Plants
Wattles
Sighting 4593306

Acacia cultriformis

Knife Leaf Wattle at Kenny, ACT

Acacia cultriformis at Kenny, ACT - 13 Sep 2024 05:07 PM
Acacia cultriformis at Kenny, ACT - 13 Sep 2024 05:07 PM
Acacia cultriformis at Kenny, ACT - 13 Sep 2024 05:07 PM
Acacia cultriformis at Kenny, ACT - 13 Sep 2024 05:07 PM
Request use of media

Identification history

Acacia cultriformis 14 Sep 2024 MichaelMulvaney
Acacia cultriformis 13 Sep 2024 CarbonAI
Acacia pravissima 13 Sep 2024 Clarel

Identify this sighting

Please Login or Register to identify this sighting.

21 comments

MichaelMulvaney wrote:
   14 Sep 2024
One vein visble in leaf and prominent gland - in you can see two veins and gland is near leaf base
waltraud wrote:
   14 Sep 2024
Agree with Id: knife-leaved wattles invade from the Federal Highway Plantings - keeping us volunteers entertained forever
Within Mt Majura nature reserve not Kenny (the new suburb that will be build to the north. CNM seems to go with suburbs respectively close-by suburbs not with the map of the (Mt Majura) nature reserve.
SteveBorkowskis wrote:
   14 Sep 2024
Hi Waltraud, ‘Kenny’ is just the arbitrary name given to the section of the map (like a grid) that the sighting was located in. It can seem misleading but if you click on ‘Kenny ACT’ you can see all the sightings in that square section of the overall map, it catches the edge of Mt Majura reserve.
waltraud wrote:
   14 Sep 2024
yes I know that the coordinates embedded in the photograph correctly locate the sighting on the grid. It annoys me that Mt Majura's diversity is nominally located in the district Majura, suburbs of Hackett, Watson, Campbell, Downer ....and now also Kenny
SteveBorkowskis wrote:
   14 Sep 2024
I see what you mean, perhaps highlighting ‘Mount Majura’ instead of ‘Kenny’ would seem to be more appropriate.
MichaelMulvaney wrote:
   14 Sep 2024
Unfortunately the boundaries are derived via google maps - this sighting must be just outside the actual reserve
waltraud wrote:
   14 Sep 2024
Certainly not https://canberra.naturemapr.org/users/4030. The record is located in the northern part and one of Mt Majura nature reserve best grassy woodland sites where many CNMers, FoMM volunteers, orchid nerds, ... and Aaron recorded the rich biodiversity including many orchids. According to the Google map scheme, records in the north parts of Mt Majura nature reserve are now said to be located in Kenny, northwest in Watson, further south in Hackett, Downer and Campbell and the reminder in Majura District (see for instance record close to the Mt Majura summit https://canberra.naturemapr.org/sightings/423694). Similar with records of other reserves, for instance Mt Taylor / Kambah. Google doesn't acknowledge the reserve maps but assigns suburbs and or districts to records. Tricky....
SteveBorkowskis
AaronClausen
SteveBorkowskis wrote:
   14 Sep 2024
I think it’s always been like this, it doesn’t bother me personally, but it does seem unusual until you know how it works. This sighting is shown in Place ‘Kenny, ACT’ and Map ‘Mount Majura’. If you look at all sightings in Mount Majura you’ll see this sighting is there. Perhaps you could suggest that the ‘Maps’ reference could take prominence over the ‘Places’ reference when there is both, that would solve the issue for you. So it would be ‘Knife Leaf Wattle at Mount Majura’ instead of ‘Knife Leaf Wattle at Kenny, ACT’.
abread111 wrote:
   14 Sep 2024
Good suggestion, Steve. I think that priority to Reserve Maps is what was happening until recently; the change happened in July, and for a while from 7 July to sometime on 18 July, sightings got listed twice with eg Mount Majura and Watson both given as the location on duplicate photos... and now we get the "suburb" taking priority.
MichaelMulvaney wrote:
   15 Sep 2024
@AaronClausen @MichaelBedingfield - something to think about
waltraud wrote:
   15 Sep 2024
I wonder whether that is affecting any other CNM function such as calculating diversity score.... as Barb pointed out, in the past years we used CNM sightings to update Mts Majura/Ainslie Flora list . I'm not sure how it works now with Mt Majura nature reserve sightings assigned to suburbs and districts...
MichaelBedingfield wrote:
   15 Sep 2024
Hi all. The top heading giving the location was changed a few years ago to give the "Place" rather than the name of the reserve. This was to improve efficiency in setting up the heading. The reserve location is correct, giving Mt Majura as the location, shown in the side panel. Unfortunately, Place is worked out by Google Maps, not us, and we have no control over that. It affects lots of our suburbs which are not accurately worked out by Google Maps. Perhaps someone who is keen could make a complaint to Google Maps and have then fix their suburb boundaries.
waltraud wrote:
   15 Sep 2024
Ah, I didn't check the right hand side panel. Thanks so much https://canberra.naturemapr.org/users/8083. Very assuring :-)
abread111 wrote:
   15 Sep 2024
Hi all. For a while from 1 November 2023 to 7 July 2024 the headline location was giving the Map reserve name, rather than the Place name. It would be good if that system could be restored. Ok to have both Map and Place in side panel. Is there a good reason to use Place for the headline? Place names reflect Google's idea of location which is not always very accurate or useful.
MichaelBedingfield wrote:
   16 Sep 2024
Hi Barbara. The top heading giving the location was changed a few years ago to give the "Place" rather than the name of the reserve. This was to improve efficiency in setting up the heading. The heading name is used in a number of different pages on the system. The system is now national. Giving the reserve name is only possible if the sighting is in a reserve. Many sightings are not in a reserve. Giving the Place name allows the system to apply a universal way of choosing the name.
waltraud wrote:
   16 Sep 2024
Michael we were talking only about records in the nature reserves and how they are placed. I understand that a decision must have been made in reg to what goes on the top headline which is the Google place. I'm satisfied that on the right hand side panel, "Maps" (Mt Majura) and the "Places" (Kenny) are listed - the question for me is whether the other functions of CNM such as biodiversity calculation, survey efforts, etc are assigned to Maps or Places or both? Kenny will be a suburb and it will be incorrect to assign the diversity that we mapped in the grassy woodland on the north west slope of Mt Majura to the suburb.
MichaelBedingfield wrote:
   16 Sep 2024
Hi Waltraud. I believe the calculations for reserves would be accurate, but those for some suburbs might not be.
abread111 wrote:
   16 Sep 2024
If a location only has a Place and not a Map, obviously the Place must be in the heading, and I can see the attraction of Place being universally available. But for reasons to do with conservation and biodiversity it would be preferable to use Map in the heading where there is one. And when calculating diversity for a Place, to exclude the subset of sightings for that Place which also have a Map assignment.
MichaelBedingfield wrote:
   17 Sep 2024
Re heading, that was how it was done in the past but it proved to be too complex and slow when applied nationally. Re your 2nd point, all Canberra reserves are included in one or more suburbs, eg Tugg. Hill, is part of Conder, Theodore & Calwell, so to leave out the reserves from calculations would be inaccurate.
waltraud wrote:
   17 Sep 2024
A rather complex issue. I wonder whether a explanation can be put together and placed on CNM - I think it would be justified; all started in Canberra with Maps i.e. records in reserves.
MichaelBedingfield wrote:
   22 Sep 2024
Added to collection "Discussions".

Please Login or Register to comment.

Location information

Sighting information

Additional information

  • 1 metre to 5 metres Plant height
  • True In flower

Species information

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
1,907,941 sightings of 21,395 species from 13,196 contributors
CCA 3.0 | privacy
We acknowledge the Traditional Owners of this land and acknowledge their continuing connection to their culture. We pay our respects to their Elders past and present.