Single-origin honey
Native-forest apiary — one title, one floral signature. Placement, foraging rights, and yields all still to verify.
Idea portfolio — ranked
Three independent brainstorming passes — roughly 326 raw ideas — were merged, deduplicated, and screened against the two hard gates on this parcel: the LCZ use table (SPP 22.2) and the physical constraint stack (91.3% Priority Vegetation Area, 100% bushfire-prone, 30.1% combined landslip). What survives is tiered — A worth a probe now, B parked for later, C rejected with a reason recorded. The full method and citations sit in the lab's research files; the seven tracked dossiers are published in full under /dossiers.
This page is the open portfolio: a collaborator, partner, or adviser can see at a glance which probes are alive, which are parked, and which have been rejected — and on what evidence — without waiting to be pitched.
This is not an investment menu. Every item here is a Stage-0 research probe, not an offer — no product, price, yield, or availability is being claimed or sold.
Fact Assumption Choice Risk Todo
Tiers alone are a judgement call. So every idea that survives the hard-gate screen is also run through an explicit two-stage model, and the table below is sorted by the result — highest composite first. Stage 1 is a conjunctive screen: anything that fails a hard gate (the LCZ use table forbids it, or it revives a screened-out family) is rejected outright and never scored — that is the Tier C set. Stage 2 scores each survivor 0–4 on six criteria, then takes the weighted mean rescaled to 0–100. The scores and weights are a Stage-0 CHOICE, not FACT — the value is that they are on the table: change a number and the ranking recomputes. Only the convergence counts feeding Demand are FACT.
Composite = Σ(weight × score) / 4 × 100. The bar is relative to the top-ranked idea. Hover any criterion for its 0–4 value and what it measures. Per-idea rationale is recorded in the lab's research files; the tracked ideas link to their published dossiers below.
These are the tracks with a dedicated evidence dossier under active research — the lab's settled portfolio scope.
Native-forest apiary — one title, one floral signature. Placement, foraging rights, and yields all still to verify.
Licensing the parcel as an ecological field-training and instrumentation site.
Bush-tucker and botanical foraging — pending NRE wild-harvest licensing.
Nature Repair Act protection of mapped threatened communities. Market not yet transacting.
Pop-up camping, dark-sky nights, volunteer hosting — cheap tests of real demand.
On-site clay for off-site 3D-construction mix testing.
A capital-unlock split. The P1 pathway appears in the scheme text; the 6.02 ha of non-PVA land is the opening under review.
Ideas the brainstorm nets surfaced beyond the seven tracks, each with a fit rationale and a single named gating unknown. Worth a probe or a dedicated research pull next. What happens next: pick a cheap probe to design and cost next.
Sensor API, livestream, bioacoustic dataset — the 91.3% PVA wet-forest baseline sold as a paid API, membership, or labelled AI training set. All three brainstorming passes converged on this cluster independently.
Film location, location menu, Foley/ambient recording, HDRI/photogrammetry. A crew reportedly shot here a few years ago (owner-attested) — the strongest existing demand signal in the portfolio, though not yet converted to a sourced fact: production, fee, and contact remain to be documented.
Spalted turning blanks and sculptural timber from fallen/pruned limbs only — no felling, couples to mandatory fuel-reduction pruning.
From lawful fire-management residues, kiln sited on the non-PVA cleared fragment. Charcoal-pigment sub-angle adds an art-supply market.
Per-student-day or per-plot-year fees for university/VET/school field access — a concrete revenue model layered on the monitoring track.
Fire-behaviour research, resilience-demo plots, firefighter training — turns mandatory fuel management into a paid, LCZ-aligned activity.
Collecting seed from standing native vegetation for revegetation nurseries — passive, PVA-compatible, mission-aligned.
Soil microbiome, endophytic fungi, native yeast, pheromone mapping. Zero clearing, potentially high margin — but NRE permitting and IP benefit-sharing are both wide open.
GNSS-under-canopy, solar degradation, foliage-attenuation comms, ruggedised robotics, acoustic noise-floor — the terrain is the test condition, sold temporarily with no structures.
One LoRaWAN/mesh/Starlink pole leased to IoT or community users — tiny footprint, ridge line-of-sight value. Open question: whether a single pole genuinely reads distinct from the screened-out telecom-tower family.
A paid baseline biodiversity-data package as a revenue line ahead of any future Nature Repair certificate eligibility — doesn’t depend on the weakened certificate market.
Reusing the existing 823 m internal track for guided riding or a skills clinic — steep treed terrain as an asset, minimal new clearing if alignment stays on existing paths.
Plausible or secondary — folded into an existing track, waiting on a primary track's result, or simply lower-value than the Tier A set. What happens next: nothing on its own — each reopens only when its named track hits a trigger.
Pollen, propolis, beeswax wraps, queen-rearing, royal jelly — extensions of the honey track, not a standalone.
Forest-bathing, bushcraft, plein-air, writing retreats — heaviest convergence of any cluster, but all gate on the same Tourist Operation permit and bushfire-insurance question.
A funded variant of the retreat cluster worth a grants-pathway note.
Cheap by-product of the media-capture cluster’s imagery work; low priority standalone.
Friends-of-the-block, adopt-a-camera-trap, patron-funded open dataset — a layer over other tracks, not a track itself.
Under-canopy cultivation already recorded in the botanicals dossier and candidate-ideas research — reinforced, not new.
Negotiating the east 1,231 m / west 530 m reserved roads — not income itself, but could unlock other tracks including subdivision.
Selective native-forest harvest — the full-canopy-removal sibling of the windfall-timber idea (A3); parked as a direct PVA-clearing question.
Non-PVA fragment planting competes for scarce cleared land already wanted for building envelopes and other uses.
Workable only at small self-consumption scale; a supporting layer for the dwelling keystone, not a standalone track.
Uses steep treed terrain as a training asset without building or clearing — shares the retreat cluster’s Tourist Operation gate.
Conservation-aligned, but must be Aboriginal-led and consent-based — parked until a partner is identified.
Overlaps the equipment-testing cluster but adds CASA aviation-regulation complexity — not a standalone track.
Screened out on the current evidence — recorded so they aren't re-litigated without new evidence, the lab's standing screening discipline. Each fails the Stage-1 hard-gate screen — a non-compensatory gate no weighting can offset — which is why none is scored in the ranked list above. What happens next: nothing — do not revive without new evidence.
Silvopasture poultry, managed venison, snail farming, captive dung beetles — grazing/agistment is an explicit screened-out family.
Reject Fails gate: Screened-out family (grazing/agistment)Collides with PVA, waterway, and landslip overlays; capital-heavy; visual-amenity gate on a conservation-zoned ridge.
Reject Fails gate: Physical stack (PVA + waterway + landslip)Non-PVA land is scarce; industrial use plus fire-risk cooling already screened as poor fit.
Reject Fails gate: Use table (industrial) + scarce non-PVA landLegal, consumer-protection, and environmental exposure from soil disturbance in the PVA.
Reject Fails gate: PVA soil disturbance + legal exposureNo evidenced demand; reputational downside against a conservation positioning.
Reject Fails gate: No evidenced demand + reputational downsideEscape room, horror LARP, silent-disco, festival — event/use-class hurdle plus noise and fire risk on bushfire-prone land.
Reject Fails gate: Use class + noise/fire on bushfire-prone landPVA almost certainly bars removing forest-floor material at volume.
Reject Fails gate: PVA bars forest-floor removal at volumeSignage code and visual-amenity provisions in the LCZ.
Reject Fails gate: Signage code + LCZ visual amenityReads as Food Services / General Retail under the LCZ use table — standalone café/retail is an explicit screened-out family.
Reject Fails gate: Screened-out family (standalone café/retail)Pelts, bounties, paid eradication — biosecurity, ethics, firearms and neighbour-safety exposure for low yield.
Reject Fails gate: Biosecurity + firearms/neighbour-safety exposureReleasing organisms or test materials into the PVA is a contamination risk regardless of research framing.
Reject Fails gate: PVA contamination riskLiability, noise, and legal-absurdity edges with no income case.
Reject Fails gate: No income case + liability edgesThe screened-out telecom-tower family in a temporary wrapper.
Reject Fails gate: Screened-out family (telecom tower)Legal enforceability and fraud-edge concerns; zero actual income.
Reject Fails gate: No income + enforceability/fraud edgesRead next → the one that survived to a live track: the full subdivision report, or the planner-facing one-page case behind it.