Portugese Laurel at Watson, ACT
Identification history
Identify this sighting
Please Login or Register to identify this sighting.
User's notes
Small exotic tree with small black berries. Growing on side of Antill St , Watson near Justice Robert Hope Park. Unable to find similar species on CNM
21 comments
waltraud
wrote:
20 Mar 2024
see my 2007 record from the Mt Majura nature reserve with comment: Prunus lusitanica (Portugese Laurel)
waltraud
wrote:
20 Mar 2024
see my 2007 record from the Mt Majura nature reserve with comment: Prunus lusitanica (Portugese Laurel)
waltraud
wrote:
20 Mar 2024
see my 2007 record from the Mt Majura nature reserve with comment: Prunus lusitanica (Portugese Laurel)
abread111
wrote:
23 May 2024
Amazingly, it has been cut down! Maybe because it was a potential threat to the drainage infrastructure?
abread111
wrote:
23 May 2024
Amazingly, it has been cut down! Maybe because it was a potential threat to the drainage infrastructure?
abread111
wrote:
23 May 2024
Amazingly, it has been cut down! Maybe because it was a potential threat to the drainage infrastructure?
abread111
wrote:
23 May 2024
Amazingly, it has been cut down! Maybe because it was a potential threat to the drainage infrastructure?
cmobbs
wrote:
23 May 2024
Yes it was cut down back in April - good to see this happen
I think the fact that seedlings have been found on Mt Majura over the years it was decided to remove it though hard to confirm if this was the mother tree!!!
I think the fact that seedlings have been found on Mt Majura over the years it was decided to remove it though hard to confirm if this was the mother tree!!!
cmobbs
wrote:
23 May 2024
Yes it was cut down back in April - good to see this happen
I think the fact that seedlings have been found on Mt Majura over the years it was decided to remove it though hard to confirm if this was the mother tree!!!
I think the fact that seedlings have been found on Mt Majura over the years it was decided to remove it though hard to confirm if this was the mother tree!!!
cmobbs
wrote:
23 May 2024
Yes it was cut down back in April - good to see this happen
I think the fact that seedlings have been found on Mt Majura over the years it was decided to remove it though hard to confirm if this was the mother tree!!!
I think the fact that seedlings have been found on Mt Majura over the years it was decided to remove it though hard to confirm if this was the mother tree!!!
abread111
wrote:
23 May 2024
TCCS don't take that sort of thing into account.
They say:
"Due to the imperative nature of growing and retaining the tree canopy cover across Canberra, in line with targets set out in Canberra’s Living Infrastructure Plan and the Urban Forest Strategy, our operations teams do not remove healthy trees, irrespective of their status as a pest plant. If identified pest species are seen to be in decline or have died, removals take place, and these species are not actively replanted by our teams."
So no account is taken of how invasive a species is.
They say:
"Due to the imperative nature of growing and retaining the tree canopy cover across Canberra, in line with targets set out in Canberra’s Living Infrastructure Plan and the Urban Forest Strategy, our operations teams do not remove healthy trees, irrespective of their status as a pest plant. If identified pest species are seen to be in decline or have died, removals take place, and these species are not actively replanted by our teams."
So no account is taken of how invasive a species is.
abread111
wrote:
23 May 2024
TCCS don't take that sort of thing into account.
They say:
"Due to the imperative nature of growing and retaining the tree canopy cover across Canberra, in line with targets set out in Canberra’s Living Infrastructure Plan and the Urban Forest Strategy, our operations teams do not remove healthy trees, irrespective of their status as a pest plant. If identified pest species are seen to be in decline or have died, removals take place, and these species are not actively replanted by our teams."
So no account is taken of how invasive a species is.
They say:
"Due to the imperative nature of growing and retaining the tree canopy cover across Canberra, in line with targets set out in Canberra’s Living Infrastructure Plan and the Urban Forest Strategy, our operations teams do not remove healthy trees, irrespective of their status as a pest plant. If identified pest species are seen to be in decline or have died, removals take place, and these species are not actively replanted by our teams."
So no account is taken of how invasive a species is.
abread111
wrote:
23 May 2024
TCCS don't take that sort of thing into account.
They say:
"Due to the imperative nature of growing and retaining the tree canopy cover across Canberra, in line with targets set out in Canberra’s Living Infrastructure Plan and the Urban Forest Strategy, our operations teams do not remove healthy trees, irrespective of their status as a pest plant. If identified pest species are seen to be in decline or have died, removals take place, and these species are not actively replanted by our teams."
So no account is taken of how invasive a species is.
They say:
"Due to the imperative nature of growing and retaining the tree canopy cover across Canberra, in line with targets set out in Canberra’s Living Infrastructure Plan and the Urban Forest Strategy, our operations teams do not remove healthy trees, irrespective of their status as a pest plant. If identified pest species are seen to be in decline or have died, removals take place, and these species are not actively replanted by our teams."
So no account is taken of how invasive a species is.
abread111
wrote:
23 May 2024
TCCS don't take that sort of thing into account.
They say:
"Due to the imperative nature of growing and retaining the tree canopy cover across Canberra, in line with targets set out in Canberra’s Living Infrastructure Plan and the Urban Forest Strategy, our operations teams do not remove healthy trees, irrespective of their status as a pest plant. If identified pest species are seen to be in decline or have died, removals take place, and these species are not actively replanted by our teams."
So no account is taken of how invasive a species is.
They say:
"Due to the imperative nature of growing and retaining the tree canopy cover across Canberra, in line with targets set out in Canberra’s Living Infrastructure Plan and the Urban Forest Strategy, our operations teams do not remove healthy trees, irrespective of their status as a pest plant. If identified pest species are seen to be in decline or have died, removals take place, and these species are not actively replanted by our teams."
So no account is taken of how invasive a species is.
waltraud
wrote:
24 May 2024
abread111
cmobbs
I think for each pest tree growing close to nature reserve we have to write a request asking the Minister to treat the pest! copies to the Conservator and to the Commissioner. Perhaps interest Media. It is outrageous that pests should be used to achieve the goal of a 30% tree canopy cover. I think the government is well aware that current legislation and regulation will NOT achieve this goal. Just look at the oversized houses built in Hackett lately following knockdowns - the owners would rather pay a penalty of a couple of $100s for cutting down a tree or for not planting one tree than cutting the size of their $million house project with garage gym spa swimming pool etc that occupy the whole block.
The cut of ALL government education programs (such as 'Are your garden plants going bush'), the refusal of the land manager to take responsibility reg garden extensions and garden waste dumping, the lack of action reg pest plants on public land on top of the pests cultivated in gardens (often unknown to owners) combine to a large burden for volunteers who care for the nature reserves. In other jurisdictions (Sydney), certain pest tree species are not allowed in a radius of 2km around conservation areas. ACT is not only behind, but the recent well meant Urban Forest Act legislation made a bad situation worse. It borders on abuse of volunteers who are compassionate about caring for endangered species, habitat and ecological communities ....
cmobbs
I think for each pest tree growing close to nature reserve we have to write a request asking the Minister to treat the pest! copies to the Conservator and to the Commissioner. Perhaps interest Media. It is outrageous that pests should be used to achieve the goal of a 30% tree canopy cover. I think the government is well aware that current legislation and regulation will NOT achieve this goal. Just look at the oversized houses built in Hackett lately following knockdowns - the owners would rather pay a penalty of a couple of $100s for cutting down a tree or for not planting one tree than cutting the size of their $million house project with garage gym spa swimming pool etc that occupy the whole block.
The cut of ALL government education programs (such as 'Are your garden plants going bush'), the refusal of the land manager to take responsibility reg garden extensions and garden waste dumping, the lack of action reg pest plants on public land on top of the pests cultivated in gardens (often unknown to owners) combine to a large burden for volunteers who care for the nature reserves. In other jurisdictions (Sydney), certain pest tree species are not allowed in a radius of 2km around conservation areas. ACT is not only behind, but the recent well meant Urban Forest Act legislation made a bad situation worse. It borders on abuse of volunteers who are compassionate about caring for endangered species, habitat and ecological communities ....
waltraud
wrote:
24 May 2024
abread111
cmobbs
I think for each pest tree growing close to nature reserve we have to write a request asking the Minister to treat the pest! copies to the Conservator and to the Commissioner. Perhaps interest Media. It is outrageous that pests should be used to achieve the goal of a 30% tree canopy cover. I think the government is well aware that current legislation and regulation will NOT achieve this goal. Just look at the oversized houses built in Hackett lately following knockdowns - the owners would rather pay a penalty of a couple of $100s for cutting down a tree or for not planting one tree than cutting the size of their $million house project with garage gym spa swimming pool etc that occupy the whole block.
The cut of ALL government education programs (such as 'Are your garden plants going bush'), the refusal of the land manager to take responsibility reg garden extensions and garden waste dumping, the lack of action reg pest plants on public land on top of the pests cultivated in gardens (often unknown to owners) combine to a large burden for volunteers who care for the nature reserves. In other jurisdictions (Sydney), certain pest tree species are not allowed in a radius of 2km around conservation areas. ACT is not only behind, but the recent well meant Urban Forest Act legislation made a bad situation worse. It borders on abuse of volunteers who are compassionate about caring for endangered species, habitat and ecological communities ....
cmobbs
I think for each pest tree growing close to nature reserve we have to write a request asking the Minister to treat the pest! copies to the Conservator and to the Commissioner. Perhaps interest Media. It is outrageous that pests should be used to achieve the goal of a 30% tree canopy cover. I think the government is well aware that current legislation and regulation will NOT achieve this goal. Just look at the oversized houses built in Hackett lately following knockdowns - the owners would rather pay a penalty of a couple of $100s for cutting down a tree or for not planting one tree than cutting the size of their $million house project with garage gym spa swimming pool etc that occupy the whole block.
The cut of ALL government education programs (such as 'Are your garden plants going bush'), the refusal of the land manager to take responsibility reg garden extensions and garden waste dumping, the lack of action reg pest plants on public land on top of the pests cultivated in gardens (often unknown to owners) combine to a large burden for volunteers who care for the nature reserves. In other jurisdictions (Sydney), certain pest tree species are not allowed in a radius of 2km around conservation areas. ACT is not only behind, but the recent well meant Urban Forest Act legislation made a bad situation worse. It borders on abuse of volunteers who are compassionate about caring for endangered species, habitat and ecological communities ....
waltraud
wrote:
24 May 2024
abread111
cmobbs
I think for each pest tree growing close to nature reserve we have to write a request asking the Minister to treat the pest! copies to the Conservator and to the Commissioner. Perhaps interest Media. It is outrageous that pests should be used to achieve the goal of a 30% tree canopy cover. I think the government is well aware that current legislation and regulation will NOT achieve this goal. Just look at the oversized houses built in Hackett lately following knockdowns - the owners would rather pay a penalty of a couple of $100s for cutting down a tree or for not planting one tree than cutting the size of their $million house project with garage gym spa swimming pool etc that occupy the whole block.
The cut of ALL government education programs (such as 'Are your garden plants going bush'), the refusal of the land manager to take responsibility reg garden extensions and garden waste dumping, the lack of action reg pest plants on public land on top of the pests cultivated in gardens (often unknown to owners) combine to a large burden for volunteers who care for the nature reserves. In other jurisdictions (Sydney), certain pest tree species are not allowed in a radius of 2km around conservation areas. ACT is not only behind, but the recent well meant Urban Forest Act legislation made a bad situation worse. It borders on abuse of volunteers who are compassionate about caring for endangered species, habitat and ecological communities ....
cmobbs
I think for each pest tree growing close to nature reserve we have to write a request asking the Minister to treat the pest! copies to the Conservator and to the Commissioner. Perhaps interest Media. It is outrageous that pests should be used to achieve the goal of a 30% tree canopy cover. I think the government is well aware that current legislation and regulation will NOT achieve this goal. Just look at the oversized houses built in Hackett lately following knockdowns - the owners would rather pay a penalty of a couple of $100s for cutting down a tree or for not planting one tree than cutting the size of their $million house project with garage gym spa swimming pool etc that occupy the whole block.
The cut of ALL government education programs (such as 'Are your garden plants going bush'), the refusal of the land manager to take responsibility reg garden extensions and garden waste dumping, the lack of action reg pest plants on public land on top of the pests cultivated in gardens (often unknown to owners) combine to a large burden for volunteers who care for the nature reserves. In other jurisdictions (Sydney), certain pest tree species are not allowed in a radius of 2km around conservation areas. ACT is not only behind, but the recent well meant Urban Forest Act legislation made a bad situation worse. It borders on abuse of volunteers who are compassionate about caring for endangered species, habitat and ecological communities ....
Location information
- Coordinates 149.165873-35.238939
- Altitude 627.9m
- Maps Watson Woodlands
- Places Watson, ACT
Sighting information
- 1 Abundance
- 14 Jan 2024 12:01 PM Recorded on
- cmobbs Recorded by
-
Collections
Plants Other Trees cmobbs Canberra & Southern Tablelands NatureMapr
Additional information
- Small tree with black currant-like fruit Description
- 5m Tree diameter (m)
- 1 metre to 5 metres Plant height
- Alive / healthy Plant health
Species information
- Prunus lusitanica Scientific name
- Portugese Laurel Common name
- Not Sensitive
- Exotic
- Medium weed or pest
- Up to 766.09m Recorded at altitude
- Machine learning
Record quality
- Images or audio
- More than one media file
- Verified by an expert moderator
- Nearby sighting(s) of same species
- GPS evidence of location
- Description
- Additional attributes
