Mona Vale was "sandy, rocky and very bad Country", the Ku-ring-gai Chase area was "very bad & rugged", the Cattai area was "very dreadful Country", and the southwest of Prospect Hill was a "bad Country frequently over-flowed". [14]
The most widespread eucalyptus species in the Sydney region include: [36]
Non-eucalyptus tree species:
Common shrub species include, but are not limited to:
Introduced shrubs and/or vines that are invasive species: [59]
Due to the microclimate, the plant hardiness zone in the Sydney area would range: [60]
The fauna of the Sydney area is diverse and its urban area is home to variety of bird and insect species, and also a few bat, arachnid and amphibian species. Introduced birds such as the house sparrow, common myna and feral pigeon are ubiquitous in the CBD areas of Sydney. [61] [62] Moreover, possums, bandicoots, rabbits, feral cats, lizards, snakes and frogs may also be present in the urban environment, albeit seldom in city centers. [63]
About 40 species of reptiles are found in the Sydney region and 30 bird species exist in the urban areas. [64] [65] [66] Sydney's outer suburbs, namely those adjacent to large parks, have a great diversity of wildlife. [67] Since European settlement and the subsequent bushland clearing for the increasing population, 60% of the original mammals are now considered endangered or vulnerable, and many reptile species are experiencing population diminution and are becoming elusive. [68]
This list includes bird species that are widespread in the Sydney metropolitan area: [69]
Although not commonly spotted, these birds are also present in Sydney: [66]
This list includes mammal, reptile and amphibian species that are spotted in the Sydney urban area: [70] [71]
This list includes insect, spider and centipede species that are commonly present in Sydney: [72]
{{cite book}}
: |work=
ignored (help){{cite book}}
: |work=
ignored (help)