Vegetation cover
36.2%
Sum total of ground vegetation, mid-story, and canopy across 3.76 ha of mapped rehabilitation area.
Current metrics
Canopy cover
4.2%
Area of the site meeting the required canopy cover where canopy is greater than 8.0 m in height. Target >15%.
Large bare patches
30
Number of bare-ground patches exceeding the threshold of 10 m² across all assessed sites.
Overall vegetation target
Overall vegetation cover averages 36.2%, well below the 70% target, and only one site currently meets the required cover threshold. Intervention required.
Canopy target
Canopy level vegetation covers 4.2%, remaining well below the >15% target, and no sites currently exceed the canopy threshold.
Bare ground target
Bare-ground patching remains a constraint, with all sites having patches that exceed the 10 m² per patch limit and the largest mapped patch reaching 5,780 m².
Summary map and table
The base map is a generic reference image and does not show the drone data used to create this report. Some visual differences may appear because the base map can be older than the drone survey.
| Name ▲ | Ground cover | Mid-story | Canopy | Bare ground | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zone 1 | 19.5% | 10.2% | 5.5% | 64.9% | 37 |
| Zone 2 | 27.4% | 6.9% | 0.4% | 65.2% | 30 |
| Zone 3 | 18.7% | 5.5% | 1.3% | 74.5% | 28 |
| Zone 4 | 30.1% | 6.9% | 5.1% | 57.9% | 42 |
| Zone 5 | 38.6% | 20.8% | 12.6% | 28.0% | 62 |
| Zone 6 | 5.9% | 1.4% | 0.3% | 92.3% | 20 |
Vegetation cover assessment
Overall health
The rehabilitation score combines total vegetation cover, canopy development, and bare-ground patch severity. Together, these measures show how close each area is to forming a stable, self-sustaining ecosystem.
Across the assessment, four sites are rated "Poor", one site is rated "Fair", and one site is rated "Good". The average rehabilitation score is 36.7 out of 100. Zone 5 currently leads the group, while Zone 6 is the clearest site needing extra attention.
The pattern is mixed rather than uniform, so the strongest sites provide useful examples while the weakest sites should shape near-term priorities.
What's working
Ground vegetation is the foundation of rehabilitation because it protects soil, reduces erosion, and creates the conditions needed for larger plants to establish over time.
One site already meet the 70% total vegetation target, and ground vegetation currently ranges from 5.9% to 38.6%. Zone 5 provides the clearest example of what stronger establishment can look like in this dataset.
Even where other gaps remain, the better-performing sites show that vegetation establishment is achievable and worth consolidating.
The priority gap
Canopy establishment and bare-ground control work best together. Trees improve growing conditions, while stable surface cover protects young plants and reduces erosion pressure.
Canopy is below the 15% target in six sites and ranges from 0.3% to 12.6%. At the same time, six sites show either high bare cover or large mean bare-ground patches. The strongest combined pressure is currently in Zone 6, Zone 3, and Zone 2.
The priority is a paired response: expand canopy establishment while also stabilising the most exposed bare-ground areas.
Bare ground assessment
Scope note
This report summarises remote-sensed vegetation structure indicators and polygon-level cover statistics. These outputs describe current vegetation cover composition and canopy status, but they do not by themselves establish causation, rehabilitation success drivers, species composition, or management advice. In sites with dense vegetation patches, consider using LiDAR data as canopy height calculated using photogrammetry may be inaccurate.