• Change text size
• Skip to content

Australian Natural Resources Atlas

Natural Resource Topics

• About us
• Contact us

Search

• ANRA home
  • Map maker
  • Natural resource topics
  • Data Library

• Natural resource topics
  • Agriculture
  • Coasts
  • Dryland Salinity
  • Invasive species
  • Irrigation
  • Land
  • Natural resource economics
  • People
  • Rangelands
  • Soils
  • Vegetation and biodiversity
  • Water
  • Publications

• Vegetation and biodiversity
  • Overview
  • Assessment
    • New South Wales
    • Victoria
    • Queensland
    • South Australia
    • Western Australia
    • Tasmania
    • Northern Territory
    • Australian Capital Territory
  • Landscape health
  • NVIS framework
  • Extent
    • New South Wales
    • Victoria
    • Queensland
    • South Australia
    • Western Australia
    • Tasmania
    • Northern Territory
    • Australian Capital Territory
  • Clearing
    • New South Wales
    • Victoria
    • Queensland
    • South Australia
    • Western Australia
    • Tasmania
    • Northern Territory
    • Australian Capital Territory
  • Management

9. Biodiversity conservation across the wider landscape

Summary

There are two broad groups of management responses for delivering biodiversity conservation. The first is protective management - across both public and private lands. This is the most cost-effective management strategy because preventing degradation is easier than repair. The second management response is rehabilitation to recover threatened species and repair threatened ecosystems and ecological processes. This strategy is costly, but necessary in parts of Australia. Both groups of management responses rely upon effectively integrating biodiversity conservation into natural resource management.

To assess where integrated natural resource management might effectively deliver conservation outcomes, subregions were assessed in terms of existing constraints and community capacity. The assessment indicated that capacity for integrating biodiversity conservation into natural resource management is severely constrained in 14% of Australia's IBRA subregions. Major constraints include the extent of degradation, socio-economic issues and limited community capacity. In a further 33% of subregions, significant constraints are identified. There is an identified capacity to integrate biodiversity conservation as part of natural resource management activities in 29% of subregions and natural resource management actions are achieving conservation outcomes in 21% of subregions. Conservation is considered to be well integrated into production systems in only 1.5% of subregions.

The specific measures required to deliver biodiversity outcomes as part of integrated natural resource management vary widely across Australia and need to be tailored to regional circumstances. Existing activities and opportunities for integrated natural resource management to achieve effective biodiversity conservation have been reviewed for each subregion.

Compared to the high numbers of threatened species, only 338 Commonwealth, State and Territory recovery plans exist (approximately 20% of Commonwealth listed species) and the implementation of many of these is not funded. Given the size of the task of redressing this situation, threatened species recovery across Australia requires a more strategic approach that goes beyond planning and addresses implementation.

Bioregional and subregional planning strategies and works that focus on multiple species may provide an appropriate mechanism for addressing recovery of threatened species. To assist in these activities, this assessment has identified recovery actions for threatened species in each subregion. Further work is needed to identify groups of threatened species for multiple species recovery, to foster links with other natural resource management initiatives and facilitate management orientated ecological research.

Recovery planning for threatened ecosystems and other ecological communities has received relatively little attention. Notable exceptions are the Grassy White Box woodlands in southern Australia, temperate native grasslands in Victoria, Western Australia's Yanchep Cave aquatic rootmat invertebrate communities and Sydney's Cumberland Plain woodlands. Recovery actions for threatened ecosystems have been suggested for each subregion and are a key information layer for regional natural resource management planning.

Overall, successful recovery outcomes for threatened species and ecosystems and identified community capacity to be involved in recovery planning is identified in only 20% of subregions. Comparatively modest conservation initiatives and investment levels will lead to significant biodiversity conservation gains in much of northern Australia such as the Northern Kimberley and Cape York Peninsula, and across central Australia (29% of all subregions). Investment in protective management in these bioregions is cost effective and a priority.

Major constraints on achieving recovery of threatened ecosystems due to the high level of habitat loss and poor landscape condition are identified for 43 or 11% of subregions. Significant effort is required in a further 34% of subregions but in these, limited community capacity and resource constraints exist.

Investment required in many subregions is substantial and it is likely that only selected activities will be able to be implemented. For example, the cost to achieve the revegetation of the 57 subregions that now have less than 30% remnant vegetation to a 30% target, is estimated to be well in excess of $4.5 billion. This makes it imperative to protect remnant natural habitat in these subregions and strategically target any investment in repair. Key biodiversity elements such as riparian zones and threatened ecosystems, are special priorities for rehabilitation in these landscapes.

Introduction

The protection of biodiversity across Australia requires the adoption of integrated natural resource management practices that specifically incorporate defined conservation objectives. One essential component is the need for targeted programs to recover threatened species and threatened ecosystems.

Reserves play a critical role in protecting a Comprehensive and Representative sample of biodiversity but the maintenance of regional biodiversity and the protection of ecological processes across the wider landscape requires complementary natural resource management activities. The identification of biodiversity conservation needs in the development of natural resource management strategies is the first step in this process.

The very large number of threatened species and threatened ecosystems identified in the Biodiversity Assessment implies that highly strategic approaches are required to achieve extensive recovery. Generally though, resources available to implement recovery plans are limited. Considerable effort has focused on providing legislative protection and on developing individual species recovery plans. As of August 2002 there were 145 recovery plans in place under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. The Commonwealth government is committed to the adoption of a recovery plan for every endangered and critically endangered species listed under the Act by 2005. State and Territory governments also prepare recovery plans under their legislation.

One of the strategic responses required is to implement a regional and all-encompassing approach to threatened species and ecosystems as part of regional natural resource management activities. For example, the Western Australian Department of Conservation and Land Management lists threatened species and ecological communities and broad recovery actions in each of their administrative regions to promote recovery planning initiatives. This initiative could be extended to the development of bioregional overviews, strategies and works for the protection of rare and threatened species and ecosystems.

Such an approach would provide better linkages with on-ground ecological conditions and constraints and other bioregional biodiversity conservation measures including the monitoring of the status of native ecosystems. The Biodiversity Assessment, through collating information on threatened species and ecosystems across all subregions and bioregions, has provided the first step in developing this approach on a comprehensive basis.

With the increasing emphasis being given to the regional delivery of integrated natural resource management that include biodiversity conservation programs, the Biodiversity Assessment has collated information on the effectiveness of existing natural resource management activities to deliver biodiversity outcomes and the various opportunities or constraints that might exist across subregions.

The Assessment

Threatened Species and Ecosystems

Important information needed at the regional level for biodiversity conservation is the occurrence of threatened species and ecosystems, their threatening processes, recommended recovery actions and the resources required to effect improvement. This information is vital for the development of catchment plans, local government plans and other instruments that seek to integrate biodiversity conservation with natural resource management activities.

The Biodiversity Assessment has investigated the conservation status of ecosystems as one means of highlighting the need to maintain viable ecosystems for the protection of biodiversity. An attempt was also made to identify groups of threatened species based on similar distribution, association with particular ecosystems, similar threats or taxonomic affinity where efficiency of scales might be achieved in planning recovery actions, for example, grouping of threatened coastal heath species or threatened upland rainforest frog species. The difficulties experienced by States and Territories in compiling this information indicate that further work is needed if integrated management activities are to be a key part of the response.

To contribute to regional recovery planning, the Biodiversity Assessment has identified the threatened species and ecosystems in each subregion based on species records held by States and the Territories. Where known, the range of recovery actions required for these species has been listed.

To assist in the collation of results, a standardised list of recovery actions was provided to agencies (Figure 9.1).

The existence of current State, Territory and Commonwealth recovery plans are also recorded.

The recovery of threatened species and ecosystems through inclusion in regional planning processes and activities is dependent upon community capacity and opportunity. It is also important to consider where comparatively modest investments in conservation measures might result in significant biodiversity gains. Subregions were ranked in terms of threatened species and ecosystems recovery opportunity within a series of classes shown in Figure 9.2.

Integrated Natural Resource Management

A wide range of mechanisms are identified to promote biodiversity conservation across private lands (e.g. Young et al. 1996). The most appropriate mechanisms vary according to regional circumstances and the nature of the issues to be addressed, and continue to evolve. For example, a market-based incentive mechanism based on a tender system for landholders to carry out environmental services is being trialed in Victoria through the BushTender initiative. Elsewhere, debate is occurring as to whether a basic duty of care for natural resource management should be legislated for and accompanied by a stewardship payment for public conservation services over and above private management obligations (e.g. Bates 2001). This mechanism has been proposed to achieve rapid reform in vegetation management in Queensland (Fensham & Sattler unpublished).

To assist in identifying suitable mechanisms for regional planning, the Biodiversity Assessment has recorded the existing natural resource management actions that contribute significantly to biodiversity conservation. These were collated across subregions using a standardised list of natural resource management categories to aid compilation. The potential to implement such actions was also assessed, using the same categories, to assist in determining what might be priority activities for investment across subregions.

To complete the analysis, an Australia wide appraisal was carried out of the overall opportunities for integrated natural resource management to deliver effective biodiversity conservation outcomes. This included a ranking of subregions in terms of their constraints, capacity of regional communities, and the degree to which defined biodiversity outcomes are currently being achieved through integrated natural resource management across Australia (Figure 9.4).

Findings

Threatened Species

The type and frequency of recovery actions for threatened species across subregions was collated as part of the Biodiversity Assessment. Examples of the required recovery actions for threatened species across subregions are shown for two bioregions - Cobar Peneplain and South East Coastal Plain (Figure 9.5) - as examples of the information presented on the Atlas.

Reserve consolidation and habitat protection on private lands and on other State lands were both consistently recorded as recovery actions required for threatened species on the Cobar Peneplain in western New South Wales. On the South East Coastal Plain of Victoria habitat protection on private lands, capacity building, fencing, fire management and feral animal control are some of the frequently recorded measures required to protect threatened species. In both bioregions the need for research into the ecological requirements for threatened species recovery was identified across all subregions.

Table 9.1 gives an example of some of the supporting information on recommended recovery actions for threatened species within the Cobar Peneplain that is available on the Atlas.

In total, 338 recovery plans exist across Australia, though often, implementation of the plans has been limited due to lack of resources. This confirms the need for a more strategic approach to the recovery of threatened species.

Table 9.1 Threatened species or species group in each subregion: their status, the existence of recovery plans and recommended recovery actions - Cobar Peneplain Atlas extract. (Endangered is denoted by E and Vulnerable is denoted by V).

Table 9.1: Threatened species or species group in each subregion: their status, the existence of recovery plans and recommended recovery actions - Cobar Peneplain Atlas extract.

SPECIES NAME	EPBC LISTING	STATE LISTING	RECOVERY PLAN	RECOMMENDED RECOVERY ACTIONS
Antechinomys laniger (Kultarr)	-	E	No	Research - Determine distribution and habitat requirements as a primary action
Nyctophilus timoriensis (Greater Long-eared Bat)	V	V	No	Research to determine more about the basic ecology of the species
Ardeotis australis (Australian Bustard)	-	E	No	Feral animal control - Control of foxes in known breeding sites; Habitat retention through reserves
Chalinolobus picatus (Little Pied Bat)	-	V	No
Swainsona murrayana (Slender Darling-pea)	V	V	No	Capacity building with stakeholders - Management of populations with landholders as well as along travelling stock routes
Petrogale penicillata (Brush-tailed Rock-wallaby)	V	V	No
Acacia curranii (Curly-bark Wattle)	V	V	No
Note: Endangered is denoted by E and Vulnerable is denoted by V

Figure 9.5 The type and frequency of recovery actions required for threatened species in subregions of the Cobar Peneplain and South East Coastal Plain bioregions. Pie charts do not convey relative importance of recovery needs but are an indication of frequency only.

Threatened Ecosystems

Bioregional recovery planning for threatened ecosystems is an important and strategic action that can be undertaken as part of regional natural resource management. Action has been taken in some States and the Australian Capital Territory to provide legislative protection and regional planning frameworks for threatened ecosystems. The Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, 1999 has listed 27 'endangered ecological communities'. Further activities are warranted. The recovery of threatened ecosystems has not yet been comprehensively addressed. For example, in some jurisdictions there is no legislative protection to the clearing of the regrowth of endangered ecosystems.

The type and frequency of actions required for threatened ecosystem recovery across subregions was collated as part of the Biodiversity Assessment. Figure 9.6 identifies such measures for the Victoria Bonaparte and the Tasmanian Northern Slopes bioregions as examples of the information available for all bioregions on the Atlas.

In the Victoria Bonaparte bioregion in northern Australia, fire management, weed control and feral animal controls are the recovery actions consistently identified for threatened ecosystems across each subregion. In contrast, on the Tasmanian Northern Slopes reserve consolidation, habitat protection on private lands and a range of management activities including fencing are identified to protect and recover threatened ecosystems.

Table 9.2 identifies the recommended recovery actions for some threatened ecosystems within the Tasmanian Northern Slopes bioregion and is an extract from the Atlas.

There is a growing trend for aspirational targets for the revegetation of native ecosystems back to 30% of their pre-clearing extent proposed in some recent catchment plans. For example, restoration targets of 30% vegetation community extent is proposed for the Murray and Murrumbidgee Rivers in draft catchment blueprints to recover regional biodiversity and to protect hydrological regimes.

Table 9.2: List of threatened ecosystems in each bioregion and subregion, their recommended status and recommended recovery actions - Tasmanian Northern Slopes Atlas extract.

ECOSYSTEM NAME	RECOMMENDED STATUS	RECOMMENDED RECOVERY ACTIONS
Black peppermint forests on gravels (AI)	Vulnerable	Habitat protection on private lands
Black peppermint forests on sandstone (AS)	Vulnerable	Habitat protection on private lands
Brookers gum wet forests (BA)	Vulnerable	Habitat protection on private lands
Black peppermint woodland on gravels (Eai)	Vulnerable	Habitat retention through reserves; Habitat protection on private lands
Black peppermint woodland on sandstone (Eas)	Vulnerable	Habitat retention through reserves; Habitat protection on private lands
Black gum heathy woodland (Eh)	Endangered	Habitat retention through reserves; Habitat protection on private lands; Fencing; Weed control

This target, if implemented Australia-wide, identifies two key issues for management and investment. Firstly, if a similar rehabilitation target is extrapolated across the 57 subregions that have less than 30% remnant vegetation (NLWRA 2001c), a total of nine million hectares will need to be revegetated. Greening Australia estimate that the cheapest revegetation cost, through direct seeding, is at least $500/ha. This means that the total repair bill to achieve this target would be at least $4.5 billion across Australia.

Rehabilitation costs may approach $10,000 /ha in those situations where direct seeding is not suitable and effective. Thus the $4.5 billion figure represents a very conservative estimate for vegetation repair. This huge cost clearly demonstrates that protection and management of existing habitat must be the priority action rather than environmental remediation of past mistakes.

Secondly, restoration in modified landscapes must be targeted to achieve the greatest biodiversity return as well as the protection and rehabilitation of ecosystem services. Issues such as the recovery of riparian zones, threatened ecosystems and other special values as identified in this Biodiversity Assessment, would be part of this regional analysis. The analysis should also recognise that if revegetation is not carefully targeted, such activity could significantly draw upon scarce resources at the expense of other conservation strategies. Preferably, revegetation should be implemented only as part of a mix of strategies that ensure existing remnants are secure and management is funded.

The complexity of rebuilding a functioning native ecosystem and additional logistical issues such as the availability of labour, expertise and local provenance seed in the quantities demanded by large scale revegetation works require careful consideration. Further research is needed into how large scale rehabilitation might be approached across bioregions.

Threatened Species and Ecosystem Recovery Opportunities

The opportunities for threatened species ecosystem recovery across Australia in terms of constraints, regional capacity and where limited measures will result in significant biodiversity gains is shown in Figure 9.7.

Key findings from this analysis include:

• Subregions with major biophysical constraints—Throughout most of the Murray-Darling Basin including the Mulga Lands of Queensland, parts of Brigalow Belt North, the Victorian Volcanic Plain and South Coastal Plain, the Tasmanian Northern Slopes and Tasmanian Northern Midlands, the Avon Wheatbelt and parts of the Mallee bioregions in Western Australia, there are major constraints to achieve effective threatened species and ecosystems recovery (11% of subregions).
• Subregions with significant resource constraints and limited regional capacity—Across large parts of all States and Territories there is significant resource constraints and limited regional community capacity (34% of subregions).
• Subregions where high levels of return are possible for limited investment—Throughout central and northern Australia, including Cape York Peninsula and the Northern Kimberley, limited conservation effort would result in significant biodiversity gains (29% of all subregions). This is a particularly significant finding in terms of achieving greater efficiency for investment in biodiversity conservation.
• Subregions where capacity exists and some recovery measures in place—In 20% of subregions, a range of recovery measures are required though capacity exists and some biodiversity outcomes have been achieved.
• Recovery measures significantly in place—In parts of the Wet Tropics, Central Mackay Coast, South East Queensland and the Eyre Yorke Block bioregions, recovery measures are significantly in place (5% of subregions).

Figure 9.7 Threatened species and ecosystems recovery opportunities

Integrated natural resource management

Increasingly, a whole of landscape approach to natural resource management that includes biodiversity conservation is being advocated within regional, State and Commonwealth programs. This requires a broad range of management strategies to fit different environmental, land use and community circumstances.

Figure 9.8 shows the range of conservation measures currently being incorporated into two sample bioregions, the Gascoyne and Riverina bioregions. In the marginal rangelands across the Gascoyne, structural adjustment of the pastoral industry is working towards biodiversity measures, such as reserve consolidation and adoption of sustainable grazing regimes. Threat abatement planning that includes the adoption of codes of practice for sustainable pastoral management ensures a whole of landscape approach is implemented.

In the Riverina, vegetation management legislation, property management planning, incentives and a variety of planning instruments are some of the natural resource management actions contributing to biodiversity conservation.

Table 9.3 gives examples of existing natural resource management measures for biodiversity conservation and Table 9.4 gives examples of feasible opportunities for integrated natural resource management measures to contribute to biodiversity in each subregion.

With increasing investment in natural resource management initiatives as a strategic vehicle for biodiversity conservation, it is important to assess where current measures are contributing effectively to biodiversity conservation and where there are constraints and issues of regional capacity.

Table 9.3: The contribution of existing projects to the protection of biodiversity as part of integrated natural resource management measures in each subregion and assessed effectiveness - Atlas extract for the Northern Kimberley bioregion.

SUBREGION	EXISTING ACTIVITIES	EXISTING ACTIVITIES NOTES	ASSESSED EFFECTIVENESS	ASSESSED EFFECTIVENESS NOTES
Mitchell (NK1)	Threat abatement planning	Threat abatement planning as part of NRM. Concerted and co-ordinated effort by the Department of Agriculture in the control of donkeys.	Major constraints to implement effective NRM	With off park priority for some focussed areas (eg. Mitchell Plateau), limited off park measures will result in significant conservation gains.
	Capacity building with stakeholders	Land Conservation District Committees established and provide a venue for discussion on conservation matters.	Major constraints to implement effective NRM	With off park priority for some focussed areas (eg. Mitchell Plateau), limited off park measures will result in significant conservation gains.
Berkeley (NK2)	Legislation including duty of care for leasehold etc	Pastoral lease inspections are undertaken by the Department of Agriculture and leaseholders notified of any problems via the Pastoral Lands Board.	Major constraints to implement effective NRM	A limited financial resource is a major constraint. The number of people available to implement strategies is a constraint. There is a need to increase awareness of conservation values throughout the community.

Figure 9.9 identifies that across much of the rangelands of Western Australia, the Swan Coastal Plain, the Northern Kimberley, the wheat / sheep belt of New South Wales, parts of the Murray Darling Depression bioregion and the Mulga Lands, major constraints to the implementation of effective natural resource management exist (14% of subregions).

These constraints may include the extent of degradation, the need for structural reform, limited land capability, small property size and the socialeconomic disruption that would be associated with implementing ecologically sustainable land use practices. In addition, significant constraints to integrate conservation as part of production systems are identified for a further 33% of subregions.

This accords with the findings of Australians and Natural Resource Management (NLWRA 2002b):

• farmers are Australia's front-line natural resource managers for at least 60% of the Australian landscape; however
• about 1% of the land area contributes about 80% of the profit from agriculture at full equity; and
• 14 river basins out of a total 246 account for 50% of the total profits from agriculture.

This does not necessarily imply that other parts of the landscape under agriculture and grazing are not profitable. Rather, it provides an insight into profitability per hectare, demonstrating quite clearly that for much of the agricultural and grazing landscape, returns per hectare are low and that additional on farm management activities to deliver biodiversity conservation outcomes may not be feasible.

Capacity to integrate biodiversity conservation into natural resource management is identified for 29% of subregions and natural resource management instruments are achieving some biodiversity outcomes across 21% of subregions. Conservation however, is well integrated into production in only 1.5% of subregions.

These results indicate while high expectations exist that integrated natural resource management is and will deliver significant biodiversity outcomes, there are major constraints and limited regional capacity across a large part of Australia.

Figures 9.7 and 9.9 indicate that significant effort is needed across rangelands to integrate biodiversity conservation with natural resource management in addition to current programs in the agricultural catchments.

Table 9.4 Feasible opportunities for natural resource management to contribute to the protection of biodiversity in each subregion (Atlas extract for Mitchell (NK1) subregion).

OPPORTUNITIES	COMMENTS
Legislation including duty of care for leasehold etc	Improved implementation of existing legislation.
Environmental management systems	Environmental planning across tenure (weeds, fire and feral animals) coordinated through LCDC.
	Research is needed on the mechanism and impacts of threatening processes. Outputs of this should assess potential cost/effective solutions.
Capacity building with stakeholders (specify)	Improved communication required between all stakeholders and an acknowledgment of differing land management objectives.
Other planning opportunities	Shire plan incorporating biodiversity objectives incorporating an acknowledgment of the worth of the natural environment eg tourism, and the cost of management.
Integration with Landcare, catchment & property planning	Development of catchment and regional plans involving all stakeholders.

Conclusions

A whole of landscape approach is essential if Australia is to address the decline in biodiversity and maintain ecological processes.

The size of the task of biodiversity conservation is large and growing, and requires a highly strategic approach as part of integrated natural resource management. In northern Australia and across the central Australia's rangelands, significant gains can be made for limited effort relative to the cost of repair in southern Australia. This includes the huge gains that can be made through promoting ecologically sustainable land use and preventing degradation compared with the cost of rehabilitation.

To achieve effective integrated natural resource management requires the clear identification of biodiversity conservation issues and targeted management responses.

In many parts of Australia, there are significant constraints and limited capacity to incorporate biodiversity conservation measures. This means that governments have a key responsibility to provide a range of programs ranging from effective incentives to structural adjustment and market mechanisms to ensure that land can be sustainably and viably managed whilst protecting biodiversity.

The delivery of regionally focussed programs will need much support and includes:

• providing information upon which to plan, such as the Terrestrial Biodiversity Assessment, the more detailed information on the Atlas and the other Audit assessments;
• coordinating monitoring and reporting on the changes to the condition of the landscape so that programs can be evaluated, investment fine tuned and additional programs developed;
• promoting the need to identify specific biodiversity conservation objectives as part of integrated natural resource management;
• assisting regional groups develop cost effective and outcome orientated investment strategies that maximize return on the limited resources available;
• facilitating management orientated research to enable cost effective recovery of threatened species and ecosystems; and
• underpinning and enabling regional management through a range of policy and funding initiatives to ensure natural habitats are protectively managed and to encourage rehabilitation and repair.

• Next
• Contents
• Previous