Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program

2010 R eview Department of Environment and Conservation 168 St Georges Terrace Perth WA 6000 Tel: +61-8-6467 5000 Fax: +61-8-6467 5562 www.dec.wa.gov.au

© Government of Western Australia 2011

July 2011

This work is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in unaltered form only (retaining this notice) for your personal, non-commercial use or use within your organisation. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 , all other rights are reserved. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Department of Environment and Conservation.

ISBN: 978 1 921703 21 8

Recommended citation Wallace, K., Connell, K., Vogwill, R., Edgely, M., Hearn, R., Huston, R., Lacey, P., Massenbauer, T., Mullan, G., and Nicholson, N. 2011. Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review . Department of Environment and Conservation, Perth, Western Australia.

Questions regarding the use of this material should be directed to: Manager, Natural Resources Branch Department of Environment and Conservation Locked Bag 104 Bentley Delivery Centre Western Australia 6983 Phone: (08) 9334 0341

Acknowledgments The following are acknowledged for their assistance at various stages during the development of this review: Alisa Krasnostein, Madeleine Clews and Karla Forrest for editing, Graeme Olsen for providing an independent review of the document, and Ali B Design. In addition, the following provided helpful comments and advice during the preparation of the document: Amir Abadi, John Bartle, Greg Durell, Darren Farmer, Jennifer Higbid, John Lizamore, Cliff Lloyd, Ray McNight, David Mitchell, and Margaret Smith.

This document is available in alternative formats on request. Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review

by K Wallace, K Connell, R Vogwill, M Edgely, R Hearn, R Huston, P Lacey, T Massenbauer, G Mullan and N Nicholson. FOREWORD

In 2001 the department published a comprehensive review of its salinity work in the south-west, a region recognised internationally as a biodiversity ‘hotspot’. At that time salinity was recognised nationally as a major environmental problem and considerable funding was allocated to salinity management. Since then interest in salinity has waned, particularly as declining annual rainfall has, in some areas, led to falling saline watertables. Nevertheless, recent evidence suggests that the impacts of salinity will be of a similar order to that predicted in the past, but it will evolve over a longer time period under the current, drier climate regime.

Nationally, interest in salinity has declined with the cessation of the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality. This is, perhaps, not surprising given the difficulties and risks in managing water at landscape scales. Hydrological data collected and analysed over a minimum of 10 years are essential to characterise individual catchments for most engineering and revegetation interventions. Furthermore, although some actions have immediate, positive effects, most take much longer to develop. Where total catchment management is required, as it is in the case of biodiversity assets on valley floors, then decades are required to achieve natural resource outcomes. At the same time, some continued degradation of assets is inevitable before management interventions halt, and then reverse, change. Hydrological momentum in south-west systems is considerable—the impacts of some 100 years of changed land use are difficult to reverse.

Consequently, dedicated effort over long timeframes is required to first halt degradation, and then recover assets threatened by salinity. In Western Australia, salinity threatens some 850 species of plants and animals with regional or global extinction. Thus salinity and its companion processes, such as waterlogging, are among the most potent threats to biodiversity in the south-west. This is an issue of international interest.

The Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program is the department’s key program tackling salinity. This program aims to protect significant biological communities threatened by salinity. Currently there are six recovery catchments from six biogeographical areas. They represent a wide range of wetland and valley floor biological communities, and make an important contribution to maintaining the character, and recreational and future opportunity values of the south-west. Three of the six natural diversity recovery catchments contain wetlands listed under the Ramsar Convention as Wetlands of International Importance, and collectively they contain 11 threatened species and three threatened ecological communities.

This review details the expenditure and outputs of the Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program from 1996–2006, with additional commentary on events up to and including 2010. While progress has been slower than hoped, work within the Toolibin Lake catchment demonstrates that there are successful management interventions, although maintaining key operational works continues to be challenging. At the same time, a wide range of ancillary benefits are also realised through departmental work to protect biodiversity assets. These include protection of some public roads, better hydrological management of farmland, and contributions to new industry development. Given that most catchments are predominantly farmland, facilitating the development of a more productive, diverse and resilient agriculture that is environmentally sensitive is an important task of recovery catchment work.

Finally, it has become clear that understanding landscape hydrology and ecology is of increasing importance with a drying, variable climate. In this regard knowledge accumulated through work in the diverse recovery catchments will be crucial to support departmental and state management capability. Interactions among food, water, energy, climate variability and biodiversity will increasingly challenge our state and nation throughout the 21st century.

The Department of Environment and Conservation will continue to take the long view of our community needs, and maintain, and where resources allow, expand, the Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program.

Keiran McNamara Director General

2 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review CONTENTS

Foreword 2 Wider benefits and outcomes from recovery work 39 Contents 3 New industry development 39 Improved management of other Overview 4 public assets and private property 40 Headline achievements 4 Management of climate change 40 Recommendations 5 Knowledge gained 41 Setting 5 Values-based planning 41 A unique national endeavour 6 Summary of Natural Diversity Recovery Lessons and challenges 42 Catchment Program 7 Institutional arrangements and catchment Expenditure and outputs 8 management 42 Outcomes 9 Landscape-scale management of salinity 43 Biodiversity 9 Multiple partnerships 43 Other benefits 10 Integrated packages of on-ground actions 44 Value for money review 11 Priority setting 44 Organisational management – looking within 44 Introduction 12 Other technical and operational issues 45 Scope and context 12 The recovery catchment approach – Terms of reference 12 value for money? 46 Is the recovery program consistent with Program objectives 14 statutory functions and policies? 46 Does the recovery program remain a Status of CALM 2001 Review recommendations 17 high priority for conservation, and is investment appropriate? 47 Program implementation 22 Delivery of State community benefits and summary of value for money 49 The regional delivery and central coordination model 22 Recommendations 51 Recovery planning 22 Data repository and quality control 22 References 53 Reporting 23 Selection of additional catchments 23 Glossary of Acronyms 55

Activities, expenditure and outputs 25 Appendix 1: Overall analysis 25 Benefits arising from biodiversity Detailed analysis 27 assets in recovery catchments and associated recovery works 56 Outcomes 28 Biodiversity conservation – Appendix 2: asset protection and recovery 28 1996–2006 Expenditure and outputs – all natural diversity recovery catchments 59 Buntine-Marchagee 28 Drummond 30 Lake Bryde 31 Lake Warden 32 Muir-Unicup 34 Toolibin Lake 35 Threatened ecological communities and threatened species in recovery catchments 37 Other conservation outcomes 38

3 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review OVERVIEW

The primary objective of the Natural Diversity Recovery • Habitat management has been initiated for areas Catchment Program, as defined in 1996, is: visited by at least 27 species of migratory waterbirds protected under one or more of the Japan, China and To develop and implement a coordinated Wetlands Republic of Korea-Australia Migratory Bird and Natural Diversity Recovery Program targeting at Agreements (JAMBA/CAMBA/ROKAMBA) and the least six key catchments over the next 10 years to Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species ensure that critical and regionally significant natural of Wild Animals (CMS). areas, particularly wetlands, are protected in perpetuity (Salinity Action Plan, page 23) . • Revegetation and other works have improved the probability that a wide range of other biological A secondary objective has been recognised as part of the communities threatened by altered hydrology will wider aims of natural diversity recovery catchments. persist. These works, particularly revegetation and This secondary objective was published in the Buntine- improved management of remnant vegetation, have Marchagee Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Plan also improved the outlook for many terrestrial native (DEC 2007) as: animals at landscape scales. Three of the recovery To develop knowledge and technologies to combat catchments 2 contain very important, representative salinity throughout the agricultural region. assemblages of terrestrial biodiversity that would make them priority targets for conservation even This chapter summarises the main body of the report, and without the wetland assemblages; and two others 3 includes the following sections: contain important samples of poorly conserved • Headline achievements – 12 key achievements terrestrial assemblages. from the Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment • Foundation investigations and initial management Program activities for three areas listed as Wetlands of • Recommendations – summarises the report International Importance under the Ramsar recommendations Convention are well advanced. • Setting – outlines the general environment affecting • Sections of public roads and related infrastructure in the salinity initiative of the department 1 three recovery catchments are now significantly better • A unique national endeavour – describes the protected from flooding and other impacts from national context of the program altered hydrology. • Agricultural land management in relation to altered • Summary of the Natural Diversity Recovery hydrology has been improved over six recovery Catchment Program – summarises the main body of catchments totalling 700,000 hectares. About 35 per the report, including: cent of expenditure through the program is for works – expenditure and outputs on private land, including land purchase. – outcomes • Significant water management knowledge has been – cost-effectiveness. gained that may be applied to other localities in the south-west. The natural diversity recovery HEADLINE ACHIEVEMENTS catchments, together with the water resource Over the six natural diversity recovery catchments: recovery catchments, represent the main mechanism • All 11 threatened species and three listed threatened for understanding hydrological processes at ecological communities endangered by altered catchment scales. Further developing this knowledge hydrology have persisted, but continue to be at risk. is vital for effectively managing biodiversity, land, Of these biodiversity assets, one of the listed water and infrastructure resources in the South West 4 threatened ecological communities (at Toolibin Lake) Land Division . would almost certainly have been degraded to the • An important contribution has been made to resource point of de-listing by 2009 without management establishment and testing of new industries (mallee intervention through the Recovery Program. industries and salt harvesting).

1. Throughout this document, the word department used alone always refers to the Department of Environment and Conservation, or one of its predecessors, the Department of Conservation and Land Management. 2. Lake Bryde, Lake Warden, Muir-Unicup. 3. Buntine-Marchagee, Toolibin Lake. 4. The South West Land Division broadly encompasses the area south and west of a line connecting Kalbarri and Esperance.

4 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review • An effective model for catchment-scale management 4. The department seeks to expand the Natural Diversity of public assets has been developed. Recovery Catchment Program as resources become • Past and current works represent a nationally unique available. Priorities for consideration, should funds attempt to recover and conserve biodiversity assets become available, will be biological communities threatened by altered hydrology in the Hutt River and threatened by altered hydrology in southern Lake Gore catchments. agricultural environments. 5. Key technical and operational issues within the • Two awards have been received since 1996—the recovery catchments are addressed. project partners at Toolibin were awarded the Institution of Engineers Australia National Salinity 6. Work within the department to develop an industry based on mallees is maintained until June 2014, at Prize in 2002; and Buntine-Marchagee was highly which point progress should be reviewed. This date is commended through the Australasian project of the consistent with DEC’s formal commitments to the Global Restoration Network in 2009. Future Farm Industries Cooperative Research Centre. • Effective partnerships have been maintained with local landholders, regional natural resource SETTING management (NRM) groups and state agencies, Water is a fundamental resource. Therefore, management particularly the Department of Agriculture and Food of water quality and quantity are prominent issues in (WA), and the Department of Water. These human socio-economics. From about 1990 until 2005 partnerships have been crucial to implementing on- this was reflected in Western Australia (WA) by the wide ground works. acceptance that increasing salinity impacts on natural • Experience over the past 15 years has demonstrated land, water and biodiversity resources was a pre-eminent that, for successful whole of catchment management, environmental issue in the south-west. This situation institutional arrangements will be based on an developed over 120 years of changing land use, organisation with a vested interest in the health of the particularly with vegetation clearing for agriculture since whole catchment, and with a long-term commitment about 1890 5. of resources to management. To date, the natural Some 18 (72 per cent) of the 25 million hectares of land diversity recovery and water resources catchments in the south-west corner of WA have now been provide the best state examples of catchment developed for agriculture. This major landscape change management. overlays one of the most diverse Mediterranean biota in the world, and the only recognised global biodiversity RECOMMENDATIONS ‘hotspot’ in Australia. Although 2.35 million hectares of Concerning the future of the Natural Diversity Recovery the wetter part of the south-west is set aside in state Catchment Program and the role of the Natural Resources forest and conservation reserves, the remainder of the Branch, it is recommended that: seven million hectares of retained native vegetation is scattered and occurs mostly throughout the drier, and 1. The goal of the Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment arguably more biodiverse, area of the state. Program becomes: The destructive impact of agricultural development on To develop and implement works within the South biodiversity has been exacerbated by the associated West Land Division that protect, and where practicable changes in hydrology. The conversion of native, perennial recover, the biodiversity of significant, natural bush to annual crops and pastures has led to a reduction wetlands and associated valley biological communities in overall water use by plants. In the state’s low relief, from the adverse effects of altered hydrology. Primary southern agricultural landscapes this has led to rising values underpinning this goal will be specified for each groundwater levels, mobilisation of soil-stored salt and catchment project. extensive salinisation. In valley floors waterlogging and 2. Consideration is given to re-allocating funds within the inundation have also increased. These processes are department’s salinity initiative to bolster work in the especially damaging to the natural ecosystems of valley natural diversity recovery catchments. floors and along drainage lines. It has been estimated 3. All current recovery catchments have recovery plans to that, as a consequence, 850 native species are the final draft stage by June 2013. threatened with global or regional extinction.

5. Agricultural land was being developed by 1830, with small areas in the inland agricultural zone by 1840. However, substantial clearing did not begin until much later.

5 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review The recent biological survey of the wheatbelt (Keighery et for program managers to remain unfocused. For example, al. 2004) also found that salinised freshwater wetlands do when funding bodies are allocating payments to not provide habitat for many salt-tolerant species, that is, landholders and catchment groups at catchment and the loss of freshwater wetlands to salinity has not even regional scales, it can be socio-politically safer to distribute increased the habitat for many saline-tolerant species. funds on the basis of landholder equity and group There is also evidence that altered hydrology, including capacity-building, rather than by targeting expenditure to secondary salinisation, threatens the invertebrate clearly stated on-ground outcomes where risks and communities of naturally saline lakes. uncertainty are high, and failure is highly visible.

Altered hydrology, including widespread salinisation, not All the above issues have contributed to fading interest in only threatens remaining wetland biodiversity; it continues salinity. The word ‘salinity’ appears only twice in the to degrade farmland, water resources and rural Caring for our Country Business Plan for 2009–10 infrastructure. In 1996 the State Government responded (Commonwealth of Australia, 2008). Nevertheless, the with the Western Australian Salinity Action Plan , and problem has not disappeared. Recent predictions are that funding from this became the core around which the private land affected by salinity in WA will increase from 6 Department of Environment and Conservation’s (DEC’s) 0.82 million hectares to an estimated 2.9–4.4 million salinity initiative was developed. hectares. This will have commensurately high impacts on To arrest and then reverse the degradation processes natural water and biodiversity resources, as well as initiated 120 years ago is an enormous challenge and substantial impacts on rural buildings and other inevitably a long-term task. Unsurprisingly, it has proved infrastructure including roads and railways. In the case of difficult to maintain momentum to manage altered biodiversity, it is estimated that some 450 flowering plants hydrology, particularly salinity. Five key reasons are: and 400 invertebrates are at risk of global or regional extinction as salinity continues to unfold over the next 100 • high costs of intervention, which is in part due to the years or so. lack of economically viable water management technologies Despite waning interest in salinity, water quality and • the large amount of catchment-scale knowledge and quantity are now major issues worldwide and nationally. research required to understand systems and plan Effectively managing the interactions between water effective management action. This issue is requirements, food production and energy demands in the exacerbated by the fact that each catchment has its context of predicted global climate change is of the own unique set of characteristics that must be utmost importance. Maintaining the multiple benefits understood to underpin effective management from biodiversity is challenging under this scenario.

• long timeframes over which focused, strategic action Thus, the problem of salinity has not gone away —it has is required for significant impact. This sits just become one element of a much more complex set of uncomfortably with one to five-year funding regimes linked issues. The technologies and knowledge we • uncertainty about effective management strategies, develop in recovery catchments to manage salinity are a particularly in the context of environmental variability, vital part of the hydrological package that is essential to including the impacts of climate variability address the tightly linked issues of water, food, energy • difficulty of producing positive outcomes in the short and biodiversity. term (less than 10 years), particularly under circumstances where even slowing degradation is a A UNIQUE NATIONAL ENDEAVOUR positive outcome. The Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program is The challenge of managing water is exemplified at a unique in Australia. It is the only long-term operational basin-scale by the difficulty in achieving biodiversity program working to conserve and recover selected, outcomes from the significant resources allocated to the important biodiversity assets threatened by altered Murray-Darling system; and the major resource input hydrology at catchment scales within southern agricultural required to win important, but slow changes in the areas. The program has received ongoing support for Denmark and Collie water resource catchments. In all more than a decade, including from the state government cases the aims are sound but we are dealing with complex and three consecutive, departmental chief executive problems requiring long-term application of significant officers. This consistent support has been crucial to resources. Often it has proved less socio-politically risky management success and contrasts with attempts

6. In 1996 the Department of Conservation and Land Management. In July 2006 this department was combined with the Department of Environment to form the Department of Environment and Conservation.

6 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review to achieve landscape-scale change over much shorter current and future generations to manage biodiversity, timeframes, or with less consistent resources. water and agricultural lands in a changing environment. Sections of rural infrastructure and large areas of Although the program involves risks and uncertainties, the anticipated gains are large and the costs are modest agricultural land will be better protected, and new compared with other natural resource management industries encouraged. Even under the worst case programs. In addition, the short-term gains to broader scenario of minimum gains in terms of natural resource community benefits are significant. asset values, the gains to future generations in knowledge of landscape processes and management technologies Terminating the recovery program would result in valuable alone will justify expenditure. wetland and riparian biodiversity assets becoming increasingly fragmented and degraded, and species and SUMMARY OF NATURAL DIVERSITY community extinctions would be inevitable. It would also RECOVERY CATCHMENT PROGRAM foreclose the opportunity to test what resolute, long-term remedial action can achieve. The above background explains the importance of the department’s salinity initiative and its component In a broader sense, failure to deal effectively with altered programs. Of these programs, the Natural Diversity hydrology would degrade a range of community values Recovery Catchment Program is the largest and most including sense of place, recreational values and landscape important. The remainder of this chapter summarises the aesthetics. Human health and infrastructure may be material in the full review. threatened by the loss of nutrient-stripping and flood protection functions of wetlands and related riparian The Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program was zones, and future generations would lose significant established under the WA Salinity Action Plan (1996) to: opportunities. From a long-term economic perspective, it “ensure that critical and regionally [that is, south-west is far easier and cheaper to prevent or minimise natural agricultural region] significant natural areas, particularly resource problems, rather than fix them after they have wetlands, are protected in perpetuity”. The program has occurred. Ironically, there is scant praise or reward for been supported through a number of government reviews those who prevent problems in contrast with those who of salinity policy. However, although there have been are seen to resolve them. recommendations to expand the program, no additional Conversely, effective implementation of the recovery state recurrent funding has been provided since the program will protect important biodiversity assets original 1996 allocation. The initial allocation has been representing the values described above. Simultaneously, sufficient to establish six natural diversity recovery it will deliver a wealth of knowledge that better positions catchments (Table 1, see also Map 1).

Table 1. Six natural diversity recovery catchments, their size, year established and summary of key biodiversity assets (see Table 3 for details).

Catchment Year Name Area (ha) established Key biodiversity assets Buntine-Marchagee 181,000 2001 Threatened ecological community, threatened species and wide range of wetland and riparian assemblages

Drummond 39,500 2001 Freshwater claypans, priority ecological communities and threatened species

Lake Bryde System 140,000 1999 Threatened ecological community, threatened species, and wide range of wetland and riparian assemblages

Lake Warden System 212,000 1996 Listed as a Ramsar Wetland of International Importance, Priority ecological communities, wetlands, used by migratory species and has a wide range of wetland and riparian assemblages

Muir-Unicup 70,000 1996 Listed as Ramsar Wetland of International Importance. Priority ecological community, threatened species and has a wide range of wetland and riparian assemblages

Toolibin Lake 48,000 1996 Listed as Ramsar Wetland of International Importance. Contains a threatened ecological community (listed at state and Commonwealth levels).

7 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Between November 1996 and June 2006, $16.17 million aimed at understanding how catchment hydrological of recurrent funds originally allocated under the Salinity processes affect the biodiversity assets being managed. Action Plan have been spent through the Natural Diversity Typically, at least 10 years of investigations are required to Recovery Catchment Program. This represents the understand catchment processes and to begin the design majority of both state funds and overall expenditure on and feasibility assessments for capital intensive on-ground the program. However, additional funding, particularly engineering works. Thus, the first phase of on-ground through Commonwealth and private sources, has also activity in catchments is characterised by works that are made an important contribution. Details of the state required for longer-term success, but which may or may recurrent expenditure, outputs and outcomes during this not be the most urgent in the medium term. These period are summarised below with some important include strategic revegetation and improved protection developments during the 2006–09 period also included to and rehabilitation of remnant vegetation in the catchment bring the review up to date. A detailed description and ($4.54 million and 28 per cent of expenditure). Such analysis of work in the catchments is provided in the full works are ultimately important contributions to achieving review. It should be noted that most expenditure is to recovery goals, so represent ‘no regrets’ actions with very counteract the downstream impacts arising from replacing low risk of failure. In many cases these works also perennial native vegetation systems with the annual crops improve the conservation outlook for upland, terrestrial and pastures of agriculture. biodiversity.

Expenditure and outputs 7 As hydrological understanding increases, surface water The seven major categories of expenditure and related management works are generally implemented to reduce outputs are summarised in Table 2. It is important to note waterlogging, groundwater recharge and other threats that 30 years is generally considered the minimum length near and within biodiversity assets targeted for recovery. of time over which data must be collected to characterise Some of these works directly contribute to protecting climate and thus understand hydrology. It is therefore farmland and public roads. To date the only recovery unsurprising that the first five to 10 years of work in each catchment with significant groundwater management catchment has been dominated by investigations and infrastructure is Toolibin Lake. However, similar works may monitoring ($4.44 million, 28 per cent of expenditure) be required at other sites. Expenditure on engineering

Table 2. Summary of recovery catchment expenditure and outputs against core activities 1996–2006. Table 5 and associated text provide further details and analysis.

Expenditure Expenditure Activity Outputs ($ million) (% of total) Expansion of conservation estate through land purchase 1,394 ha purchased 1.14 7%

Revegetation to buffer remnant vegetation, provide new 4,920 ha revegetated habitat and hydrological control 4.8 million seedlings 3.72 23%

Improved protection of remnant vegetation on private property 5,161 ha protected 350 km fencing 0.82 5%

Engineering works on Crown lands to protect public assets 39 sites 2.94 18%

Engineering works on private property to protect public assets Not listed 0.66 4%

Monitoring, research and investigations including impact assessments (other than funds allocated against specific management projects) Not applicable 4.44 28%

Management of committees, recovery planning, communication and volunteer management Not applicable 1.72 10%

Other (e.g. development of recreation/interpretation sites) Not applicable 0.73 5%

Total 16.17 100%

7. In this document, outputs are defined as measures of management activity—such as area revegetated, kilometres of drainage works, etc.—while outcomes are defined as measures of goal achievement, including threat amelioration.

8 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review works to 2006 totals $3.6 million (22 per cent of activity was conducted throughout the 39,500 hectares of expenditure). the Soloman-Yulgan Brook and Mt Anvil Gully catchments. This work was aimed at ‘no regrets’ actions Some 10 per cent of total expenditure ($1.72 million) to improve water retention in the upper catchment and supports recovery planning, communication activities, protection of vegetation, landscape connectivity and management of committees and related activities. hydrological function. Increasing understanding and Overall, it is estimated that some 35 per cent of total support for the program was also a priority. Recovery expenditure is for works directly involving privately owned activity over the latter years has focused on the priority farmland. assets which were identified through the investigations to date. The assets, two freshwater claypans and their Outcomes biological communities, are located within Drummond Management success in recovery catchments needs to be Nature Reserve. It is currently predicted that some reviewed over decades because the outcomes of most additional revegetation work and a small amount of interventions at landscape scales to counteract secondary surface water engineering will ensure that these key asset salinity can rarely be fully assessed in shorter time periods. targets are secure in the short to medium term. In This reflects the difficulty of resolving problems that have summary, it is anticipated that projected recovery works developed over more than 100 years. Exacerbating this will maintain the current, good condition of biological situation is that the path to recovery may be different communities of the freshwater claypans. However, further from and more difficult than the process that developed investigations will be required to assess the management the problem. For example, restoring soil structure after required for the wandoo woodland. salinisation needs more than just recession of the shallow Lake Bryde : Investigations and early modelling indicate saline groundwater. At the minimum, it also requires time that conserving significant parts of this major wetland for the salt to leach from the soil profile. The positive complex depends on extensive surface water management results from management are even more difficult to assess works (including the main constructed waterway) to where, as in the case of salinity in the south-west, control waterlogging and groundwater recharge on the landscape degradation is continuing. Thus, management valley floor. Most of the works on reserved land were that either slows the rate of decline or decreases the final, completed during 2009, and this will greatly improve the full expression of salinity is, in many cases, a highly protection of native vegetation on the valley floor beneficial outcome. together with some of the smaller wetlands. Additional Biodiversity works on private property are then proposed. Further investigations are also needed to monitor the effectiveness The key outcomes realised to date for each recovery of surface water management and to determine the catchment are briefly summarised below. Substantial urgency of direct groundwater management around key outputs have also been achieved for each recovery wetlands. The threatened ecological community, which catchment, and these are detailed in Appendix 2. includes one species of declared rare flora, persists at Buntine-Marchagee : Recent conceptual models of salinity three locations. While vegetation condition has continued development in the wheatbelt have given greater to decline in some areas, the construction of the emphasis to the management of surface water before it waterway should halt decline due to waterlogging of affects biodiversity assets on valley floors. In this context, important areas of valley floor vegetation. In addition, the broadscale surface water management currently being the waterway will ultimately provide the basis for surface implemented at Buntine-Marchagee, which integrates water management in relation to Lake Bryde itself. surface engineering, revegetation and other improved Lake Warden : While the salinity of surface inflows must practices, is an important success. Initial work focused on be controlled, and previous and ongoing revegetation and landholders in an 860-hectare demonstration sub- other works will contribute to this, detailed investigations catchment, with work largely completed in 2006. In the and modelling have shown that the immediate problem is future, this type of work will be expanded and more overfilling of the lake system. In 2009 the initial tightly focused on key biodiversity assets. The quality of engineering works to relieve the problem were completed, the work in this catchment is underlined by it being listed and the planning and impact assessment of more as a “Highly Commended Australasian project” by the substantial works is now well underway. The priority 1 Global Restoration Network. The threatened ecological and priority 3 ecological communities in this system are community remains intact. currently conserved, and provided the next phase of Drummond : The initial phase of revegetation and engineering works is implemented, the recovery goal investigations was completed in 2009. Much of this initial should be achieved.

9 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Muir-Unicup : This is an exceedingly complex hydrological making an important contribution to biodiversity and biological system. Although widespread tree farming conservation in general by increasing the area of effective in the catchment has helped protect conservation values, habitat for many terrestrial species. In this respect, the there are significant management issues related to targeting of revegetation into specific catchments ensures increasing salinity and acidity. Operational works by DEC a much greater probability of current biodiversity have largely eradicated one surface saline scald on the persisting. This is because focusing habitat reconstruction inflow to Yarnup swamp and there is some anecdotal increases the likelihood that population viability thresholds evidence of Baumea recovery. Private re-diversion of flows will be exceeded. It should be emphasised that three of has helped recovery of Baumea swamps in the the recovery catchments—Lake Bryde, Lake Warden and Geordenup/Neeranup Swamp system. Current knowledge Muir-Unicup—contain very important representative will allow further small scale recovery works to be assemblages of terrestrial biodiversity that would make undertaken, but more intensive works require further them priority targets for conservation even without their investigations. These investigations are underway and important wetland assemblages. In addition, Toolibin and appointment of a catchment hydrologist under contract Buntine-Marchagee also contain important samples of has helped this process. The 10 threatened species at risk poorly conserved terrestrial assemblages. from altered hydrology in this catchment are currently Climate change : A much better understanding of conserved. hydrological processes and their management in relation Toolibin Lake : Management has largely achieved two key to biodiversity is developing through the work in recovery physical indicators of lake recovery (depth to groundwater catchments. This is essential to managing the impacts of and quality of surface inflows) and there are areas of climate change in the south-west. In this regard, it is a vegetation recovery including significant areas of seedling distinct advantage that the recovery catchments are regeneration. Mechanical and electrical problems with spread across six different IBRA (Interim Biogeographic groundwater pumps have, however, resulted in some Regionalisation of Australia) sub-regions. groundwater rises and recovery criteria are under review. Despite improvements in physical recovery indicators, and Other benefits areas where vegetation condition has remained stable or Although the Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment improved, vegetation decline continued over substantial Program is aimed at biodiversity conservation, it areas until about 2005. There is evidence that vegetation contributes to a much wider set of outcomes. The most condition has now stabilised, however, whether this is important are summarised below. correct will not be confirmed until the next round of New industry development : During the life of the monitoring is complete. Due to dry conditions and the program, nearly $1 million of program funds has been by-passing of saline flows, there has been little used to subsidise the planting of commercially prospective opportunity to assess other biological indicators which are plants, mostly oil mallees. In the low-medium rainfall based around lake filling events. Twenty-four waterbirds, zone of the south-west, the lack of a plant resource base 11 displaying breeding behaviour, were recorded on is a key barrier to developing a successful biomass industry Toolibin and Dulbining (upstream of Toolibin) following a based on woody perennials. At the same time, if the partial fill event in 2006–07. A further six species of revegetation component of catchment recovery is waterbirds were recorded during the same period commercially driven, the government costs of recovery immediately downstream at Walbyring Lake, and it is likely could be greatly reduced. Thus, the strategic work in that these birds were also present in the project area. In recovery catchments to achieve conservation objectives is, summary, progress to date against recovery indicators is a concomitantly, supporting the development of new major achievement given the intensity of hydrological industries which in turn may contribute to conservation. threats to the lake and its biological communities. In In addition to contributing to the development of 2002 the project partners at Toolibin were awarded the prospective, commercial plant species, the commercial Institution of Engineers Australia National Salinity Prize. feasibility of salt harvesting (it is not feasible under current The threatened ecological community at Toolibin remains circumstances) has been well tested by work in relation to intact, but almost certainly would have disappeared Toolibin. without recovery actions. Improved management of other public assets and private Upland biodiversity assets : Works to conserve and recover property : About 35 per cent of expenditure has directly wetland biodiversity assets threatened by altered contributed to improved management of private property. hydrology also benefit biodiversity higher in the landscape. In addition, surface water management works at Buntine- In particular, revegetation, remnant vegetation protection Marchagee, Lake Bryde and Toolibin are helping to protect and other recovery works in the upper landscape are a number of public roads from flooding and other water

10 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review damage. Current and proposed works at Lake Warden evaluated using financial methods, many public benefits will contribute to flood mitigation for the town of are not assessable in these terms. For example, supply of Esperance. Finally, recovery works at Muir-Unicup have adequate potable water and air of a quality consistent contributed to the management (through revegetation) of with human health are threshold assessments 9, not lands held by the Department of Water, and are making a financial ones. contribution to the improved management of parts of the Given the above, assessing value for money here involves Tone Catchment which is a water resources recovery addressing three questions: catchment. The natural diversity recovery catchments, taken together, are improving water management within a. Is the natural diversity recovery catchment program their 700,000 hectares of catchments. If all recovery consistent with the department’s statutory functions catchment works are completed and maintained, this will and published policies and goals? be a substantial contribution to hydrological management b. If the answer to (a) is yes, does the program remain a across this area. high priority in relation to the relevant departmental Contribution to management of climate change : goals, and if so, is the investment level appropriate? Revegetation and rehabilitation works under the Recovery c. Overall, is the program delivering state community Program represent DEC’s single largest, direct contribution benefits commensurate with the level of investment? 8 to carbon sequestration in the south-west . In addition, After addressing these questions, it is concluded that the given that many impacts of climate change will unfold Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: through the hydrological cycle, the elucidation of hydrological functions across the different types of • is consistent with statutory and policy obligations recovery catchments, all in different IBRA sub-regions, will • tackles two of the major threatening processes in the provide valuable knowledge for the management of South West Land Division (altered hydrology and altered hydrology driven by climate change. These climate change/variability) changes are predicted to include increased climate • is progressing the management of important variability, increased frequency of extreme climatic events, biodiversity assets, and is based on a modest and decreased average annual rainfall. expenditure that is, if anything, less than might be Broader application of knowledge generated : Knowledge expected given the proportional allocation of generated in recovery catchments is informing a spectrum resources in the south-west of land management including agricultural practice (for • delivers a broad range of state community benefits in example, documenting the interaction between addition to those related to statutory obligations. revegetation and groundwater) and management of Therefore, it is concluded that the program represents urban salinity (for example, value of groundwater good value for money for the state community. pumping).

The full complement of benefits generated through the biodiversity assets in recovery catchments and their management is summarised in Appendix 1.

Value for money review As part of this review it is important to assess whether the natural diversity recovery catchment program provides value for money. Here, value for money is defined as government investment generating an acceptable level of overall, state community benefits where the assessment of benefits takes into consideration both negative and positive impacts. For a publicly funded program the judgement of “an acceptable level” is ultimately socio- political and, in addition, requires evaluation against statutory requirements. Also, while some benefits can be

8. In terms of both direct and indirect stimulus for revegetation, DEC’s mallee program, a component of the salinity initiative, represents the greatest contribution to carbon sequestration. 9. That is, life ultimately depends on individuals having enough air and water of a quality that will not cause death or serious illness. While acceptable mortality rates may be debated, these are threshold issues.

11 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review INTRODUCTION

SCOPE AND CONTEXT must be understood and their management integrated to This 10-year review (1996–2006) of progress with the halt salinity degradation. In the south-west, this department’s Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment complexity is exacerbated by the long timeframes—a minimum of several decades—over which on-ground Program 10 updates that undertaken previously (Wallace 2001). This document forms part of a review of all management is generally required for sustainable success. departmental salinity programs; however, the recovery An additional complication is that while salinity catchment section has been completed first to support development and management are well understood in strategic decisions in relation to natural resource general terms, economically viable, environmentally management programs. sensitive tools for successful broadscale management are not yet available. Given the risks involved, there is also In undertaking this review, similar questions to those in reluctance to invest in the development of the appropriate 2001 are addressed, namely: tools, a theme returned to in other sections of the • Are we achieving our salinity initiative goals and departmental review. associated outcomes, and should they be amended? Given the challenges listed above and the current • Which management approaches have worked, which emphasis on issues such as climate change and its have not, and how does this affect our management interaction with food and water production, it is of salinity in the future? unsurprising that the public profile of salinity has declined. • What specific recommendations, based on our At the same time, saline groundwater tables have experience and new knowledge, should be dropped in some areas with a drying climate. Therefore, implemented to improve effectiveness and efficiency? while the timing of this review is consistent with standard planning cycles, it is also opportune to consider the value In broad terms the salinity context for this review remains of salinity programs in the context of natural resource unchanged. The most recent predictions of salinity extent management priorities in general. in the south-west of WA are that the area of agricultural land affected by salinity will increase from 0.82 million TERMS OF REFERENCE hectares to an estimated 2.9–4.4 million hectares, with a total area affected of up to 5.4 million hectares The Department of Conservation and Land Management (McFarlane et al. 2004). Although the predicted extent of (CALM) previously reviewed its salinity initiative funded salinity is now less than earlier forecasts (for example, through the Western Australian State Salinity Action Plan Department of Agriculture et al. 1996a), it still represents (Department of Agriculture et al. 1996b) for the period 11 major, ongoing costs to the state community through January 1997 to 30 June 2000 (Wallace 2001 ). By 30 degradation of infrastructure and natural land, water and June 2006 the salinity initiative had been implemented biodiversity assets. over 10 financial years, although increased funding began from a very small base late in the 1996–97 financial year. In the case of biodiversity, it is estimated that some 450 flowering plants and 400 invertebrates are at risk of This decade provides a convenient period for review, and global or regional extinction as salinity continues to unfold sufficient time has elapsed for a new evaluation to be over the next 100 years or so (Keighery et al. 2002, 2004). opportune. Consequently, the department’s Director The importance of better managing salinity is also General has sought a new review of the salinity initiative. emphasised in the most recent State of the Environment The terms of reference for this review are as for the Report Western Australia (Environmental Protection original review, but amended to take into consideration Authority 2007) where land salinisation is ranked among more recent statements of policy. They are that this the first priorities for action. review will:

Those managing salinity still face the challenges outlined • review DEC’s programs under the Western Australian 12 in 2001. Many ecosystem components and processes State Salinity Action Plan (Department of Agriculture

10. Referred to below as either the recovery program or recovery catchment program. Where another form of recovery program is discussed, full titles are used. For example, water resources recovery program. 11. Referred to as the CALM 2001 Review throughout the following text. 12. Referred to as the Salinity Action Plan throughout the following text.

12 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review et al. 1996b) and its successors, the documents entitled Natural Resource Management in Western Australia: Salinity 13 (State Salinity Council 2000) and Government Response to the Salinity Taskforce Report – Salinity: A New Balance 14 (Government of Western Australia 2002); and • make recommendations for the future of the department’s programs under current government policy.

As with the previous review, this account deals primarily with the recurrent funds originally allocated to the department under the Salinity Action Plan . These funds were specifically for activities to better manage biodiversity assets threatened by salinity. Recurrent expenditure allocated to manage salinity prior to November 1996, and maintained throughout the period of this review, is not assessed except where it relates to either the activities of personnel allocated salinity management tasks, or to the delivery of specific government tasks allocated to the department in policy documents.

The Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program is one of several forming the overall departmental approach to the management of salinity—reviews of the other programs are either currently being completed or proposed.

On 1 July 2006, CALM and the then Department of Environment were amalgamated to form DEC. Given that this amalgamation post-dates the review period, this document deals largely with the work of CALM. However, given that four years have elapsed since the financial review period, new information up to early 2010 has been included to update the review.

13. Referred to as the Salinity Strategy throughout the following text. 14. Referred to as the Response to the Salinity Taskforce Report throughout the following text.

13 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review PROGRAM OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of the Natural Diversity Recovery As noted in the CALM 2001 Review, it is also important Catchment Program is: that natural diversity recovery catchments:

To develop and implement a coordinated Wetlands • demonstrate that it is possible to stabilise hydrological and Natural Diversity Recovery Program targeting at trends within a large catchment that, if left least six key catchments over the next 10 years to unchecked, threaten land, water and biodiversity ensure that critical and regionally significant natural resources areas, particularly wetlands, are protected in • demonstrate to other land managers in Australia perpetuity. (Salinity Action Plan, page 23). methods of protecting their biodiversity, land and This objective remains unchanged through subsequent water resources policy reviews of the program. However, an additional • develop mechanisms which lead to community target that a total of 25 natural diversity recovery ownership of WA’s natural resources, including catchments be established by 2010 was identified in the management problems and their solution. Government Response to the Salinity Taskforce Report in While not formal objectives, these additional outcomes 2002 . In 2007, the 100-year Biodiversity Conservation will be achieved if the program is successful. Strategy for Western Australia: Blueprint to the Bicentenary in 2029 (Draft) identified a target date of Consequently, although the Natural Diversity Recovery 2017 for the establishment of 25 natural diversity recovery Catchment Program focuses on the conservation and catchments. The change in target dates reflects the lack recovery of important biodiversity assets, it contributes to of additional resources available for starting new recovery a much wider range of important public benefits. Since catchments. 2003, there has been a greater emphasis within recovery program planning on identifying the priority values of A secondary objective has been recognised as part of the biodiversity assets. A summary of the community benefits wider aims of natural diversity recovery catchments. This of biodiversity assets and related recovery works is was accepted in principle through the CALM 2001 provided in Appendix 1. Review. This secondary objective was published in the Buntine-Marchagee Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment The six current natural diversity recovery catchments are Plan (DEC 2007) as: described in Table 3 and their location is given in Figure 1.

To develop knowledge and technologies to combat salinity throughout the agricultural region.

This secondary objective acknowledges that:

a. success in conserving and recovering biodiversity assets threatened by altered hydrology depends on developing new knowledge and technologies that ensure the profitable, sustainable and environmentally sound management of other land uses, particularly agriculture b. government investment in protecting public assets where the on-ground outcomes are long term and uncertain is best undertaken in a way that delivers a valuable return to community needs in the short term—in this case through development of applied knowledge, including new technologies. Other benefits are outlined in the Outcomes section below.

14 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Table 3. Six natural diversity recovery catchments, catchment area, date established and biodiversity assets. Unless otherwise stated, all threatened and priority listings are based on state records.

Catchment Date Name area (ha) established Key biodiversity assets Buntine- 181,000 2001 • Threatened ecological community (TEC) ‘Herbaceous plant assemblages Marchagee on Bentonite Lakes’ (Endangered) • Declared rare flora (DRF) Caladenia drakeoides and Frankenia parvula and 10 priority flora • A large variety of wetland types and valley floor vegetation assemblages and associated fauna including primary saline wetlands and braided channels, gypsum wetlands, fresh/brackish wetlands with Eucalyptus camaldulensis woodlands, bentonite wetlands, and freshwater claypans

Drummond 39,500 Oct 2001 Two claypan wetlands supporting: • DRF Eleocharis keigheryi and seven priority flora Myriophyllum echinatum P3; Stylidium longitubum P3; Rhodanthe pyrethrum P3; Trithuria australis P4; Hydrocotyle lemnoides P4; Schoenus natans P4; Persoonia sulcata P4 • High aquatic invertebrate species richness that lies within the top 10% of wetlands surveyed in the Wheatbelt survey • Priority ecological community (PEC) ‘Claypans with mid dense shrublands of Melaleuca lateritia over herbs’ (P1)

Two other important biodiversity assets threatened by hydrological changes are: • PEC ‘Wandoo ( Eucalyptus wandoo ) woodland over dense low sedges of Mesomelaena preissii on clay flats’ (P2) • A second area of wandoo woodland within which occurs DRF Acacia chapmanii subsp. australis

Lake Bryde 140,000 Jul 1999 • TEC ‘Unwooded freshwater wetlands of the southern Wheatbelt of System Western Australia, dominated by Muehlenbeckia horrida subsp. abdita and Tecticornia verrucosa across the lake floor’ (Critically Endangered) • DRF Muehlenbeckia horrida subsp. abdita • Wooded yate swamp in Lake Bryde Reserve dominated by E. occidentalis and M. strobophylla • Wetland assemblages dominated by M. halmaturorum , M. lateriflora , M. atroviridis and Tecticornia sp. • Valley floor vegetation assemblages; the most dominant vegetation type being mixed melaleuca shrublands along the low lying flats dominated by M. brophyi , M. lateriflora subsp. lateriflora and M. atroviridis . The second dominant vegetation assemblage is M. lateriflora subsp. lateriflora in the lowest parts of the landscape. Adjacent mallee woodland over melaleuca shrubland is dominated by E. sporadica , E. suggrandis and E. perangusta

Lake Warden 212,000 Nov 1996 • Listed as a Wetland of International Importance under the Ramsar System Convention • Regularly supports more than 1% of the global population of hooded plover ( Thinornis rubricollis ) (P4) and chestnut teal ( Anas castanea ) • 73 species of waterbirds recorded. These include 42 EPBC 15 Act listed species, 40 are listed as ‘Marine’ species and 25 species are listed as ‘Migratory’ and are included under one or more of the following international migratory bird agreements: CAMBA (23), JAMBA (22), ROKAMBA (19) and CMS (20). One species is listed as ‘Vulnerable’ under the EPBC Act

15. Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

15 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Table 3. (continued) Six natural diversity recovery catchments, catchment area, date established and biodiversity assets. Unless otherwise stated, all threatened and priority listings are based on state records.

Catchment Date Name area (ha) established Key biodiversity assets Lake Warden • Two PECs ‘Stromatolite like microbialite community of a Coastal System Hypersaline Lake (Pink Lake)’ (P1) and ‘Scrub heath on deep sand with (continued) Banksia and Lambertia , and Banksia scrub heath on Esperance Sandplain’ (P3) • Wide variety of wetland assemblages

Muir-Unicup 70,000 Nov 1996 • Listed as a Wetland of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention • 69 species of waterbird recorded. These include 30 EPBC Act listed species, 30 are listed as ‘Marine’ species and 17 are listed as ‘Migratory’ species and are included under one or more of the following international agreements: CAMBA (16), JAMBA (15), ROKAMBA (13) and CMS (14). Presence of the threatened Australasian bittern ( Botaurus poiciloptilus ) (Vulnerable) and the little bittern (Ixobrychus minutus ) (P4) • DRF Caladenia christinea , C. harringtonia and Diuris drummondii , plus about 30 priority flora (numbers under review) associated with wetlands • Presence of two species of threatened fish, the western mud minnow (Galaxiella munda ) (Vulnerable), Balston's pygmy perch ( Nannatherina balstoni ) (Vulnerable) and the black-stripe minnow ( Galaxiella nigrostriata ) (P3) • A rich suite of aquatic invertebrates, including those restricted to freshwater and salt tolerant species. Many species have restricted distributions (local to Muir-Unicup or local to the south-west) including some relictual taxa of Gondwanan origin. A couple of invertebrates are priority listed ( Pseudohydryphantes doegi (P1) and Acercella poorginup (P1) with Branchinella compacta to be submitted for listing; others are being reviewed as well) and a microinvertebrate family has been identified that appears to be endemic to the complex • PEC ‘Relictual peat community’ (P2), which is generally rare and threatened within the West Australian landscape

Toolibin Lake 48,000 Nov 1996 • Listed as a Wetland of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention • TEC ‘Perched wetlands of the Wheatbelt region with extensive stands of living swamp sheoak ( Casuarina obesa ) and paperbark ( Melaleuca strobophylla ) across the lake floor’ (Critically Endangered), which is also listed under the Commonwealth EPBC Act as Endangered • 41 waterbirds recorded using the lake, of which 24 have been observed breeding – the largest number of species for any inland wetland of the south-west • Associated riparian vegetation – for example, York gum woodlands, that are poorly conserved in the south-west agricultural zone

• An invertebrate fauna typical of brackish or mildly saline waters. The species present at any one time vary according to salinity and probably represent a transitional fauna between fresh and saline conditions rather than a stable brackish community

• Melaleuca strobophylla , recorded as having a restricted geographic range

• Flooded gum ( E. rudis ), a species near the eastern edge of its distribution

16 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review STATUS OF CALM 2001 REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations 11 through 15 of the CALM 2001 has been excellent. However, a key thrust of state policy Review relate to the Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment documents and the review was the expansion of the Program. Progress against each of these program up to 25 recovery catchments. Without recommendations is summarised in Table 4. Proposed significant additional, ongoing resources, expansion of the actions and responsibilities for further action, where current program is not practicable. Despite this, some warranted, are included with the recommendations of this progress in this regard has been made in partnership with review. An analysis of the department’s progress against several regional natural resource management groups published government policy recommendations is being through a collaborative approach which has enabled work developed separately. on several potential recovery catchments, particularly in terms of data collection. Where implementing recommendations has not been dependent on significant, additional resources, progress

Figure 1. Location of six natural diversity recovery catchments in relation to IBRA sub-regional boundaries.

17 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review , e ) g e s d s h g 9 e n y h t e e o . i n l d n t v t n 0 h t s ) d w e y i i h t y d e n n t u d t o t s t u 0 i t i i 9 t , n e . b i e a n e i n o n o n t f s e a i b s 2 s r , x 0 u n s e s i d h r w r a ( a n r u o o s r u a d s l e r e t i 0 d o i l l a n t e l u t m l e t d o t l e g c e e l q p a i d s i 2 h e i u l v s e p p a v t d w s v n n c t n t n i n h t e i w u r i r y r i l r a n o t o s e c e e e o i n e d o e e n m d y b h r g i a o e h r s t t h h i l e g r o c e t c i t s t f l r o n s n s o o l s m o i c i h n i s a b i p n l b o n d r C a l s n e c u i i s u l e i s t e k g b l a g b g e t k m c i e t J i p n u b R r m n s s t d a u r h n w h t t l n n a t e o s l i a o d t o t e a i o o m o i y o m r i t t p i o n n F A n c e u e s a n a c t t n r t h d t e i s t h e e n e w r a a l e c i s t o t a w a i e w s r s m a l t e u t h m s . . e t h e s i o g l p R t a i s r h r d e r e t l r o s d T e e e d c y i u s i m r o s b o m r n o l m n m h o e o e m n m i g h e s v i t n d e h , i n a a . p u i p e C a o c p b a e a s h t t h a r n n r t w i o r n s h d i r t n I d a t f T s n o e t t n h e n m t g m m n d , m n a m d n g a i t i e r o v i c e l a e t t n e f o o e r e s e r a d e o i . c r m t r o t s o a m s r u r m f n r o d i r p p v p m e r i m d c e m P i y o h e p u g a o o o o t P s d a n u t t a t a e f p t e n t e c e t h c e y i c g i p b c i e y s t e t e F . t a o e a p t g y e n y g o r e s i n r u u o y , m t s r d r n n i o i o h a a r i t t w a m s e o l e m R r d t m n o a t t g e i a e s i r ( s v d n s v e t d n n a s n i a t l r a p n h i v y i d a i n m o s a l s u a t y u o r i o e a a a m r n v a l t g h o a s t . n r e l o n i c s g r o v o g n t r t s e s s u c e y a i d m a u p c r t m m s b r a e r e t a n e r o n c e e d e f l b i F d n g e e r r e s d s R s n s i a f t a c p e s . o R n s h g o i e d u a l c n P e g r k s l s y v n n e e t d d i o a o o d c t u n r n h e p t n a i a r a y r i u - g e u s e n h f e o t n h d l a l t t . t o t o h r m h f i n n r t u n r l t p i p ) e o r o n i t t l u o o c g t n l c n s g h e e a a e e w n v f t r a w e h t c a i r n d c t r e g a f w r n c o e n t u t h g s h e i e p i f r t e n e e w e m n a t n e d t n o o d e t a o e i o n i l d d m h v a e r s o m , s d a r h r e i C t t a e t w r n n e k d e c e d y n n d a e k e n d r v e l , h g a l s e a h v m n s r D n g i n b i n t h u u i r h e g R o n n i h t o e n y h v p i r e f l o n o n a t h r c m s r a t e g o e t i a t u o s o r n a s i g r d o n e e f t a e f p c o m s s i p d e w h r m r n s s d a e r i n s a o i e e v t e t r r n o l s k i e r w p h g i u a e i a t e u e v j m g r t u n e e k o m g o u o i t t w w s d y c s s s e o i u e h p o r s s c c t o o a o c o c t a e a o e r o a r s a e a r e r s l s x s r n n a o e r o o u t e n W w N f a T a a C t N e a P s s W d f C r p p a u B i d b e m p R ( P a s r e b a t d f r m n o , o o e o t t a e u e y t d r p y g r i s n h n e t t d d g t o . p t i v e n m l l e k i s n e e n v n u o . G . i a a a a g e o h r d d s t r o o m t i i d i u c t n g r m p e c n n . g e v v t m o o e , a e a k u e i Q e o a s n t o g o o e r s r r l r h t a r r d o e r a d o g k g e r a k m L i P d n p p n c C e s n n t r a t w o i p h e e t , e e a u l s r a e r t a n o n l e s n n h a . l g e p P 6 e a d t m e e n u d a m m w n v d n 0 i m n W e e h r y n m e m m o h y i r n – k a c e i m d l e d W b b a v l n r t t g d i c e e s 1 e e o n , , d a a m a v o t g e e e u ) n e e o i c c 0 s a r r l c n t r v v c e i o o a t o 3 b R e 0 m e , o r r a a a r v e c n u g ) y n 0 r 2 y o d P r g e h r e n e h h n i o e t 6 0 – g c t t i v a s s e s n e R 6 e y s s t 0 w e 2 n a o v n r e m n d o i ( 0 r i h d d d r 0 y o w l o h p e o t h o d n n t r 0 e D t s l n n 2 i e a E v c c c i i e ( s u n 2 n s e l a t C t n S u u e o i o f v r i h d r a p . f f r a a b o r l c t l a r e e e m D e u t u c t e t t a k a e a p v t o R n o k y h , n i n o i c b f n n n g R r i y t a s t s r r m b u y r o o D e e e e s o e n o t g o J y r r n r e g n i n m l R f k t r r s d s i l e s a i v w r n e a n o l 0 e e a u u i h h s i v f t k r n o n M l r o t t P r i c c c r 3 e s k a n i i k o c u r r a e o R e e e y r a i a t d w h o e t v n a r r S u v i t s t w N r n o p a i W e u T a o l l o s a o l g t t l i S s o N D c s a a i c i w t g p e d m . M s d a n n t s r e l c . s n n n d n a L u s n e e e r a n n y i a i t a s a r r o o a n A t o u a d r c h f A o i i , e n h s r i s i s r m m a t e t a t l l o i n u i i e r u C s e p g e e e g f n n n t l a l x , p a i i d d a d e ) v e ) g g a a t o e n p m 1 m p r ) r i d d d e n 3 v a a a / m e o s h N e a 0 l P i g a a M n i a i h m l 0 l P n n c w t t 0 c d A R m u a p t o a e e e e 0 a a o a o o A o r e r 2 x x n a o o h h h N N 2 N t t t N ( ( s E W N e H N b p c m ( d s m a P e h t l l l n i a d i . o c e i t s w m s e d y t g l e t n i e c d d n t e e o r c n o l e s n a e i b b a f e y n t o s a f s i i s m m a s a s d d e m s B t l l h t a d e t s r t m e u u s e n c e n n o m o g r o o e e e o e h o c p a a a v i h h c t n e t e m s s n e m t r , m r i t a i h e a t n k h o m s d g g o t s m m a c i m s n o t n n a u n a a r l a r c . r r e n a e o a e w s o e r l g g s c a o i r m i o e m s p t h i o o o f t a h i t d r r m e r h a m t y m P P n . i l i r w t h g e d o i s w t a g , g t , v y y c i o c e t e i s i t r r s r e t s r i e t a f d n t i s a e e r i P o u h f p s t n e v v n n h t i s i d o a e a t o n m o o m e c a e r h g e c p c n s e v c t e n n g e r e e n d r e a o t i i o h o g a o i a t R i R e e g r t r o t t i n m r s y , e s i n p y y t d v a a i s a s e e o i v b t t t t v i i s n e d d R d r e n r n t s s r n i i n e I l n s e r u r n e a e i l g h n e . v a a s e e e r e c l h c o s v v r o e t n m t w v r i i n a m i r c i m u e e o y o t p l a D e D d r c c c o r b f o w o p l l m h e t e C t t g t y n o a a f p o d t m g r r o e f a i t i e c d d e o r t n s e u u l a h w i h e e e P r n t t u t h e t h e n d e d e a a R n i b v i t y g i s t r v a v n n e i a r N N e u e a e 1 t t e e a a v t d d t o e u d 0 e e r n n R p p l r r a o o i n e 0 h x h x u o o a h h h T e c b c N t u T e t S t b v 2 . 4 . e . c l e o 1 2 b 1 1 R n a T

18 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review f ) g o 9 n i t 0 r e 0 a b 2 p s i r e r m e e d n r d h n o u t f n J a r l u l u y e i o . f t s v t i i t w l w t o i s n e c s i i N e b n e i v j . h . o s e m t s i s b r s t n n o s m e c e o a a l c l o a h a . p c o p t d s r e n m e v y o e p n r r o r t i i r o i o e u r t f b w n v d e q a a e e f o a i r n e v c e v r i 2 e a r e e e g 1 s r d r b i s s i s s n n n o n o n a t t o n o o a i i o l i n i e t t o i s t t p r c a c c e a a d a y d a u d r o e s r n n t t r n e i d e e a t v e e n r e h i n o b m t s o m r c o s o p m m e c u e m r r f u p o s k o o i c r n o e c c a e r h o h t e n n T i r F t R ( P o i t a d n n i e l e r C , , h a s n e h E t i m s , d i l i t n t n t t e e h D a a s a y o l i m t t o n n s t w i . ) h r r t t p o c e e o t n p w e P s e e n o e l x c a e e a v t t k t j h e A m m m e e e i b r e N t h t a o r o s e c e h o a r N n o r c o l o r d ( d w c a i g h t e d e – o e p t t f l n p p t i n w n a a i r P r n n y t e a r a v a t A n h s h e a u i c n w a d i o y b e l a l i l . a s t t t g t ) e n w i . a a m i e y s d y n s a f T u y e s r r r a t m v , e u g e r r g e n o o e u H n , t e e r w g n m n e r . n t Q v d o i s i i v e l n e R m i y a v N a i t h i n i e a o n t ( r u t u t n c u s d n t u y m b c o c d a a e c c t d i y i t c e l t a i u t l n b a e i h t l d s s g e i r i n t n o f r b i a r i c o r a n a e s r m u a t p e g i t d 6 t r d o c r l s o s s e n u i e a r a f W i T e r 0 n T l e u r m a m e d s e c s e t a e m l 0 o e p s v u S t h n t n l d t e a a t n e c p y o 2 c p a g n n a a t a u c n b g i i r v e n t s f a l s n t e M a a o n e i i e a e o w h m a e t o L t e t r n b r n v t c i o b r i y n s l i r e e e n n o i p t C t A o o g m t . i y o d u s e c s c e g a d c E o n r t s b a l i n o C J r n m a n a k i a t e H i i r s v e o D e f r p l r h n u r w p d h n r v l c l 1 0 u f a h m o l a e c f d e e e i o e a c r t u o 0 3 l n r l S y r s o r e e s o e f c w e t r o 0 e l a a s w o e t m i n r r u l f f i i n e o v w 2 t e e n t r h a h l n d t o o a l . t t i M e t a o f e a c h a l o c a a - n f l l e o i s n w t n n t l d n m l a r d t N e n e h o l p h y i n a e e a o a s e t i t t s i t t n n o e i s c t a d i d x i i e t i n e l m s e m m s e s t t m g e d c e d n i h e y P m h s r e u a v e e i s i l n t l p n r t s n a n i m d x i e t e i a g g d a p m e u s o n a r r u d v e d l d l e h i i a a e v e m v f e l h e B n e o g a s e i t m u i r d n n p c o o l m o d t s e s v m l d b a t h o i m e e i r a a c c c o o c t e e i n e r h x o n a u a h a h h e e n a T r b s i d e t c f m b s m W t t N S A u h a r P d n r e t d . r g s s e ] 1 n i r d e m h n e g b e s i a 1 t t e t w v e i s i d n v e a . b - m n i i d s o o m d t e n l l o , y l h g e w e e o h l e n n u n t y s d t n n o e i l i l p s c n s i c i b b e t m b a u o l n e t s m r t b i a e h e u u o r n r n p l t r n a i t t a u w y d d o e u e o m l e l l e x 5 a l e v e c e t p d n y f t l t s v e e h d h e r e s r u u r a 1 i d u o e e s t o a s o s a l i e g h n s e e v e o o d r n q d m t e s r h s a t a a t n v a u m e d s h h t e l e y ( e r c b n a n t t n n s o s i o n d r t s p n w n a i s s i o e i t o r h o c a e m d r e s y t n n n u s t s s , n x c t c t e e l h e r a u h i ) a m m s o e o , r m m m t e v i t n c a y e T a d n l y a c a i e a e d l p C o o a o e t r v r r p i g e g n . n o s i n i h n h e c i i i c o n n . a y g g o s c t e a G i l e a a t d m l e t l g r m r t h w n t s i o o r e a e e o h o s 4 r a r e r s b a g u T h m i k o v n t i t s v r c 3 d i b t i v r y 1 P P o n u n o . l l i t b t e l a e i e $ m n g s a s o p 4 d r p a a S a e d y y d d h d n d e l e e o l e o s r r i e t c 1 e v g l r r m y i t m n c y a t W v u e e a d i i t o o a r t m l l e y o a t w e a i n n t v v . r t r y o c n k r t a o s l a k c c n n R n o o s o o m d p r u f t r e r h a i e i 2 i i i i d s o e t l f t c c o s n e t t r e v o l u j a u f e f i 1 s . l e c a a n r t e e h t c a d t o p o l r b e o e e m d a I , n e e i i c S n m a o o R R e c t d s n o i r t u o t f a r d t [ 1 . u r n t l e e m a u n c m a e y y o s w h n a a i r n 1 : t q e i p P u t r t y t t e b o d e p i e r h t l i e i n s e d e r i t s t i x p s y g e n s o s f n g a r t e C o s i n u v t m r d r n l s e e e e n i s m l b a t x i h A e r n e b o t , e e s e o e g i t i l e o a e u m d n c f r r l v l v . i a d m R u t e i g i i i h n o t r h o o n g t s e o i e c m p t d d n h e t s h t n t r ’ a c c D D v i a v h w t o ) c e e a t i l i h A S y s e o a t s m d l l l m c p g t s d i t d d m n s d t m r t a R a a i y y , e e d n n t o o n u a l e e u n n l r l r r t t o p i n s c l n e e o c i i n , r o n r t r e e a b r o e u e c u t u e f n y m r e n n o g e y e t t a u t v a i l e i i m h v n n r l l e m m v i t t i u o m a a R e i d v e b a n i i n i g m m e r t i v a a i t t t g y h m r e e c d r u N N m v m u 3 a i e h p S S a 1 c t n l n e i g o d r t i o c o o o w p o 1 n m e 0 e d e c n p p s t h u o e n u e e r a r f c c c e o e f 0 h x n x c f h m c o a u o t h e u o o h h h e e e ( T e a c e m c a s t t e T f t r f r a s t R o t H s t r 2 . 4 . e . c l e o 3 4 b 1 1 R n a T

19 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review . a h a t d s i s e e i t u ) r y . b l s w i r s 9 b n p i e : u s e o f n 0 s o , e t e t q g i s d s a s 0 t c g s l a e e ( w n e l s r p i r 2 a r e n p t h o i i t u s . u u l g c t f r ) r n l a i r e e y p o o n o a a e r o h e r s . n r g w n o a f i d e e h c e d g e d p o p m u h s y v e , l s v l R e - n J s c h l o e p r t a r g e i d l i u o c M r c s y b o e a n t o . a n l . u i w R 6 t e s o c y t r w a t i a i r n e t q r t n c 1 o l i w r f N c u v g i s t e n f o t n e e o h l r e i n t g n y n e t n b n o a a i i i a p i g r n v l c d n s r o o s o h i t s N i e i n e e m a u o p i t a ( o t r i t r b f i e v n t n o t o t w s c i a i y t m t e r c e i s b o a e o r e w i s e t g d n n i o c t i h l a l w e h l . h p m a t e v c e n o e i e p t g d t v r s s e r e h s e n e a e o o r d v o m f w m e f c l n s h o t d s c i n t r e t m o . n o i t w o i o t l y n a e e a r r t p n i b e o t r u n t a d i m i c o 6 r e p g i c d a e o a i d s e b v l f n r o r n y e o n h r v y e v l n i e e n e e e c , m i r 2 e a h e p r r g r n t b v e a e o k e e s g 1 v i d m o e u a v i e s s l s , i g v R t e g l t r s l i e p i o s a d d s n n n a n o b m n t r t t o i a a d o n o c o n o s d o w f l a s i - h e n c i i i i e o y o r i e t e t t n e n o e B e t t t b t r s t r i v e r i r i c v a c e r c r l a m a e a r , a d f i a l e m . n d e e a l o l r n e g o e ) t m i o o i e s i d r o n p h l c a p p a t i r r g h n g d e - e c t w u m e n p c o e i a s n e p n s s n e h r a o i r s o d a u s n i e b n u m t i B r s t a y c p u r c v e e a c o a r s s w t u i R u r o r r e m h i r p m u o h o e n o f g t g B P m S i R G l f G a s N a C u p o k c o r n o r a e ) ) r ) ) o ) t P n F a R b c d e ( P o i t a d n s , s i e i l f r e o n a t h e o s v i I m t o l c v i . : a t s t i , f l d s A m . g e n h a w n y t e o C e o d . o n i h r h o e w w o t i s . v s E y d e s c s y c t r l t t e e s n t o l 5 e s s i a e l p m n e D e t v d o n r o l e p r n o b e t v t d T y d o v o e t n n o e e r f t n o l e t . i - h u e u e e ( i y f – c e c n t a t r a o e a e o s l k e s i i o i e m n c c e m r n s f s r v p t . t s b i e i m , s n o i r ) e s f l u a i y f a w h a e e a , g a a r g i l o n l o p t r c d a t o A c h p i e r f d n . s e d u i D s a n u o t t o i e a s o 6 s i a o s a c o r v r n c q r l f v l i a M s i g g t t W C i f d 1 i i d n f , e e g p e e c g e e F a o e i h R E n s f n n o e d r n v t y 6 v R n d p h r i e s n t A i y o N m D h o w i t a d d e e e i 0 a r r u a d o a e c y r n l s t o D f i a e k m ) t d b t t e 0 m o n t ( t I e a o e t i a v p h t o i o n v h e t n l e 2 o i n o ) a e l n p t n n d d W o c , I b o i o m c . e 6 o l o e n i n l t d g p A o t n n s n o c d d . t m e v k i d 0 u i I o a a s n g n w a r s n o s e a m e a i o D e R n m g i i i t 0 o c S W r e g i ( t n v o v s d h ( t s . m e i e c e o o 2 e r e s r n y r r r y c g i o r s a n l n i c s l m s w b e p N r t r e i l d r i d s M t o g o e n a a e e b s i e v f a h d p t a t e t L p n e o n o m c n i d , . ) n m v c i n i c a t l d d a g n l u a m n e i s o o i o A n s e m 4 o e u o d a f x n a u u e e i F c n c r y , n y e o d f C J c m W c 0 r v h a n u u o e e n d t o s h h e o e o m f r d p 0 e i r f o u m t n a R h t r e s 1 0 e a o t e p m r l v f h h n u t 2 t a t o s t a n 0 3 r t a t t h n c a , p o a h a d o o p e n s s o a e t t t s 0 o t c d d t r n c t w s e r e t i i i e t h f – n a a n m n n e r t e 2 t e n r n y i i t a s e G r i c e l e r g s i r c e e c p s m e i l n e d e a W h k u e r r e s n g u a y n n o e y i h e t i d e l n g t i i e m m a r m a l h m r c o t a . o w t . t t h t g e a a a a t n l h p o f s i a o m w t e r r a u i r r s d t t t t t s e r s s m r s o d t v s c e a a a h e e i k t p e a n r n i n n n i s e f n g b s t o o i r i e i c o s i v t r v p p a d v h e c e r d t e c e o e o a r m e a p c o a t o o o e g e d s e r r y r n e e e e t a e y e e r e r p n e r g C h r c m p N S s u W b D m w A D r m n A b p g r t a o n c o o i e e r o e t o e ) ) r ) ) l ) h h P a N c t n t d a b c d e P d n e d w s n s e m o l t e n l l r a s e n r i l i h i b e m t h o , a a l o h i c w t t s n o i t a e l g s p d y T t l f l c n t t o c i a o d h e i n e f n i i b n . i t e i u r t a h o t a n s b o r g e w t m g o t h a g d c a n r d i d n o t t i a y m s l i e s h d l n n e m i t o e o l e n y s a i n g s e h e h h n t f o u h e y h r i k o i a g t t s a g n t e a g c i t h n o T e c h m i i g i i b e e t e s t m t c ) v g a m e r . p n v w c t h w i a s s n y c a i t a ) t l t e d o l t C e l c r o o n s n e e a l a p 4 r e e c h i r e h h a r a n e R e g r k t h t e s y s r t e a 0 b h g p t e e t b r m i o r a n v t a o s f u n i m c g 0 r t W t y e i y h e e t ( r b m b e e o a l d s f u 2 r p n v n - l r d g n d f e e i s h c , u i e e o s s n s S e s m y u l n n o s c o , b h I e i c v o s i c r r e i t o t n h a h o a k m t i o i u r h r e o d e a a G r a d c t o s c r t s h e h r l m c e i w g t e l c u g s w s o s c e t g o l i i r e r d u o l h a a d p n t x c r y t e n a i o c c w b o n e o d n e r r r m r e e a t f e s s o o t n m e a e e h o i i e a o c y p h s u i c t f h F i t s o m r i n s h t v t i g ( i t n s h h f e g o r f o t i i o t m e s e t o c o s o , l c t n i i i n t o i s l s n c i o - v c e o s i i c e r t r c C n h s d t o s e e r s d t s o w i e e a p a s h a o e o g v o d e r r t s p c o w t i n a p r s e o r p e t a c s t c u d a e m e e l t i c u i u y t d s c e m i e r l r a A i p f o t n s n l a o n e o v v t o r n r r n b o i e t l a o r n i e f a o h n o e c f d h W h e o o u e n t R n u t e d t g g t o n t f f i R r r n n i e s c : m p i e o a i u e . r i n o r m i e a h d m y d s s r i n w f d g t i o t n a e ) e t t f c h m e d d d , e e e n u e i a n l m y t t s a h u t d i a t e d l e e e s s a w e n n i d v m l n r l t t p e i i t D o i n v v v b r a t e e u v l l g / o r n u e i u o c r r n h m n e v m e o o o s e e a , q t u f m l c i e d a d p i e a r r r e i e s i e e s t e d d x n w p s r t o n m e i i o m n l p p p p , n e o R i a d t n s a a d v m m o g y t s e u u e e e t r o d w y l n o a e n m m m n s e h p i 1 a l i s g g m c i g h i m i d W A n e u e b u t a v e c i l 0 e p p r t o s e c v o o c t m e ) ) 0 h s r ) ) c a ) u e i h e n m ( T r s t a c w A P d t s i i a b c d e 2 . 4 . e . c l e o 5 6 b 1 1 R n a T

20 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review e e . e b h d r t l ) e o l t u i t s t 9 h n a s u s w 0 e i t l F r e 0 n h r e b h r 2 e e g u a t c h c t u n a m e t s . o e e e o e n r d g h g h C u t t e p n e l a J i n h p b a v n i e l c y a t l o a , a . r l o t y t i e t i l a v r e l m w n i e s v p w i n o e i i s i t k a t b n s e m s i v c s i a o k s t e r R o m a i n r f c n c t n r i s e e g e l c i j e e o v o t b n i t a i y t o l h p t a l r t c l d a s s a i n d p r n u , e n s l e o e i e r w t e d i c p p s g t n e s n n o d i a o a s l a e n e - e r , n o o e s v o s c m i v i e a p s C t d e e g s o d o c s s i r o r g d s a / e s n c m p h n i r . a t d r a n s o a e t r g i e t d e r t e s o t t r g r n n n n c i u c m n a i a e a o n d a e r i t t n o n s g n p t a r n n I o m o d t i n e e e n i p e s d e l i r r n t i b i m r r s e s c p m i r t a s u u o e m x s o a e i m C l m c C E d F i u p k n o a ) ) r ) t n f h g ( P o i t a d , r n d t e a e i e s v e l , v – e e v a a e l o m r r d v h s y t w o a i e s m t n s c v s h m s n n a t o o u i n n e i i a i c t s u a t e r m w A i . t s e s a o g a g o r n d e t n r I e g S l a T i r o c - e r g – n a l , a u r i t n o s s p o a t r g e n r i o m r t p n i w e p e d p t r u n e u s o m i i e i a n R n c r o s r v d i f a r m s t o , r e e i i G h s o , g o t e e s t R h s i l c n v a t d t . d i l c e y o t s f n M a t n n e i t e v i r a e o a a R e o i i m e d - s r n l t h i y i e g 6 N s F p l m t b t i d i e n o e l 0 D a h I l l r t h n W a n 0 g S c t i s o b g n a l t n n r 2 n a n n i a o W a a t e o o r t r e M n i i s h c e , r n b t u L p c o g r g e n o m s y a s e e A m e r e n p t h n u r u a i t m l e e h J C c e e s t a n v t a m d h r s i m s v t o a 0 1 u n o n i i e E a s c a 3 0 q y a s C i , l d w e s c e . 0 e t p g g r t s n l e s a i n d 2 a n e n n a p h c n i i e , a n i t r o h d r e s i f o n g o . c i i m e i e e t i d h m s a a t e c v a v a a c t e - e g a a c t e x r e g s a s r o o n e a i r r r n n s e s a r p u h g i i w e s g s p p k o c e o e r a o t r o s r n r n c p n u e o n i m n n C i s E P m l I e H s I E f a g o o i t ) ) r ) a f g h P d n s y e i r h e m e e t v t . s b s h m o s a t n k n c y o e s s n n o m n c e a i i e d i e l r a a a t e b a r u r e m h a y l g e r y t o g s s c t a i r r e n a h i o i n v t n e e n b r h r t o v t e , d n a t e i p i n r o t l o g d t a g e t e a r c r c s a d a n v - s a g i a e d o e n d r e i r z t e e g r e r e r e g a a e v t n p e s l e d n g h s g i e n e i e n o h r i a o t s v y h h a t e m t e t s t e t o o e i v , s o i v h p t i n s y c t n s e e h i l t I a l o r e t e v n i r c h s . a h g g a b r e e t p s a g l w n o f i e h p i c r f e f e f t v d h x t v n e p o p o o e e o e a e n o a g l f c y i n d s t n h ) c m r t o n e o t t n t i i s n o r e a e o m i r c t l e t n r e d s v i t l i n e e w a o e j n a h m u v o o t t m e e n i i d o i a s i u l p t l e l r w h s v m l n e n n , t t a a i l p s , e o e p r e s l d o v u u c R g s h c o e o e e f t m t e m n o v t n c i b h i i r i i n ) n t e d a i v n l u m n l e d o i d i d e l o e r t d t o r n f s d v a e e r o s m l c c t n a v e p o c e y g u l a l h e e r e n o , j r e i h n c k o n e l i s d y p R t k l i o i a o c g v e y r e i s t n a a i r a s m t n 1 m a p b ( i c r m h t v i t i n 0 o ) ) 0 c ) ( f g h 2 . 4 . e . c l e o b R n a T

21 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION

This section describes the management techniques applied RECOVERY PLANNING in natural diversity recovery catchments. Although all Along with their operational role, personnel from the catchments are managed using a standard approach, Regional Services Division are responsible for management catchments vary considerably in terms of their social and plan preparation. This includes local consultation, which biophysical characteristics. Thus, the standard approach is is generally managed through a recovery team or steering adapted to meet local circumstances. For example, while committee comprised of key stakeholders including the main biodiversity assets in most recovery catchments representatives of local land managers, government are within nature reserves, many of those in the Buntine- agency representatives, and a range of other groups Marchagee natural diversity recovery catchment are on depending on the particular catchment. private land, and this has implications for management including approval of plans and associated works. Although recovery plans are developed with significant input from DEC regional personnel, staff from the Natural In all recovery catchments, biodiversity assets are Resources Branch manage plan development, including threatened by changes in hydrological processes arising the writing component and technical input, particularly in from the replacement of perennial native vegetation with relation to hydrological expertise. While all recovery agricultural activities based on annual plants. A significant catchments have had at least an interim plan, only one percentage of the recovery works must therefore be formal plan (DEC 2007, Buntine-Marchagee) has been undertaken on private property. Under these published in the last decade in addition to the formal plan circumstances, action only proceeds where there is strong for Toolibin Lake, which existed prior to the beginning of mutual interest among the parties, or adequate incentives the program. are available to encourage landholders to participate. In one recent study, the importance of incentives from the A departmental Technical Advisory Group also provides perspective of private landholders is clearly acknowledged advice and input during the development of formal by the landholders themselves (Munro and Moore 2007). recovery plans. Ultimately, the final draft recovery plan is sent to DEC’s Corporate Executive for approval, and to the THE REGIONAL DELIVERY AND CENTRAL Conservation Commission of Western Australia when key COORDINATION MODEL areas are vested in the Commission. Operational management of natural diversity recovery DATA REPOSITORY AND QUALITY CONTROL catchments is undertaken by the Regional Services Division of the department. In April 2003, the Natural Resources The program involves regional officers collaborating with Branch was established within the Nature Conservation personnel from the Natural Resources Branch in the Division, and this group is now responsible for overall collection, collation and analysis of large amounts of data. coordination of the salinity initiative. Indicative annual Each of the individual recovery catchments has valuable budgets for each recovery catchment are developed and irreplaceable hydrological, geochemical, geological, annually by the branch in consultation with personnel geophysical and other significant datasets that, until from Regional Services Division, and these are endorsed, recently, were largely managed inconsistently across the or adjusted and endorsed, by the Director of Nature catchments. In July 2008 the department began Conservation. In the language of purchaser-provider developing a Hydstra database, the industry standard, to management models, the Director of Nature Conservation store and analyse hydrological information. Once all is the output purchaser, and the Director of Regional hydrological data are transferred to this system, the level Services is the service provider. of data protection, quality assurance, and capacity for corporate-wide analysis will be substantially improved. Use of Hydstra will also enable departmental data to be directly incorporated with the commonwealth and state datasets managed by the Bureau of Meteorology and the Department of Water respectively. Currently other biophysical data are stored and managed through regional and district offices, and there is considerable scope to improve data management. Science Division personnel also manage important datasets.

22 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review REPORTING Walshe et al. (2004) note in the abstract of their paper Systems for planning, budgeting and reporting are that the results of their analysis “identified a subset of standard across all catchments and have been designed to core areas for conservation investment that efficiently ensure that management activities are closely linked to the represented [biological] assemblage diversity. management of a specific threatening process. Outputs However, ... field reconnaissance and verification will be and expenditure are, in turn, closely linked to necessary to account for localised variation in species management activities (see Appendix 2 for a detailed richness and for vagaries in the distribution of remnant description). This ensures that the efforts to address vegetation patches, wetlands and salinity risk.” specific threatening processes are fully documented, an To improve the definition of sites for potential recovery important contribution to effective planning and project catchments, this information was combined with expert evaluation. The standard system also allows information and other analysis from the Salinity Investment Framework to be collated and analysed across all recovery Phase 1 (Department of Environment 2003). This has catchments. provided an important guide to the location of additional recovery catchments (see Figure 2). In December 2006, SELECTION OF ADDITIONAL CATCHMENTS after undertaking some of the field reconnaissance Only the Drummond and Buntine-Marchagee natural proposed by Walshe et al. (2004), the next three natural diversity recovery catchments have been added since June diversity recovery catchments were identified and 2000. Selection of these used the criteria outlined in the recommended for consideration within the department CALM 2001 Review, augmented by expert knowledge (Hutt, Lake Gore, Lort), and a further five areas were developed during the biological survey of the south-west suggested for additional field work (Campion, Mollerin, agricultural zone (Keighery et al. 2004). Yarra Yarra, Coyrecup, Young-Stokes). With respect to the last group, it is particularly important to assess However, a major new output from the biological survey whether key biological communities threatened by salinity of the agriculture zone (Keighery et al. 2004) was the in the wheatbelt are adequately conserved in the identification of areas that should be investigated as rangelands to the east. A desktop analysis (Woodgis sources for potential natural diversity recovery catchments Environmental Assessment and Management 2009) (Walshe et al. 2004). This work highlights areas that are suggests that many of the target wheatbelt communities most likely to contain biological assemblages that best are well represented in the rangelands, and thus some represent the biodiversity of the south-west agricultural assemblages might not need to be conserved within the zone threatened by salinity (see Figure 2). agricultural zone. In any case, at this stage, funding is not sufficient to initiate any further recovery catchments. Consequently, further work on selecting new areas has ceased.

23 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review . ) 4 0 0 2 ( . l a t e e h s l a W f o k r o w e h t d n a ) 3 0 0 2 W o D ( k r o w e m a r F t n e m t s e v n I y t i n i l a S e h t r e d n u d e t c e l e s s a e r a , s t n e m h c t a c y r e v o c e r g n i t s i x E . 2 e r u g i F

24 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review ACTIVITIES, EXPENDITURE AND OUTPUTS

The overall expenditure and outputs from work on Catchment Council, South Coast NRM, and South recovery catchments are summarised below. In this West Catchment Council all made valuable document, outputs are defined as measures of contributions to on-ground works in recovery management activity—such as area revegetated, catchments. Again, it has proved difficult to kilometres of drainage works —while outcomes are accurately capture this expenditure (much of it does defined as measures of goal achievement, including threat not come through departmental records). However, it amelioration. is recorded in individual recovery catchment reports where data are available. Expenditure into recovery OVERALL ANALYSIS catchments from the Natural Heritage Trust, National Landcare Program and National Action Plan for During the period July 1996 to June 2006, $16.2 million Salinity and Water Quality is estimated to have of state recurrent funds were expended on work in exceeded $6 million for the period 1996–2008. After recovery catchments, an average expenditure of $1.6 2006, much of this expenditure has occurred via million per year. Full details of this expenditure are regional natural resource management groups. Note, provided in Appendix 2 and summarised in Table 5. also, that the primary purpose for a significant part of The following points need to be considered when this expenditure has been directed primarily at, for interpreting these figures: example, sustainable agriculture, but has been targeted to recovery catchments to maximise multiple • Salinity expenditure is reported on an activity basis benefits. (project budgeting). That is, all costs including salaries, contracts and vehicles are allocated against a • There will be some inaccuracies due to misallocation specific activity. This approach focuses attention on of funds due to human error. Corporate financial the cost of delivering a particular activity and its records were used as a check against catchment related outputs and outcomes. expenditure for each year, and there was an acceptable reconciliation at this level (<5 per cent • The expenditure recorded only tracks the use of error over all catchments for all years). recurrent funds allocated under the Recovery Program of the salinity initiative. An additional amount of Over the past 10 years, three general phases of about $0.3 million per year from the salinity initiative expenditure have become apparent to those working in (starting in 2003–04) supports work through the recovery catchments and these are represented in the Natural Resources Branch in recovery catchments, and relative proportions of expenditure in Table 5. some further recurrent funds are allocated within DEC In the first stage, with the exception of Toolibin Lake, all to work in recovery catchments. However, the latter is catchments began with completely inadequate local a minor component of overall expenditure and is knowledge of hydrological and related processes. Even in counterbalanced by use of recovery catchment the case of Toolibin, the emphasis had been on personnel in bushfire suppression and other activities groundwater hydrology. Data on surface water and its outside the recovery catchments (but with costs impacts are only now beginning to be effectively captured. debited to the salinity program). In general, 30 years is considered to be the minimum • Other agencies and private landowners fund research period over which data must be collected to characterise and on-ground works relevant to delivering outcomes climate (Colls and Whittaker 1990), and in the Australian in recovery catchments, but there is no mechanism context some have suggested up to 150 years of data are currently for capturing this expenditure. Given that required to describe the rainfall component of climate much of this expenditure is aimed primarily at (Gibbs et al. 1978). It is therefore unsurprising that the first achieving objectives other than the protection of five to 10 years of work in each catchment has been biodiversity, it is arguable whether it would be dominated by investigations aimed at understanding how appropriate to record this work against biodiversity catchment hydrological processes affect the biodiversity outcomes, despite its importance in achieving them. assets under management. At the same time, continuous monitoring is required to maintain data collection and • During the period when the National Action Plan for analysis at an adequate level to evaluate conceptual Salinity and Water Quality was operating, the Avon models and to develop the numerical models required Catchment Council 16 , Northern Agricultural for operational management of hydrology.

16. Now Wheatbelt NRM

25 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Table 5. Summary of recovery catchment expenditure and outputs against core activities 1996–2006.

Expenditure Expenditure Activity Outputs ($ million) (% of total) Expansion of conservation estate through land purchase, including survey work 1,394 ha purchased 1.14 7%

Revegetation to buffer remnant vegetation, provide new 2,672 ha revegetated habitat and provide hydrological control 3.1 million seedlings 2.88 18%

Revegetation with commercially prospective plants to buffer native vegetation, provide habitat and provide hydrological 2,249 ha revegetated control 1.7 million seedlings 0.84 5%

Rehabilitation of degraded areas on Crown lands 310 ha rehabilitated 0.33 2%

Improved protection of remnant vegetation on 5,161 ha private property 350 km fencing 0.82 5%

Weed and feral animal control Not applicable 0.09 1%

Engineering works on Crown lands to protect public assets 39 sites 2.94 18%

Engineering works on private property to protect public assets Not applicable 0.66 4%

Monitoring, research and investigations, including impact assessments (other than funds allocated against specific management projects) Not applicable 4.44 28%

Management of committees, recovery planning, communication and volunteer management Not applicable 1.72 10%

Other (e.g. development of recreation/interpretation sites) Not applicable 0.31 2%

Total 16.17 100%

All these aspects are reflected in the high percentage of landholders, an essential precursor to later actions such as expenditure against investigations and monitoring (28 per cross-property engineering works. Revegetation works cent). As outlined below in the section titled, ‘The continue throughout the following phases. challenge of managing catchments’, we have generally The second phase involves engineering. Initially, such aimed to have 10 years of data in recovery catchments works usually focus on surface water management, which before modelling catchment hydrology. Even this level of data has not always been achieved given the urgency of are typically extensive and sometimes complex. This work management action in some cases. is required to better manage surface water moving through catchments—mainly to reduce waterlogging, It would be poor management to embark on expensive decrease surface water residence time and minimise the engineering works without adequate biological and surface expression of salinity from related recharge. hydrological information. Therefore, the first phase of Toolibin and Lake Bryde are well into this phase, with Lake work is also characterised by on-ground works that are Warden and Buntine-Marchagee also having entered this required for longer term success, but may or may not be stage. In the case of Buntine-Marchagee, early works are the most urgent in the medium term. Typically these centred on ‘no regrets’ actions at a sub-catchment scale include strategic revegetation and improved protection and management of remnant vegetation in the catchment (photographs 1 and 2), with substantial funding from (30 per cent of expenditure). Such works are ultimately external sources because the activities directly contribute important contributions to achieving recovery goals, so to sustainable agriculture as well as (but more indirectly) represent ‘no regrets’ actions with very low risk of failure. to biodiversity conservation. Surface water management In addition, these works protect biodiversity outside the works may require substantial engineering, for example, biodiversity assets threatened by altered hydrology and are the diversion at Toolibin and waterway at Lake Bryde (see an important mechanism for engaging catchment photographs 3 and 4).

26 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Ultimately, significant groundwater management works of 10-year expenditure) strongly underlines the potential may also be required, such as the groundwater pumping savings in recovery costs if revegetation with perennial program at Toolibin to reduce immediate threats, or the plants, integrated with agriculture, was commercially planned wetland dewatering at Lake Warden (first phase viable. A desktop study (reported in URS 2004 and Sparks completed in 2008–09). Such works require much more et al. 2006) has estimated that recovery costs met by sophisticated engineering, highly detailed environmental governments could be reduced by about 50 per cent if impact assessments and feasibility analyses including risk the perennial revegetation component was paid by assessment (see, for example, the Bayesian analyses for commercial interests. This underlines the importance to Lake Warden (Table 6). Some 22 per cent of expenditure nature conservation of departmental work to develop new over the past decade has funded engineering works, and commercial industries based on broadscale plantings of given the relative youth of the recovery catchments, this is native plants. certain to increase. Because of the high cost of capital A second point of interest is that all remnant vegetation works, this phase is typified by the need to seek additional protection, private land purchases, most revegetation resources from outside the annual recurrent funds of the (excluding the small proportion on Crown land), and all program. engineering works on private property directly and Finally, in the third phase of activity there is a positively contribute to the management of private land. consolidation of work into maintenance, monitoring and These include one or more of a wide range of benefits review. While in the case of Toolibin this phase has briefly including improved management of salinity, waterlogging, proved less expensive, and one would expect this to be stock and crop protection and erosion control. It is typical, it is also stimulating additional proposals for a new estimated that more than 35 per cent of recovery phase of engineering to modify and improve initial works catchment recurrent expenditure directly benefits private based on experience and new information. This is landowners. This figure: associated with increases in expenditure. Furthermore, • excludes some 300 hectares of revegetation on the task of monitoring, evaluation and reporting, critical private lands purchased for conversion to public to effectively manage and extend the knowledge from reserves recovery catchments, is expensive in itself. • includes purchase of private land for reservation on It is expected that work in each of the recovery the basis that all purchases are by mutual agreement catchments will broadly follow the sequence of phases and therefore of mutual advantage. In addition, land described above. Although the various catchments cycle purchases invariably include large areas of saline or at through these phases at different paces, this general risk land, consequently, they result in better alignment pattern of effort is consistent with actual experience and of land management and land capability provides a guide to forecasting workloads and budget • excludes the benefits to private land arising from requirements for new catchments. expenditure on Crown land; for example, improved management of surface water on reserved land that DETAILED ANALYSIS allows for the safe drainage of excess water from In addition to the broad analysis provided above, the data upslope farmland. Works at Toolibin and Lake Bryde in Table 5 and Appendix 2 also allow more detailed are making an important contribution to upslope evaluation. At this more detailed level the most farmland in this regard. interesting set of statistics relate to the relative costs of Taking all these points into consideration, the benefits to revegetation. private property of recovery catchment works will greatly Analysis of revegetation costs shows that, overall, exceed the calculation of 35 per cent of directly applicable revegetation as biodiversity plantings costs on average recovery expenditure. $1,080 per hectare, or $0.93 per seedling. In contrast, revegetation with commercially prospective plants—mostly oil mallees in this case—costs on average $370 per hectare and $0.5 per seedling 17 . The significant cost difference for this key management strategy (23 per cent

17. It should be emphasised that the area cited for the commercial plantings is based around hydrological area of impact. Given that many of the commercially prospective plantings are as mallee belts, rather than block plantings, the hydrological impact of the commercially prospective plantings is much greater than the more consolidated biodiversity plantings. This also explains the low number of seedlings per hectare for commercially prospective plantings.

27 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review OUTCOMES

Management success in recovery catchments needs to be Buntine-Marchagee reviewed over decades because the impacts of landscape The operational goal for the catchment is: scale management interventions to counteract secondary For the next 10 years, maintain the 2007 richness, salinity can rarely be assessed in shorter time periods. Not distribution, abundance and condition of a only is it difficult to rapidly address problems that have representative sample of biodiversity assets developed over some 100 years, the pathway of recovery threatened by salinity in the BMNDRC. (DEC 2007) may be different and more difficult to the process of development. For example, recovering soil structural Recent conceptual models of salinity development in the changes caused by salinisation may not involve a simple wheatbelt have given greater emphasis to the reversal of the salinisation processes. The positive effects management of surface water before it reaches of management are even more difficult to assess where, biodiversity assets in valley floors. This conceptual model as in the case of salinity in the south-west, the landscape is particularly important at Buntine-Marchagee where is still in decline. Thus management that either slows the extensive surface-water control works are being rate of decline or decreases the final, full expression of undertaken on farmland. The model itself is based on the salinity is, in many cases, a positive outcome. understanding that:

As outlined above, nearly a third of expenditure in the a. waterlogging is degrading some biodiversity assets in recovery catchments has been directed to investigations valley floors — for example, by drowning riparian that will underpin modelling, the results of which will vegetation drive complex management strategies. Apart from b. ponding of surface water in valley floors is leading to Toolibin Lake, until recent years there have been increased rates of recharge to groundwater, which insufficient data and modelling to drive the more intense will ultimately increase the area of shallow saline forms of management that are likely to provide outcomes groundwater threatening biodiversity assets in short timeframes. Therefore, outcome data are c. ponding of surface water and associated recharge are generally only available for Toolibin Lake, the area with also causing in situ salinisation of the soil surface, and the longest history of management intervention. In spite this in turn is contributing to increasingly saline of this, there have been a range of positive outcomes surface flows, which in turn are degrading biodiversity from the recovery program to date. These are described assets below. d. ponding of surface water increases soil moisture BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION – content, hence increasing the likelihood of run-off ASSET PROTECTION AND RECOVERY during and shortly after ponding occurs e. where sediment and nutrient stripping are The success of the recovery program needs to be incorporated as part of surface water management, considered largely in terms of the conservation and the probability of downstream nutrient, turbidity and recovery of biodiversity assets directly threatened by sedimentation impacts on biodiversity assets is greatly altered hydrology, particularly salinity. However, all reduced recovery catchments also contain important biodiversity assets upslope and outside the wetland, riparian, valley f. management that delivers (a) to (e) above at paddock floor and other ecosystems threatened by salinity. scales is an important contribution to sustainable farm Recovery works, particularly revegetation, also contribute practice. In this regard, properly designed surface to the protection of these terrestrial biodiversity assets. water management has long been recognised as a Therefore, outcomes for the conservation of terrestrial means of reducing water erosion, recharge, biodiversity assets arising from recovery program works waterlogging and flood damage (McFarlane et al. are also considered briefly below. Recovery outcomes are 1993). considered in relation to each of the six recovery In this context, the broadscale surface water catchments below (presented in alphabetical order), management being implemented at Buntine-Marchagee— followed by a section on threatened ecological which integrates surface engineering, revegetation and communities and threatened species in recovery other improved practices—is an important success. Initial catchments. The final part of this section describes work focused on landholders in an 860-hectare upland biodiversity assets within recovery catchments that demonstration catchment, with work beginning in the are better protected through catchment actions. review period and mostly completed in 2006.

28 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Success of this work (see photographs 1 and 2) has given surface salinisation on farmland. However, based on landholders and DEC staff the confidence to expand this generic principles, it is expected that there will be positive approach to a target area of 19,000 hectares (Figure 3) outcomes for downstream biodiversity assets through including the original demonstration catchment. Figure 3 improved quality of water reaching the valley floor, and emphasises the scale of works required to have a positive decreased salinity outbreaks in the upper catchment. impact on natural resource management at landscape scales. At the same time, revegetation integrated with the engineering works will at least partly offset the increased To date the outcomes have largely been more effective volumes of water reaching the valley floor as a result of management of land to prevent erosion and downstream surface water management. sedimentation, protection of a public road, and reduced

Figure 3. The shaded brown and blue areas are the target integrated water management areas. The brown area includes works up to 2007–08. The blue areas encompass the proposed 2009, 2010, and 2011 treatments.

Photograph 1. Landholder Jack Stone inspects the surface water flow in the constructed grassed waterway and new culvert – immediately after the one-in-45 year rainfall event in December 2007. Photograph courtesy of Kathy Stone.

29 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Photograph 2. Downstream from the new culvert, the constructed grassed waterway performed well in the one-in-45 year rainfall event. Photograph courtesy of Kathy Stone.

The next phase of works will directly involve important Drummond wetland assets including a gypsum wetland and fresh- The management goal is: brackish wetland complex. To maintain the existing (2007) natural species The significance of work in this catchment is richness and viability of the freshwater claypans and underlined by its listing as a Highly Commended associated habitats within the Drummond Recovery Australasian project by the Global Restoration Network Catchment for the next 20 years (draft management (see http://www.globalrestorationnetwork.org/countries/ plan). australianew-zealand/). Given the comparatively short The Drummond natural diversity recovery catchment is the duration of this project, this is an excellent result. most recently established. The initial phase of Overall, the condition of biodiversity assets, apart from revegetation and investigations are now (2010) drawing one wetland, in the recovery catchment has been to a close, and the recovery plan will be completed once comparatively stable, and none of the values for which the hydrological assessments and modelling of the catchment was selected have been lost. management actions for the key biodiversity assets are Revegetation works at Buntine-Marchagee have largely complete. Currently, it is expected that some further been undertaken in conjunction with the integrated revegetation, plus new engineering works to divert excess surface water management project. Wherever practicable, surface water, will be required to complete the main revegetation aimed at improving the management of component of recovery works, for this, the smallest of the water in the landscape is implemented so that it also recovery catchments. Once these works are completed, it contributes to improved habitat for the conservation of is predicted that the key biodiversity assets within this biodiversity in general. The planning framework catchment, two freshwater claypans and their biological underpinning this work is based on a modified focal communities (including declared rare flora and priority species approach for isolation-, area- and condition- flora species), will be secure in the short to medium term. sensitive birds (Huggett et al. 2004). Much of the earlier activity for this recovery catchment comprised ‘no regrets’ actions throughout the 39,500 hectares of the Soloman-Yulgan Brook and Mt Anvil Gully catchments to improve retention and protection of

30 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review vegetation, landscape connectivity, and hydrological Photograph 3. Section of surface water management function. To this end, these activities were aimed at waterway, Lake Bryde system. demonstrating methods of protecting biodiversity, land, Photograph courtesy of Wingsphotographics. and water resources from threatening hydrological changes, and developing understanding and support for the Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program.

In terms of overall condition of the key biodiversity assets, the two threatened ecological communities (priority 1) and the declared rare flora ( Eleocharis keigheryi ) and three priority flora ( Trithuria australis P2; Hydrocotyle lemnoides P4; Schoenus natans P4) remain intact. A second area of wandoo woodland, within which the declared rare flora, Acacia chapmanii ssp. australis , is threatened by hydrological change, is also being managed. It is anticipated that projected recovery works will maintain the current, good condition of biological communities on the freshwater claypans. However, further investigations will be required to assess management of the wandoo woodland.

Lake Bryde The management goal for the catchment is:

For the next 20 years to slow the rate of decline of biodiversity across valley floor assemblages and to conserve specific high value biodiversity assets including: – threatened ecological communities on Lake Bryde, East Lake Bryde and in Lakeland Nature Reserve – the wooded yate swamp in Lake Bryde Reserve landholders. Hydrological and biological monitoring – wetland vegetation assemblages transects have been established to allow the biodiversity outcomes from this work to be documented over the next – valley floor vegetation assemblages dominated by decade, and the application of remote sensing techniques Melaleuca spp. is also being explored. At Lake Bryde, major surface water management works Although the primary aim of constructing the waterway is (photographs 3 and 4) are still (2010) in progress and will to protect important biodiversity assets, it should be protect large areas from waterlogging by moving water emphasised that the work will ultimately contribute to rapidly through the valley floor system into a series of resolving waterlogging and related problems on farmland termination lakes 18 in Lakeland’s Nature Reserve. This is upslope from the Lakelands Nature Reserve (see points (a) predicted to significantly decrease valley floor recharge to (e) above under the section on Buntine-Marchagee). and ameliorate subsequent groundwater rise, with The improved water management and culvert upgrades significant benefits for vegetation communities that are will also significantly improve protection of vulnerable currently degrading. sections of public roads. These outcomes are significant The waterway is a complex project and the first five years in their own right, and underline the multiple benefits of catchment work have been dominated by the arising from the recovery catchment projects. It should investigations underpinning this work, together with the also be noted that significant additional works are purchase of private property, environmental impact required before the waterway is fully functional. assessments, feasibility assessment and engineering design, and liaison with local government and

18. The environmental impact assessment suggests that using these lakes will not result in unacceptable change. Recent observations indicate that the lakes are actually receiving fresher inflows than immediately prior to the waterway construction.

31 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Photograph 4. Section of Lake Bryde waterway. Note the salinity and waterlogging expression along the boundary of the reserve—the waterway will help to prevent this waterlogging and further encroachment into the reserve. Photograph courtesy of Wingsphotographics.

As a consequence of the issues discussed above, in Lake Lake Warden Bryde there has been a much greater focus on assisting The management goal for Lake Warden is: landholders with surface water management than at any To recover the existing (2003) waterbird species other recovery catchment except for Buntine-Marchagee. richness and abundance and living assemblages of the Ultimately, extensions of the current waterway Lake Warden Wetland System to a near natural state 19 , (photograph 4) upslope of Lake Bryde itself will contribute by the year 2030. to management of the threatened ecological community on the floor of the lake, plus assist landholders to deal Investigations have shown that the groundwater system with similar problems on their own properties. Together directly affecting the Lake Warden Wetland System (LWWS) is with revegetation and remnant vegetation protection, quite local, and the upper catchment’s groundwater system is these works have dominated the remainder of outputs at separated from that of the lakes by a largely impervious Lake Bryde, and have yet to be reflected in documented geological structure. This emphasises that each catchment outcomes, as opposed to outputs. will have a unique set of characteristics that must be understood to underpin effective management. In the case The overall condition of some biodiversity assets has of the LWWS, a desktop feasibility assessment based on declined in the Lake Bryde Recovery Catchment over the general hydrological principles grossly overestimated the past decade. However, no assets have been lost, and the recovery costs. Other research has shown that the lake declared rare flora and threatened ecological community system is being ‘drowned’ by excess water from the upper persist. catchment, which is causing loss of habitat including: shallow feeding areas, exposed feeding flats and fringing vegetation (Robertson and Massenbauer 2005).

19. A near natural state is benchmarked against early 1980s waterbird survey and lake hydrological data.

32 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Figure 4. Basal area of Melaleuca cuticularis at Lake Wheatfield showing decline where flooded since 1999 (< 1.4 m elevation, squares) compared with the same species higher in the profile (>1.4 m elevation, circles). Transect 1 data are not included due to fire in 2009 prior to the survey (Lyons and McCormick, unpublished data).

The decline in basal area of vegetation due to excessive The first of the engineering works, a gravity fed pipeline flooding is apparent from Figure 4 (Mike Lyons, pers between Lake Wheatfield and Bandy Creek, was comm. 2010). These data, collected by the department’s established in 2009. At the same time, conducting Wetlands Monitoring Group, are for Lake Wheatfield in extensive revegetation and other works in the upper the Lake Warden system. A significant decline was catchment is essential to minimise or halt salinisation of observed in the basal area of Melaleuca cuticularis from the surface soils which is leading to increasing salinity of 1997 to 2009 at elevations below 1.4 metres (adjusted r 2 surface inflows to the lake system. Greater than 50 per = 0.79, p<0.05). Basal area of trees above this elevation cent of the revegetation management action targets set showed no significant relationship with time (adjusted r 2= for the next 25 years of recovery works has already been 0.25, p=0.23). The correlations (Pearson’s r) for the two achieved. Revegetation works have also provided for elevation classes were also significantly different (p<0.05). increased community capacity 20 and promoted on-farm nature conservation. While revegetation and other management techniques will in time reduce the excessive run-off into the lakes, in The final engineering phase will include environmental the short term it is crucial to reduce the water in the impact assessments and design and construction of a wetlands to recover bird habitat and fringing vegetation. pumping system to reduce water volumes in Lake Thus, engineering interventions are proposed to Warden. If effectively implemented, not only will these counteract the current degradation in the short (10-20 works achieve recovery objectives, they will provide the years) term. town of Esperance with some additional flood protection.

To underpin engineering works and give confidence in the In summary, the condition of the biodiversity assets has selected management strategies, ecological models have declined somewhat during the last decade, largely due been combined with Bayesian Belief Networks to provide to overfilling of the lake, which is the key process a comprehensive understanding of how the wetland threatening the assets at this time. If the proposed system functions, test management scenarios, and assess engineering works prove to have acceptable the probability of management success (Walshe and environmental impacts and are funded, then overfilling of the lakes will be managed effectively. Massenbauer 2008; see also Table 6). This has provided the basis for biological and physical targets and thresholds Thus, provided the remaining phase of engineering works in relation to reducing water in the lakes system. is implemented, there is a high probability of achieving Feasibility assessment has canvassed both engineering and recovery goals (Table 6). In the absence of management social aspects, explicitly dealing with aspects of the (the ‘do nothing’ option in Table 6), failure to achieve the uncertainty and risk assessment, financial feasibility and recovery goal is almost certain (Walshe and Massenbauer offsite impact assessment for disposal of excess water. 2008).

20. Capacity has increased through improved knowledge and understanding of the issues. This was achieved through a farm business planning approach that raised awareness of the defined threats, and management options required to meet a clear asset goal outcome. Offering technical support and a cost sharing subsidy that meets economic and conservation needs, combined with high levels of establishment success, has resulted in high landholder demand being targeted strategically at priority zones that will directly benefit the LWWS.

33 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Table 6. Decision tables describing the utility of four alternative management actions under three climate states for a) shorebird abundances at Lake Warden, b) diver bird abundances at Lake Wheatfield and c) aquatic invertebrate species richness at Lake Wheatfield.

a) Utilities Probability Option 1 (a 1) Option 2 (a 2) Option 3 (a 3) Option 4 (a 4) State of state pi (engineering) (perennials) (eng. and peren.) (do nothing) Drier 0.6 69.5 6.0 70.4 1.8 Wetter 0.2 68.9 4.4 73.8 0.8 No Change 0.2 73.0 4.4 74.7 0.8

Expected Utility, EV 70.1 5.4 71.9 1.4

b) Utilities Probability Option 1 (a 1) Option 2 (a 2) Option 3 (a 3) Option 4 (a 4) State of State pi (engineering) (perennials) (eng. and peren.) (do nothing) Drier 0.6 34.0 12.7 35.6 4.6 Wetter 0.2 31.2 7.4 35.9 3.5 No Change 0.2 33.4 8.6 36.4 3.8

Expected Utility, EV 33.3 10.8 35.8 4.2

c) Utilities Probability Option 1 (a 1) Option 2 (a 2) Option 3 (a 3) Option 4 (a 4) State of State pi (engineering) (perennials) (eng. and peren.) (do nothing) Drier 0.6 57.8 42.6 77.9 28.2 Wetter 0.2 49.5 34.4 69.7 23.5 No Change 0.2 54.1 38.4 72.8 25.5

Expected Utility, EV 55.4 40.1 75.2 26.7

Note: the three climate states are ‘drier’, ‘wetter’ and ‘no change’ and utility is the probability (expressed as a percentage) of observing a threshold number of birds or species richness. Expected utility (EV) is the sum of the probability of utilities for each climate state calculated as the product of the probability of the state and the utility of the option. The higher the utility, the greater the biodiversity gain. In summary, the ‘do nothing’ option is predicted to result in goal failure, while implementing engineering and revegetation actions will maximise utility. If longer timeframes had been used for the calculations, the revegetation option may have achieved greater utility. Taken from Walshe and Massenbauer 2008.

Muir-Unicup water flowing through them has been massively reduced The primary management goal is: (pers comm. Roger Hearn).

To maintain existing (2006) biodiversity richness of the Although some management works can be implemented wetlands, sumplands, damplands, riparian zone, and now with a high probability of conservation success, planning for many of the most important interventions seepage areas (including mid-slopes) threatened by depends on the development of sophisticated numerical salinity, acidity or waterlogging. and conceptual hydrological models. These will be In the Lake Muir-Unicup Natural Diversity Recovery constructed during the next phase of management, with Catchment, a surface saline scald on one drainage line new impetus coming from the appointment of a contract leading to Yarnup swamp has largely been eradicated by catchment hydrologist. revegetation and decreased annual rainfall. At this site, Muir-Unicup is a complex set of unique and highly management attention is moving to other areas producing important wetland assemblages with an equally complex salt loads that are affecting the wetland. Further south in hydrology. An important challenge over the next decade this catchment, the Geordenup/Neeranup Swamp system will be to successfully model and manage the key has benefited significantly from the re-diversion by private wetlands. Overall, no important biodiversity assets have interests of surface waters back to their former flowpaths. been lost, however, there has been decline in asset Baumea reed beds have redeveloped in the condition in some areas and the status of bittern species is Geordenup/Neeranup Swamp system as the volume of a concern.

34 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Toolibin Lake This hypothesis is being tested through a joint project with The primary management goal is: the Future Farm Industries Cooperative Research Centre. Considerable ecophysiological work is required to to ensure the long-term maintenance of Toolibin Lake understand the current, variable response of vegetation and its environs as a healthy and resilient freshwater and to interpret the interactions between pumping (both ecosystem suitable for continued visitation and when on and off) and vegetation. In addition, further breeding success by the presently high numbers and hydrological investigations and management works are species of waterbirds. (1994 Recovery Plan) required to manage the predicted increase in salinity of At Toolibin Lake, engineering works have largely achieved inflows as groundwater reaches the surface in drainage physical recovery targets in relation to depth to lines in the middle to upper catchment. groundwater beneath the lake and the salinity of surface inflows (George et al. 2004), two major accomplishments Figure 5. Vegetation trends in Casuarina obesa (plant for the recovery catchment. In the case of groundwater numbers on Y-axis) at three sites on Toolibin control, since 2005 there have been two periods when Lake floor. Note that these transects miss the recovery area shown in photograph 5 below. many groundwater pumps have been out of commission A transect in this area including seedlings due to technical problems. This was associated with would show a substantial increase in basal much more rapid recovery of groundwater tables than area. (Data from the department’s Wetland expected. This is of concern, and underlines the Monitoring Group.) importance of continued pumping for recovery.

In response to substantially improved groundwater and inflow control, mature vegetation of swamp sheoak (Casuarina obesa ) has recovered in one section of the lake floor (photograph 5), vegetation condition has been maintained in some areas, but there has been decline in condition in many other areas (photograph 6). The stable and declining trends are captured in Figure 5, but not the recovery. Overall, the main trends in mature vegetation Figure 6. Population numbers of Casuarina obesa have been continued decline, or stabilisation, with some seedlings at three plots, each 100m x 5m, areas of recovery. The more deep-rooted paperbark near Pump 9, the recovery site (Ecoscape 2009 (Melaleuca strobophylla ) has been worst affected with p 102). The plot with the fewest seedlings had most adult populations declining. 177 in 1999. Note that in 1995 there were no seedlings at this site (K Wallace pers comm.). Overall, living vegetation has been retained across sections of the lake floor, which is an important recovery criterion. The reasons for continued decline at some sites are unclear given the achievement, for the most part, of key physical recovery criteria. However, it was always predicted that there would be some inertia between meeting hydrological targets and observing substantial biological recovery, although natural regeneration has fared much better (see below). Also, problems with managing the groundwater pumps noted above have led to higher than desirable groundwater levels during some periods, and would also have brought some salts back into the root zones of plants.

Only small amounts of pooling have occurred in the lake since 1996, due to: low annual rainfall, fewer intense In contrast with much of the mature vegetation, the rainfall events, and diversion of high salinity flows. situation with natural regeneration on the lake floor is Therefore, it is hypothesised that there has been little much more positive. From 1997 there has been natural opportunity for soil-stored salts to be washed deeper into seedling regeneration of both swamp sheoak ( Casuarina the soil profile beyond the root zones of the oldest plants, obesa ) and paperbark ( Melaleuca strobophylla ) on many some of which have active roots at three metres below parts of the lake floor. A particularly positive sign has the soil surface (based on recent research data). been the continued growth with very few deaths of this

35 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Photograph 5. Strong recovery of Casuarina obesa at Toolibin Lake. Photograph courtesy of Sam MacWilliams.

Photograph 6. Groundwater pump at Toolibin Lake. Note that while Casuarina obesa canopy has largely been lost, green epicormic shooting is visible from stems. Photograph courtesy of Ken Wallace.

36 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Photograph 7. Epicormic shooting from Casuarina and suggests that neither the invertebrate nor the obesa stems, Toolibin Lake. waterbird fauna are likely to have changed significantly Photograph courtesy of Ken Wallace. over the past decade when the lake is half or more full.

In summary, when the pumping system is operating effectively, the physico-chemical recovery criteria for Toolibin have largely been met, a major achievement recognised in part by the Recovery Catchment Team, Lake Toolibin Catchment Group (local community group) and the department being jointly awarded the Institution of Engineers Australia National Salinity Prize for 2002. Achievement of the biological recovery criteria has been much more varied with both some gains but also further degradation. Overall, the lake retains the core biological values for which it is noted—it would almost certainly have lost these without management intervention over the 1996-2010 period.

The physical and biological condition of the lake since 1990 is schematically described in Figure 7. The trends described are based on a combination of data and anecdotal observations, and are therefore qualitative and generalised. This diagram emphasises that indicators for complex systems will be moving in quite different ways through time. Although some indicators can be improved dramatically—for example, salinity of surface inflows controlled immediately with diversion systems in place— others are much slower to respond. In addition, interpreting monitoring data can be difficult given both the spatial and temporal variability of the systems themselves and the responses of organisms to interventions.

On balance, however, the Toolibin recovery goal has been regeneration. In 2008, one or two patches of paperbark met in terms of the composition of biota that is predicted seedling death were recorded. However this has not been to occur with a major filling event. However, the inferred observed again in 2009. Insect attack is associated with abundance of native fauna must be achieved and the the 2008 deaths, but it is unclear whether they are a current condition of mature vegetation must be primary or secondary cause of mortality. substantially improved to achieve full recovery. This will With regard to fauna, the limited data obtained when the require ongoing management including revegetation and lake partially filled in 1996 suggest that increases in engineering works to stabilise and improve the quality of salinity at Toolibin Lake have caused only small changes in surface water flows from the catchment. One hypothesis invertebrate faunal composition and no significant change currently being tested is that a major fill event and in the numbers and species of waterbirds that visit overflow are required to achieve sufficient downward Toolibin Lake (Halse et al. 2000). Salinity and invertebrate flushing of salts to improve the trend to full vegetation richness are linked, and there has been no significant recovery. The importance of maintaining groundwater change in the salinity measured during partial fill events as deep as practicable is emphasised by current research. that have occurred at Toolibin between 1996 and 2006. A full review of Toolibin work as part of the planning process will provide a detailed analysis and evaluation In 2006–07, 24 species of waterbirds, 11 displaying of progress. breeding behaviour, were recorded on Toolibin and Dulbining (upstream of Toolibin) lakes following a partial Threatened ecological communities and fill event (Peter Lacey pers comm.). A further six species threatened species in recovery catchments of waterbirds were recorded during the same period It is important to emphasise that the biodiversity immediately downstream at Walbyring Lake, and it is likely assets within recovery catchments at risk from altered that these birds were also present in the project area. hydrology include a range of threatened ecological Given the partial nature of the fill, this is a substantial list communities and threatened species.

37 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review These are listed in Tables 7 and 8. Thus, although the Table 7. Threatened species within natural diversity natural diversity recovery catchments are aimed at recovery catchments at risk from altered conserving key representative samples of natural biota hydrology. threatened by altered hydrology, in doing this they are Recovery Threatened/ also managing a number of endangered and critically Catchment priority species endangered species and communities. Buntine-Marchagee Caladenia drakeoides Other conservation outcomes Frankenia parvula Within all recovery catchments there are important Muir-Unicup Australasian bittern biodiversity assets outside the areas that are threatened by (Botaurus poiciloptilus ) altered hydrology on which the program is focused. This Mud minnow ( Galaxiella munda ) is most apparent in relation to threatened ecological Balston’s pygmy perch communities and threatened and priority species in (Nannatharina balstoni ) addition to those listed in Tables 7 and 8. Perhaps more Christine's spider orchid importantly, many of the recovery catchments contain (Caladenia christinea ) terrestrial biodiversity of sufficient importance that they Caladenia harringtonia would be selected as areas of management focus Tall donkey orchid irrespective of their wetland and riparian values. This (Diuris drummondii ) applies particularly to Muir-Unicup where the plant biodiversity is greater than that recorded for Mt Lesueur, Lake Bryde Remote thorny lignum a larger area and recognised centre for biodiversity (Muehlenbeckia horrida (Gibson and Keighery 2000). Lake Bryde and Lake subsp abdita ) Warden catchments also contain terrestrial biodiversity Drummond Keighery’s eliocharis of significant importance within the south-west. (Eleocharis keigheryi ) In addition, there are a number of terrestrial assemblages Acacia chapmanii ssp. Australis at Toolibin and Buntine-Marchagee that are poorly conserved and not well represented in conservation areas.

Figure 7. Schematic diagram of changes in biophysical indicators at Toolibin. General trends through time based on some monitoring and anecdotal information are shown —the diagram aims to capture the different patterns of change in achievement of indicators —it is not a quantitative representation. Time (year) is shown on the x-axis; percentage achievement of indicator target on the y-axis. 100% = target achieved.

38 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Table 8. Threatened and priority ecological communities at risk from altered hydrology within natural diversity recovery catchments.

Recovery Ecological community name Status Catchment Herbaceous plant assemblages on bentonite lakes Endangered (state list) Buntine-Marchagee

Perched freshwater wetlands of the northern wheatbelt with extensive stands of Eucalyptus camaldulensis To be confirmed Buntine-Marchagee

Wandoo woodland over dense low sedges of Mesomelaena preisii Priority 1 Drummond

Claypans with mid dense shrublands of Melaleuca lateritia over herbs Priority 1 Drummond

Unwooded freshwater wetlands of the southern Wheatbelt dominated Critically Endangered by Muehlenbeckia horrida subsp. abdita and Tecticornia verrucosa (state list) Lake Bryde

Stromatolite like microbialite community of a Coastal Hypersaline Lake Priority 1 Lake Warden

Scrub heath on Esperance Sandplain: Scrub heath on deep sand with Banksia and Lambertia , and Banksia scrub heath on sandplain Priority 3 Lake Warden

Perched wetlands of the wheatbelt region with extensive stands of Critically Endangered Casuarina obesa and Melaleuca strobophylla (state list and Endangered on EPBC list) Toolibin Lake

Peat swamps Priority 2 Muir-Unicup

For example, the Banksia prionotes and York gum/jam needs to maximise the conservation values from (Eucalyptus loxophleba and Acacia acuminata ) associations revegetation works. Although revegetation designs to at Toolibin Lake are poorly conserved, particularly in the best protect biodiversity from a hydrological perspective wheatbelt. At Buntine-Marchagee 'Medium woodland - rarely coincide with priority areas for habitat expansion, Salmon gum' is 'limited in extent' in the Northern catchment officers have found that they are able to Agricultural Region, and 'poorly represented' in the implement more conservation works when conservation reserve system (0 per cent in the Northern Agricultural aims are ‘packaged’ with other land management aims, Region) (Richardson et al. 2004). such as water management, than if they were offered In this context, the revegetation and other management independently to landholders. works undertaken as part of the recovery program not Given that the total area of natural diversity recovery only contribute to improved water management at the catchments (0.7 million hectares) is about three per cent catchment scale, they are important for the conservation of the south-west agricultural zone, work in recovery of a range of terrestrial biota. Ecological resources from catchments is generating a significant ‘footprint’ in this even commercially prospective revegetation, such as oil important region for biodiversity conservation. If the mallees, can be substantial and increase the probability recovery catchments expand to the 25 proposed in total, that native biota will persist. For example, work by Patrick then a major contribution to landscape-scale conservation Smith from CSIRO has shown that while revegetation would be achieved. involving complex species composition and structures will better emulate natural bushland, oil mallee belts still add WIDER BENEFITS AND OUTCOMES FROM significant ecological resources for birds, invertebrates and RECOVERY WORK even small mammals, such as western pygmy possums (Cercatetus concinnus ) and red-tailed phascogales New industry development (Phascogale calura ) (Smith 2009). Where revegetation During the life of the program nearly $1 million have been serves to buffer remnant vegetation on upper slopes from used to subsidise the planting of commercially prospective the drift of fertilisers, pesticides and weed seeds, there are plants, mostly oil mallees. In the low-medium rainfall zone additional gains to biodiversity conservation. of the south-west, the lack of a plant resource base is a This broader support for conservation has been formalised key barrier to developing biomass industries based on in a plan for revegetation in Buntine-Marchagee where a woody perennials. Therefore, the strategic work in modified focal species approach for birds (Huggett et al. recovery catchments is, concomitantly, supporting the 2004) is used in conjunction with water management development of new industries. In addition, research at

39 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review both Toolibin and Buntine-Marchagee on the interaction certainly exceed six per cent of total expenditure. between mallee water use and groundwater is helping to Not only have recovery works contributed to private establish both the range of soil types over which species property management, there have been a number of may be planted, as well as helping to delineate their water benefits for other land uses. For example, surface water requirements and contribution to salinity management (e.g. Noorduijn et al. 2009). At Toolibin, this relationship is management works at Buntine-Marchagee, Lake Bryde being explored through a trial planted on private property and Toolibin are helping to protect one or more public in 1995, which is only now coming to fruition. The roads within their catchments from flooding and other importance of long-term commitment to generate water damage; and proposed works at Lake Warden will important results is emphasised by this and other research contribute to the flood protection of Esperance. projects. However, the poor continuity of monitoring in Information has also been extended to other areas. For this project diminished its value, which also emphasises the example, presentations to local governments and other importance of a consistent, long-term commitment to agencies have used works at Lake Bryde as a basis for monitoring and research. discussing water issues and roads, and methods for Apart from oil mallees, melaleuca trial sites have been resolving them. A final example is that the recovery works established at Lake Bryde and Toolibin, along with an at Muir-Unicup have contributed to the management Acacia phase cropping and a Search 21 trial at Lake Bryde. (through revegetation) of lands held by the Department of Although these projects are at a much lower level of Water. intensity compared with oil mallee work, they nevertheless As noted above, the current area of the existing six provide sites with documented species of known age, and recovery catchments is about 700,000 hectares (over three thus lend themselves to general interpretation of plant per cent of the agricultural lands in the south-west which performance. total some 20.8 million hectares). Provided the recovery Finally, a detailed feasibility study of salt harvesting in programs are maintained and are successful, it would be association with groundwater pumping, while underlining expected that the majority of works required for how difficult it would be to establish a profitable industry, hydrological management across this area will have been continues to provide the benchmark against which new implemented. Improved hydrological management of this proposals for such an industry may be measured. area represents a significant contribution to land Improved management of other public assets management in general—particularly when the broader and private property application of knowledge generated through the recovery As noted in the outcome statements, more than 35 per catchments is also taken into consideration. cent of expenditure has contributed directly to improved management and profitability of private property. URS Management of climate change (2004) estimated from their desktop calculations that In the south-west agricultural zone, revegetation in direct commercial benefits to private landholders from recovery catchments is the department’s single largest reducing the area of farmland salinity would be about six on-ground contribution to carbon sequestration on per cent of public expenditure in recovery catchments. agricultural lands. However, this calculation does not take into consideration More importantly, work in recovery catchments is a major on-farm benefits such as improved water and wind source of knowledge concerning hydrological processes at erosion control, increased stock and crop protection, and landscape scales across the agricultural area. This decreased probability of sedimentation and eutrophication of wetlands, including farm dams, where appropriate knowledge is essential for successful management of works are applied. In addition, the benefits calculated by native biota in the context of the potentially severe URS were site benefits from salinity treatments. However, impacts of climate change. The comparatively long-term some works, such as large-scale waterways to manage monitoring of a range of hydrological variables in recovery excess surface water, provide a basis for on-farm works. catchments represents an uncommon and increasingly This is because the constructed waterways provide one valuable dataset for inland agricultural areas. means for safe disposal of excess, freshwater ponding on farmland. Thus, there is a need to calculate more precisely the actual benefits to landholders—they will

21. Search project is shorthand for the DEC/NHT funded work searching for commercially prospective native species in the late 1990s and early 2000s (CALM 2004).

40 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Knowledge gained multispectral variations in vegetation condition with In addition to examples mentioned above, there have high resolution GPS ground truthing and aerial been many other cases where knowledge and information photographic texture of vegetation assemblages from work in the recovery catchments has been directly allows remote assessments of vegetation condition to applied or used in other salinity management projects. be undertaken. Hyperspectral techniques are also Examples include: being developed at Toolibin Lake, and mulitspectral imagery has been trialled at Drummond • application of new knowledge concerning groundwater pumping systems, including data on • our understanding of palaeochannel genesis, hydraulic properties and predicted impacts, from evolution and stratigraphy has been improved Toolibin to other sites in the wheatbelt through the Recovery Catchment Program. This is particularly the case from research in Toolibin Lake • use of contracts developed for recovery catchments and Muir-Unicup, but also from Buntine Marchagee for projects managed by other agencies and regional groups • the source of acid groundwater in the wheatbelt is still a topic with many theories and few answers. • predictions of landscape and regional trends based on However, a recent PhD study being finalised during data from natural diversity recovery catchments and 2010 (Margaret Smith) has determined sources of work in other catchments. This knowledge has also acidity impacting on the Muir-Unicup biodiversity been used to predict the impact of salinity assets. Most of the acidity had been generated management options and the impact of unmanaged within the regolith material and stored acidity is groundwater rise throughout the agricultural area. In present in the wetlands. This knowledge has wider this regard, it should be noted that under the Salinity implications for acid generation in the wheatbelt, in Action Plan and Salinity Strategy there are 11 key the southern part in particular. catchments in the south-west, including six natural diversity recovery catchments, where there are Values-based planning sufficient data upon which to base predictions The planning process in recovery catchments focuses concerning salinity throughout the agricultural region. effort by linking broad community values (developed The importance of this knowledge, and of continuing through catchment steering committees or project the related monitoring and evaluation, is too easily advisory groups), goals, and biodiversity assets on the one underestimated hand, with management feasibility and actions, long-term • strongly related to the previous point is the monitoring and evaluation. It is widely accepted that the contribution of recovery catchments as detailed case priorities of stakeholders must be considered in planning studies of landscape-scale hydrological and other the management of natural resources. It is also critical processes. This is important knowledge for guiding that the goals of management reflect the relevant set of future land-use decisions. Recovery catchment values (Wallace 2006). contributions to knowledge in this regard will increase As foreshadowed in the 2001 Review, the challenges (see as further data are collected and analysed and the next section) facing catchment-scale management dataset is extended over decades, particularly given necessitate an increasingly sophisticated analysis of the that catchments are distributed across a range of relevant cause-effect relationships and associated risks biogeographic regions (see, for example, Walshe 2005, 2007). These planning • assessment of the contribution of airborne geophysics processes are being further developed for natural diversity —including radiometrics and electromagnetic data— recovery catchments. This includes projects with the to salinity management. This was undertaken by Future Farm Industries Cooperative Research Centre. comparing, for catchments with substantial Clearly documented assessments of the feasibility of geophysical data, the analyses of airborne geophysics management actions, alternative options, and the alone with standard field techniques (George et al. associated risks and likelihood of success are vital 1999, George and Woodgate 2002) components of management in uncertain environments • ecophysiological knowledge that contributes to where large expenditures and long-term commitments are predictions of the likely success of revegetation involved. This is exemplified by the work at Toolibin (e.g. Noorduijn et al. 2009) (Jones et al. 2009) and Lake Warden (Walshe and • multispectral imagery techniques developed for Lake Massenbauer 2008). Warden by the Lake Warden Recovery Team and Specterra have been applied to other areas such as Lake Gore and Gnangara Mound. Correlating the

41 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review LESSONS AND CHALLENGES

Over the course of more than a decade of work in iv. Other technical and operational issues recovery catchments we have learnt many lessons. This v. The recovery catchment approach – value for section describes the most salient lessons from the past money? : addresses the issue of the ongoing and and challenges for the future. In general, three broad relative importance of continuing work in the challenges confront those managing hydrological recovery catchments, given the outcomes and processes for biodiversity conservation outcomes in south- lessons/challenges. western Australia. These are described by Wallace and Lloyd (2008) as follows: INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS AND Firstly, natural biodiversity assets are highly complex CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT given the number and range of organisms at risk, a Viewed in a national context and compared with other situation aggravated by inadequate knowledge of states, WA has a long history of managing the hydrology their life histories and related ecosystem processes. of agricultural catchments in relation to salinity. These This contrasts with management of agricultural land efforts have included research and development as well as and potable water resources where assets are more generic operational approaches involving regulatory and easily defined and tolerances are much better known. incentives schemes. Apart from these activities, at the Secondly, the long timescales required for successful scale of specific catchments and sub-catchments management within a variable climate are particularly government approaches to catchment management in taxing. The current extent of salinity has taken many WA have been directed either at assisting groups of land years to develop, continues to spread, and may managers to better manage catchments threatened by require decades to effectively address. While the salinity (Focus Catchment Approach, Rapid Catchment 22 regional climate is relatively stable, surface flows are Appraisal, Catchment Demonstration Initiative ); or have erratic and underlying geology variable. Wetlands been aimed at directly managing catchments to protect may be dry for long periods, or contain water for specific public assets (water resources recovery several consecutive years (Lane et al. 2004). Given catchments, natural diversity recovery catchments, Rural also our inadequate knowledge, there is significant Towns Program). Taking into consideration experience up uncertainty regarding management outcomes. to and including 2009, four conclusions may be drawn from this experience: Finally, the above issues are exacerbated by a range of socio-cultural factors including inadequate 1. Comprehensive hydrological data need to be collated understanding of biodiversity values and generally consistently over a long timeframe (minimum of 10, poor appreciation of management difficulties. These and preferably more than 20 years) to effectively and other social factors—such as the difficulty of develop even a modest model of catchment processes attracting and retaining personnel in rural areas— that is sufficient to underpin target setting and give create an uncertain socio-political environment for confidence to significant financial investment. For conservation work. Taken together, these three example, initial hydrological planning was based on challenges are a formidable barrier to effective some 14 years of data (1973–1987) in the Collie biodiversity management. Water Resources Catchment, and 15 years for Toolibin Lake Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment. In both Lessons to date from managing recovery catchments, and these cases significant additional data have been future challenges are dealt with in more detail below required, and are still being collected and analysed, to under five headings: improve models. Under the Catchment i. Institutional arrangements and catchment Demonstration Initiative, even catchments with more management : summarises collective agency than 20 years history have struggled to develop experience in catchment management effective models for target setting and monitoring due to the scale of the catchments and inconsistency ii. Landscape-scale management : explores three critical of monitoring through time. This conclusion strongly aspects of management at this scale affects the following three conclusions that describe iii. Organisational management : identifies key aspects of the alternative approaches to catchment departmental arrangements that affect management management. success

22. For details on these catchment approaches see Agriculture Western Australia et al. (1996b), State Salinity Council (2000), and Robertson et al. (2009).

42 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review 2. Implementation of management works at catchment services to enable them to develop and implement scales, including the related investigations and management plans (Department of Agriculture et al. planning works, will generally require annual 1996b) have not been met. Even when $6 million expenditures of some hundreds of thousands of was allocated to four catchments over four years dollars plus additional funds for any major capital (with considerable prior planning), there has been limited works. Such expenditures will normally be required success in achieving substantial on-ground public benefits, over decades to achieve measurable targets. at least within the one catchment for which there is Resourcing this level of commitment requires the published information (Robertson et al. 2009). However, backing of senior executives in large organisations. the lack of broadscale, economically viable management For public assets, this effectively requires Chief options for salinity is also a significant barrier to success at Executive Officer support at the agency level catchment scales. reinforced by adequate socio-political backing It is emphasised that applying all the approaches outlined amongst key communities of interest 23 . In theory above was essential to discover the most efficient and public natural resource assets could be managed over effective methods for managing the hydrology of long timeframes by corporate interests or non- catchments in agricultural areas. This experience provides government organisations. However, at least in important context for the description below of landscape Australia, there are no examples of this occurring for scale management of salinity through natural diversity complex assets where delivery of multiple cultural recovery catchments. It also contains important lessons values is involved. Even where projects have some of for all those wanting to work at landscape scales. the required characteristics, they are generally supported by government funding. LANDSCAPE-SCALE MANAGEMENT OF SALINITY 3. It has not proved feasible to empower community groups, including groups of landholders, to effectively In addition to the conclusions outlined in the previous manage the hydrology of catchments to achieve long- section, there are a number of other important points term targets. Successful catchment management is concerning successful salinity management at landscape 24 difficult, and requires ongoing commitment of scales . resources and expertise over timescales and at levels Multiple partnerships that is not practicable for most community groups at As described in Wallace and Lloyd (2008), the importance the catchment scale, especially given the typically of cross-stakeholder and cross-disciplinary partnerships is short length of their funding cycles (generally one to well documented (in relation to recovery catchments see three years). In contrast, community groups enjoy CALM 2001 Review, Halse and Massenbauer 2004, Munro greater success managing shorter term, smaller scale and Moore 2005). Three consistent lessons described by natural resource management projects. Wallace and Lloyd from experience in recovery catchments 4. Planning and operational management at catchment are: scales are best driven by an organisation with a strong commitment to achieving a clear goal for the • One-on-one relationships with catchment landholders catchment as a whole over long timeframes. For are essential for management success, even where example, the natural diversity and water resources there is a strong, socially coherent catchment group recovery catchments are managed by agencies with (which is rare—catchment boundaries often cross long-term commitments to the recovery and social and administrative boundaries). conservation of important public assets (in this case • Cross-disciplinary and cross-agency collaboration biodiversity and water resources respectively). To underpins successful management. Networking is date, this has proved the best model for achieving easier in WA given its relatively small population in outcomes at catchment scales where consistent effort comparison with the more populated states. is required over long timeframes and where high However, relationships amongst agencies and levels of accountability are required for the individuals must still be nurtured, and partners must management of public assets. be willing to collaborate. Thus, early expectations that agencies could provide • Long-term relationships between local conservation landholders in priority catchments with sufficient advisory officers and catchment landholders greatly facilitate

23. Natural resource managers in Australia have often used the term ‘community’ very loosely at significant cost to clarity. Here, the term ‘communities of interest’ is used in the sense defined by Harrington et al. (2008). 24. In this context, landscape-scale management is viewed as being in the order of 10–200,000 ha units.

43 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review positive working relationships between the two Experience in recovery catchments has also shown that it groups. In this context, selecting and retaining is important to retain focus on project priorities in the effective government personnel in rural areas is allocation of resources, rather than some notion of important, but often difficult (CALM 2001 Review). stakeholder equity. For example, it can be tempting to As noted in the previous review, DEC has been fortunate offer subsidies for revegetation equally to all landholders, in having willing collaborators and partners amongst rather than targeting the specific sites (and landholders) catchment landholders and across a range of institutions that are most critical to achieving the recovery goal. (state and Commonwealth agencies, CSIRO, regional NRM Targeting of expenditure at any scale will inevitably lead to groups, etc). Without such collaboration, there would be at least some criticism from those who miss out on few successful works in recovery catchments, and none funding—an issue discussed in the CALM 2001 Review. on private land. However, appropriate planning and consultative Integrated packages of on-ground actions approaches do help people to understand the need to target expenditure. We would all prefer that difficult tasks could be resolved with the land management equivalent of a single dose of Within the recovery program itself, there is also a need to antibiotics. However, the reality is that successfully improve priority setting and to better explain the internal managing salinity at landscape scales to deliver multiple allocation of resources. Although the business plans benefits invariably requires an integrated package of drafted for recovery catchments in conjunction with this management strategies. This has certainly been the review will help, full recovery plans for each catchment are experience in recovery catchments where most involve: an essential basis for effective priority setting. • strategic revegetation to improve water use and effect some hydrological control ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT – • surface water management to reduce waterlogging LOOKING WITHIN and recharge on valley floors In examining the lessons from recovery catchment work • fencing and management of remnant native an important aspect is the effective functioning of the vegetation to help maintain water use, contributing management organisation itself, in this case the to hydrological control department. This is explicitly explored in this section. • intensive engineering works to manage the solute 25 At an operational level, there may be tension between the and water balance of wetlands. needs of managing a complex asset, such as a recovery One valuable trait of recovery catchment managers in catchment, and the need of regional and district general has been their capacity to consider a range of managers to meet immediate demands for activities such solutions, including substantial engineering works, to as bushfire suppression and environmental impact maximise the probability of achieving biodiversity assessments. A constant challenge for all concerned is to conservation objectives. ensure that the inevitable trade-offs between short-term Priority setting urgency and long-term importance do not lead to the Institutions allocating grants for work in natural resource neglect of effective long-term planning and the strategic management generally give priority to on-ground works. actions that will lead, ultimately, to goal achievement. While understandable from the perspective of achieving This issue is exacerbated in situations where recovery demonstrable, concrete outcomes, it encourages neglect catchment work can be seen by managers as an add-on of critical activities such as research, planning (including to normal operational activities, rather than as part of core priority setting) and monitoring. Well-reasoned priority responsibilities. In this regard, the purchaser-provider setting can be particularly important. For example, one model of organisational management, which will lesson from the recovery catchment process has been the inevitably take second place in emergency situations, has importance of planning management priorities in relation not always been successful. to a goal prior to engaging catchment landholders. This approach ensures that targeting of expenditure and the Related to the above, once a specialist operational group underlying reasons are clear at the outset to all has been allocated tasks for a given area, there is a stakeholders. In turn, this has avoided the creation of tendency for other operational personnel who have been false expectations that can later threaten the achievement involved in generic management activities, such as feral of outcomes. animal control, to shift their attention elsewhere.

25. Mainly salt (NaCl), nutrients and acidity.

44 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Consequently, there may be a double loss to the specialist relationship. Short-term projects with frequent staff management activity in both time lost by recovery officers changes and lack of an ongoing, coherent management helping generic management (such as bushfire approach are rarely successful, irritate local land managers suppression) outside the catchment, and loss of and often use resources inefficiently. operational resources that had once been allocated to work within the catchment. OTHER TECHNICAL AND OPERATIONAL ISSUES To help address these issues it is important that recovery Since 2001 there has been considerable progress in plans are completed, and there are more frequent joint relation to monitoring and evaluation and better reviews of progress between personnel from the Natural standardisation of data collection and storage. However, Resources Branch and regional personnel. These issues there is still significant scope for improvement including have been acknowledged, and steps are being taken to more frequent and comprehensive evaluation and address these matters. The appointment of contract reporting to explicitly test management strategies and hydrologists rather than employing consultants will greatly hypotheses. In addition, the high volume of data, reports assist in this regard. and publications associated with each recovery catchment, combined with comparatively frequent staff turnover and The benefits of attracting and retaining good staff for five weaknesses in information storage, have led to years or more are underlined by the generally improved inadequate tracking and collation of reports and data. liaison (see also section on Multiple Partnerships above), Successfully tackling this group of issues is critical to better skills development, and tighter linkages between sustaining high quality, long-term management. Currently research and operational work in catchments where (2010) considerable effort is being applied to bring officers have been retained for longer periods. The together hydrological data in a standard format across difficulty of achieving consistently effective interaction catchments, and to ensure that quality control and between research and management personnel has been assurance are implemented. Recovery planning will well documented (Wallace 1995; Halse and Massenbauer ensure that strategies and hypotheses concerning 2005). Somewhat ironically, officers operating at a high catchment processes are explicit and thus more readily level of performance may be inadvertently penalised by tested. having greater expectations and demands placed on them —this may contribute to burn out and lead to inequity An important operational issue in recent years has been across work groups. maintaining the pump network at Toolibin, where delays in repairing pumps and electrical systems have resulted in There are no simple means for improving the attraction periods of groundwater rise. There are inevitable and retention of rural-based staff. Short-term steps that difficulties in servicing complex systems in rural areas, and can be taken include ensuring that recovery catchment specific monitoring and emergency systems are required officer positions are offered at a level commensurate with to avoid unnecessary threats to recovery works. The the demands and expertise required of them, continuing difficulty of attracting and retaining personnel in rural to improve technical support through the Natural areas considerably exacerbates these issues. Resources Branch, and investing adequate resources in selection processes. Longer term, there are important In two catchments in particular, government subsidised issues that need to be addressed to improve the works on private property—such as revegetation and attractiveness of employment in rural areas. Quality and surface water management works—have been removed availability of education, medical and social facilities by landholders, generally after changes in property remain important issues. ownership. While formal agreements with landholders, including conservation covenants, have been considered In concluding this section it is important to emphasise that as a mechanism for dealing with this issue, landholders achievements in recovery catchments depend on are often reluctant to enter such agreements. To force consistent, recurrent funding from government at an this issue would almost certainly lead to an inadequate adequate level to support core recovery catchment work. level of recovery works on private property, and the In turn, for natural diversity recovery catchments this has increased transaction costs would probably exceed any depended on continuous support from three consecutive savings that might be generated. Thus, although the loss chief executive officers. No program of this nature could of catchment works is disappointing, the level of loss is be successful without such a high level of intra-agency sufficiently low that recovery programs are not support. As might be expected, local landholders also threatened, and in any case there are no cost-efficient prefer to interact with a long-term program with mechanisms for overcoming the deficiency. consistent resources and sufficient continuity of staff to allow them to evolve a predictable and positive Increased adoption of precision farming is itself a threat to

45 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review past works given the desire of many landholders to statutory requirements. Also, while some benefits can be operate over long, straight lines. This affects the uptake evaluated using financial methods, many public benefits of revegetation and surface water management works in are not assessable in these terms. For example, supply of general and increases the likelihood that past works will adequate potable water and air of a quality consistent be removed. Although sophisticated use of GPS would with human health are threshold assessments 26 , not allow precision farmers to follow contours, most, to date, financial ones. are using straight line methods. This poses significant problems for revegetation with belts and surface water Given the above, assessing value for money here involves management works aligned to contours—both important addressing three questions: techniques for delivering a range of conservation and production benefits. There are no obvious solutions to a. Is the natural diversity recovery catchment program this, although it is likely that the benefits of contour and consistent with the department’s statutory functions precision farming will be integrated, particularly once the and published policies and goals? technologies are further developed and when major b. If the answer to (a) is yes, does the program remain a erosion events have occurred that affect precision farmers. high priority in relation to the relevant departmental An important contribution to work in recovery catchments goals, and if so, is the investment level appropriate? has been the availability of external funds. However, the c. Overall, is the program delivering state community main external funding source has been the various forms benefits commensurate with the level of investment? of the Natural Heritage Trust (now Caring for our Country). The five-year cycles of this program, with Each of these questions is considered below. Although changing rules and approaches, is not conducive to sound the review focuses on the period 1996–2006, the long-term planning and the management of complex, following commentary includes some additional natural resource management issues. In this regard, the information up to and including March 2010. continuity of state recurrent funds has been vital to ensure the continuity of planning and basic operational Is the recovery program consistent with management, with boosts from external funds where they statutory functions and policies? have been available. It would not be possible to run an The role of DEC, as relevant to this review, is expressed effective, long-term catchment management program on a five-yearly basis with high uncertainty concerning future through the functions of the Chief Executive Officer under funding at the end of each funding cycle. section (33) of the Conservation and Land Management Act 1984 . The natural diversity recovery catchment Finally, grazing by native species, particularly western grey program is clearly consistent with these functions, in kangaroos, and degradation by pigs and other introduced species are causing an unexpectedly high level of issues in particular, those pertaining to: more than one recovery catchment. The increasing level • conserving flora and fauna throughout the state of pig introductions by illegal hunters, even into the • managing land (most of the biodiversity assets in the wheatbelt, is of considerable concern from a number of perspectives. natural diversity recovery catchments are on land to which the Act applies) THE RECOVERY CATCHMENT APPROACH – • promoting and encouraging revegetation to VALUE FOR MONEY? rehabilitate land or conserve biodiversity As part of this review it is important to assess whether the • research relevant to the other functions. natural diversity recovery catchment program provides The most pertinent published policy document is the value for money. Here, value for money is defined as government investment generating an acceptable level of Corporate Plan where the applicable goal is: overall, state community benefits where the assessment of To protect, conserve and, where necessary and benefits takes into consideration both negative and possible, restore Western Australia’s biodiversity. positive impacts. For a publicly funded program the judgement of ‘an acceptable level’ is ultimately socio- Again, the natural diversity recovery catchment program is political and, in addition, requires evaluation against consistent with this goal. This leads to the next question.

26. That is, life ultimately depends on individuals having enough air and water of a quality that will not cause death or serious illness. While acceptable mortality rates may be debated, these are threshold issues.

46 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Does the recovery program remain a high Nevertheless, the results (Table 9) provide a useful priority for conservation, and is investment estimate of the relative intensity of various threatening appropriate? processes and their likely impacts, and underline the This question needs to be addressed in relation to the continued importance of managing altered hydrology above goal, and can be broken down into three further including salinity. questions —are the biodiversity assets threatened by One important knowledge gap is that there was no basis altered hydrology of very high value; does addressing the for quantifying the likely number of extinctions due to threat of altered hydrology remain a high priority in the climate change at the time of the assessment, although context of other threatening processes (and the response some scientists consider this perhaps the most important to the previous question); and is the current investment threatening process. Therefore, it is useful to briefly appropriate given program outputs and outcomes in the analyse the potential impacts of climate change in relation context of answers to the two preceding questions? to the threat of altered hydrology.

In relation to the first of these questions, the biodiversity Climate change—particularly a drying climate—would be assets threatened by altered hydrology in recovery expected to decrease the threats posed by increasing catchments include: salinity and waterlogging. However, one possible scenario • three Wetlands of International Importance under the for the south-west is that extreme rainfall events will Ramsar Convention increase at the same time as overall rainfall decreases (Ruprecht et al. 2005). For example, over the last decade • more than 50 taxa listed as threatened or priority Lake Warden and Lake Bryde have received a remarkable species of native biota number of high magnitude rainfall events which have • three listed threatened ecological communities, and caused flooding. Given that extreme summer events can five priority ecological communities be a very significant source of recharge driving the rise of • habitat for at least 27 species of migratory waterbirds saline groundwater, particularly in the eastern wheatbelt protected under one or more of the international (George et al. 2008), climate change could exacerbate agreements with Japan, Republic of Korea and China rather than diminish the threat of altered hydrology • a wide range of biological communities that provide expressed as salinity. Not only would increasing extreme important representation of biota threatened by events increase recharge directly on valley floors, there will altered hydrology across six IBRA sub-regions (eight be increased runoff from slopes with associated recharge counting small areas that overlap into a second sub- both in situ and on the valley floor. region). These samples are particularly important in In addition, 2010 assessments of groundwater data the context of the predicted regional or global suggest that while the rate at which watertables are rising extinctions of up to 850 species of native taxa from and land is salinising has slowed, the ultimate extent of the south-west due to salinity. areas with shallow waters tables is unlikely to be This list clearly demonstrates the very important array of significantly less than forecast. What remains uncertain, biodiversity assets retained within the recovery as a result of enhanced climate variability, is how much of catchments. Their international significance is underlined this area demarked as a hazard actually becomes salt by the status of the south-west as a global biodiversity affected (Richard George, pers comm.). hotspot (Myers 2000), the only one in Australia. Thus, irrespective of how climate changes ultimately play This leads to a consideration of the second question, the out, ongoing hydrological management will be required in relative importance of managing altered hydrology. In late recovery catchments to conserve wetlands and their biota. 2004, a summary (Table 9) of the likely impacts of various For example, enhanced surface water management threatening processes in the south-west was estimated improves our capacity to manage water volumes reaching based on the then current literature and expert wetlands under either a drying or wetting scenario. At assessments by departmental scientists. This assessment the same time, a vital requirement for managing climate focused on the number of likely species 27 extinctions that change and variability is knowledge of landscape would arise if threatening processes were not managed. hydrology. At present, the natural diversity and water Such estimates, given extant knowledge gaps, are resources recovery catchments are the key means for necessarily coarse and involve important assumptions. establishing this knowledge base.

27. Of the widely recognised asset types —genes/alleles, taxa, biological communities, aggregations of biological communities and biomes —the species level is the most amenable for this type of analysis. However, analyses at the other levels of biological complexity are also important, but require substantial data. It is assumed here that managing species at risk of extinction will be an acceptable surrogate for communities.

47 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Table 9. Predicted number of extinctions in the south-west within 50 years, based on data as at October 2004. These estimates assume that no management action is taken over the 50-year period.

Threat category Predicted no. of (Dot point examples of key management issues) species extinctions Altered biogeochemical processes • hydrological processes, particularly salinity • nutrient cycles, including eutrophication • carbon cycle and climate change Only hydrological processes considered in this analysis 750

Impacts of disease • dieback ( Phytophthora spp.) 100+

Insufficient ecological and genetic resources to maintain viable populations/asset value • destruction of habitat (food, water, shelter, oxygen, access to mates) • land clearing • small population size and isolation 90

Impacts of introduced plants and animals • environmental weeds • feral predators • new introductions of damaging species • grazing by stock • competition for food and shelter (other than as above) 43

Detrimental regimes of physical disturbance events • fire • cyclones • flood • drought • erosion (wind, water, sedimentation) 20+

Impacts of problem native species • parrots • defoliation by scarab beetles, lerps, etc. 0

Impacts of pollution • oil, acid and other chemical spills • herbicide/pesticide use and direct impacts • secondary acidity (from drainage, canal construction) 0

In summary, successful management of altered hydrology, Nonetheless, it was estimated that in the 2007–08 including salinity, continues to be a high priority task in financial year the amount allocated to managing altered the south-west to achieve biodiversity conservation goals. hydrology (including salinity) was about 10 per cent of the Climate change will undoubtedly influence how this combined allocation to managing introduced animals, unfolds over the coming decades, and developing and introduced plants, disease, fire and altered hydrology. applying hydrological knowledge will be an increasingly From a comparison with Table 9, it can readily be seen crucial task for those managing natural resources. that the relative expenditure on salinity is, if anything, less In relation to the third question, the program outputs, than might be expected given the potential consequences expenditure and outcomes have all been summarised in of unmanaged salinity. In addition, as outlined above in the relevant sections above. Taken together they the section dealing with outcomes, management for represent a substantial and well-documented body of salinity makes an important contribution to the work. To assess relative departmental expenditure an management of terrestrial species through habitat attempt was made to analyse departmental expenditure provision and through the central importance of on each key threatening process. Unfortunately, the landscape hydrology in management of climate change. structure of departmental accounts made it difficult to However, it must also be emphasised that in the nature accurately summarise expenditure for the South West conservation area, DEC has many other commitments in Land Division against specific threatening processes. addition to managing threatening processes. Thus, the

48 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review relative allocation of resources is more complex than the program. These findings are uncontroversial. Given presented here. that the program is tackling altered hydrology over some 700,000 hectares of catchment, these positive impacts In conclusion, the Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment are, it is argued, significant and represent good value for Program is consistent with statutory and policy the expenditure. For the period 1996–2006 this obligations, tackles two of the major threatening expenditure ($16.17 million) was, on average, $23 per processes in the South West Land Division (altered hectare over the whole 10 years. hydrology and climate change/variability), is progressing the management of important biodiversity assets, and is The delivery of broader benefits from the program is based on a modest expenditure that is, if anything, less supported by other analyses. Specifically, it is estimated than might be expected (at least strictly on nature above in the Activities, Expenditure and Outputs section conservation grounds) given the proportional allocation of that more than 35 per cent of program expenditure (some resources in the south-west. On this basis it is concluded $5.66 million) during the period 1996–2006 benefited that the program represents good value for money from management of private property. That is, about one third the perspective of departmental functions and policy of the expenditure has private benefits in addition to the objectives, particularly nature conservation. This is benefits arising from better management of the particularly so given that progress is being made in a biodiversity assets that are the focus of departmental natural resource management arena where even slowing management. Additional financial gains will be realised the rate of decline is an achievement (see Outcomes through better protection of rural infrastructure, including section above for more detail). sections of public roads.

Delivery of state community benefits and Furthermore, Worley Parsons (2009), in a report for Verve summary of value for money Energy, calculated the present value of the broader regional benefits (that is, those arising from improved Apart from representing value for money in nature salinity management, aesthetics, additional employment, conservation terms, a wide variety of other community etc) from a biomass mallee industry in the Narrogin region benefits arise from the Natural Diversity Recovery to be about $95 million over 20 years, or an average of Catchment Program. Most have been outlined in the $4.75 million per year. This was based on there being Outcomes section above, but see also Appendix 1 for a about 5,000 hectares of mallees established in belts. The comprehensive summary. These additional community area of revegetation under the recovery program is about benefits include improved or additional: the same, but spread over six target areas rather than • protection of public roads and other infrastructure one. One would therefore expect a substantial benefit • contributions to industry development from recovery catchment revegetation. However, further • protection of farmland investigation would be required to properly quantify the benefit. To deliver the benefits calculated by Worley • landscape aesthetics Parsons, one would expect that revegetation would need • recreational opportunities to be highly targeted within one district, rather than six • health areas as under the recovery program. Also, the recovery • knowledge and educational opportunities catchment vegetation included block plantings for biodiversity, which has a smaller hydrological impact than • opportunity values. mallee belts of equivalent area. Nevertheless, the recovery As noted in the introduction to this value for money program is still much more targeted than most analysis, many important public benefits are not amenable revegetation programs, and as work continues, can be to financial evaluation, but are critical to human expected to deliver additional benefits increasingly in line wellbeing. One method for analysing the benefits with the Worley Parsons assessment. outlined in Appendix 1 is to compare the benefits arising Based on the above analysis, and given also the benefits from the program with those predicted to have arisen if outlined in Appendix 1 and Table 10, it is concluded that there were no program. That is, one can compare the the Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program not benefits arising from the program with those that are only represents good value for money in nature predicted to have occurred in the absence of the program. conservation terms, it provides a wide range of other Table 10 summarises this comparison in qualitative terms community benefits that ensure the program provides for the period 1996 to 2009. Note that the comparative substantial value for money to the state community. impact on benefits could be either positive or negative. However, in this case all the impacts of the program are positive in comparison with predicted outcomes without

49 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Table 10. Contribution of works in natural diversity recovery catchments to state community benefits. Marginal improvement shown by +, significant improvement by ++. There are no negative impacts from the works. See Appendix 1 for detailed description of benefits.

Brief description of benefit and, where Benefit relevant, sub-categories Impact Productive use These are the benefits from biodiversity and associated recovery works that are derived either from direct commercial harvesting or indirectly through enhancing the production of commercial goods. In recovery catchments benefits include: • food and fibre ++ • structural materials (for example wood products) + • energy, in the form of biofuels or bioenergy (e.g. wood pellets or electricity generation provided the mallee biomass project is successful) + • medical and other oil products (provided the mallee biomass project is successful) + • consumptive use +

Infrastructure for travel Includes positive effects on roads, railways, etc +

Recreation The importance of biodiversity for leisure activities is well known. In recovery catchments activities include bird watching, nature photography, bushwalking, canoeing and picnicking ++

Health (physical and These are benefits from biodiversity that contribute to the quality of our chemical environment) chemical and physical environment +

Health (protection from Biodiversity helps to maintain our health by protecting us from other other organisms) damaging organisms +

Aesthetics Scenic and other aesthetic benefits from natural landscapes ++

Philosophical/spiritual/intrinsic Biodiversity ethic values Land stewardship values ++

Knowledge and education Natural biodiversity is widely used for scientific research and educational purposes. In a very real sense, natural areas provide a library of knowledge ++

Opportunity The conservation of biodiversity provides for a range of future opportunities in any of the above categories ++

50 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review RECOMMENDATIONS

As noted by Wallace and Lloyd (2008): program deals with altered hydrology in general, not just salinity. This proposed change to the program After a decade, recovery catchments are valuable objective also acknowledges the growing importance examples of tackling difficult natural resource of climate change and variability as threats to problems at landscape scales. While there have been biodiversity, and the important role of recovery losses, progress towards biodiversity objectives catchments in modelling the impacts of hydrological generally has been positive, but not as rapid as hoped. change in general. The proposed goal would expand However, this is consistent with the physical inertia in recovery work to include, for example, the thrombolite the local systems and the need to collect adequate community at Lake Clifton, a threatened ecological data to underpin management decisions. At the same community. Ultimately, it would be useful to expand time, contributions to industry development, improved the role of the program to cover Ramsar Wetlands in understanding of wheatbelt environments and gains general as well as threatened ecological communities for sustainable land use have added to the success of where altered hydrology is the paramount threat. the program. The priority state community values underpinning In summary, the salinity initiative, including the Natural goals are explored and documented with each new Diversity Recovery Catchment Program, will continue to be recovery plan. These values (for example, see Table of high importance given the: 10) and their relative importance vary from catchment • high value of biodiversity assets at risk to catchment. To date it has been found that • severe consequences to biodiversity conservation of engaging advisory groups in assessing values of leaving altered hydrology unmanaged biodiversity increases the understanding and knowledge of all interest groups involved, including • vital contribution the program makes to our the department. This approach also provides one understanding of hydrology at landscape scales, which mechanism for assessing the value of outcomes for is essential to effectively manage climate money invested. change/variability and interactions among food supply, water supply, energy and biodiversity conservation Officers working in the recovery catchments program, particularly the hydrologists, are already providing • ability to deliver wider community benefits in rural advice outside the salinity initiative, so that this areas through the program’s contribution to recommendation is consistent with an existing trend. sustainable agricultural land use in particular, but also At current levels of funding, this will entail little more broadly to the state community. change in the current program, but see also In this context, augmented recovery program funding Recommendation (2) and (3) below. would increase delivery of a wide range of community benefits. Also, the Natural Resources Branch already 2. Consideration is given to re-allocating funds within the provides advice on hydrological and wetland management department’s salinity initiative to bolster work in the issues outside the recovery program, and has growing natural diversity recovery catchments. expertise in this area. This, and the contribution the Completing the necessary work required to meet branch offers in relation to climate change, provides recovery goals, including engineering and replacement important context for the following recommendations. of capital infrastructure, is important and difficult with Thus, concerning the future of the Natural Diversity current resources. Consequently, it is recommended Recovery Catchment Program and the role of the Natural that consideration is given to some re-allocation of Resources Branch, it is recommended that: funds within the salinity initiative to bolster work in 1. The goal of the Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment recovery catchments. Program becomes: 3. All current recovery catchments have recovery plans to To develop and implement works within the South the final draft stage by June 2013. West Land Division that protect, and where practicable Completion of recovery plans for each of the existing recover, the biodiversity of significant, natural recovery catchments has proved to be a difficult task, wetlands and associated valley biological communities largely given the need to collect and analyse essential from the adverse effects of altered hydrology. Primary information, but also due to the lack of central values underpinning this goal will be specified for each resources to undertake the necessary specialist writing catchment project. and hydrological work. Implementation of the above Complex interactions between salinity and recommendations will greatly speed the preparation of waterlogging have long meant that the recovery recovery plans.

51 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review 4. The department seeks to expand the Natural Diversity mechanisms for attracting and retaining staff in Recovery Catchment Program as resources become rural areas. available. Priorities for consideration, should funds 6. Work within the department to develop an industry become available, will be biological communities based on mallees is maintained until June 2014, at threatened by altered hydrology in the Hutt River and which point progress should be reviewed. This date is Lake Gore catchments. consistent with DEC’s formal commitments to the This is an aspirational proposal that acknowledges the Future Farm Industries Cooperative Research Centre. desirability of expanding the current program. Currently the department maintains a woody crop 5. Key technical and operational issues within the development program based largely on mallees. In recovery catchments are addressed. 2010 this is making steady progress towards a At an operational level many issues highlighted above commercial outcome. This program delivers to a and in the previous review require additional work to number of the department’s statutory functions, but in improve effectiveness and efficiency. These include, particular “to promote and encourage the planting of but are not restricted to, developing and trees and other plants for the purposes of the rehabilitation of land or the conservation of implementing: biodiversity throughout the state, and to undertake a. improved planning systems, including advances in any project or operation relating to the planting of feasibility analysis, and the assessment of risk and trees or other plants for such a purpose” values. Some of this work will be delivered (Section 33(1) (cc) of CALM Act). through a project with the Future Farm Industries In relation to the salinity program, the development of Cooperative Research Centre, however, additional a mallee industry or equivalent has the capacity to activities will also be required encourage broadscale revegetation at, once the b. improved conceptual and numerical models industry is established, little government cost. This has combined with monitoring systems appropriate to major implications for managing salinity and other support (5a) and to ensure continued land degradation. URS (2004) estimated that development of knowledge and adaptation of commercially driven perennial revegetation could operational activities. This will be particularly reduce government management costs in recovery important in the context of climate catchments by 50 per cent. Early plantings of the change/variability and likely changes in catchment program are already playing an important role in some land use. Physical monitoring in recovery recovery catchments, and at the same time such catchments to be managed through the recovery revegetation provides additional habitat for native planning process plus a group of recovery species, and discourages planting of potential woody catchment officers. Biodiversity monitoring will, in weeds. the first instance, be developed through recovery In addition, the mallee program is contributing to a plans. Progress to be reviewed within two years wide range of other outcomes including the (2012) management of climate change. For example, c. improved communication of recovery catchment plantings contribute to carbon sequestration and, if a information and outcomes, including a bioenergy industry develops, will also assist in redeveloped website replacing non-renewable energy sources. d. the very effective interagency links and Thus, it is particularly important that the program be collaboration that have evolved with external maintained. The program should be reviewed prior to partners, including regional natural resource the cessation of the Future Farm Industries management groups, universities and landholders, Cooperative Research Centre on 30 June 2014. There and to expand these links nationally (for example, are ongoing departmental commitments until that through involvement with the Future Farm date, and this therefore provides a convenient review Industries Cooperative Research Centre) point. e. a process for ensuring that, where the success of recovery projects is threatened by changed circumstances (such as changing regional staff commitments), the issues should be discussed as early as practicable with appropriate managerial staff f. in relation to incentives schemes, consistent cost- sharing arrangements across catchments g. a review charged with the task of proposing

52 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review REFERENCES

Agriculture Western Australia, Department of Conservation and Government of Western Australia. 2002. Government Response Land Management, Department of Environmental Protection, to the Salinity Taskforce Report – Salinity: A New Balance. Water and Rivers Commission. 1996a. Salinity: a Situation Government of Western Australia, Perth. Statement for Western Australia. Government of Western Halse, S.A., Pearson, G.B., McRae, J.M. and Shiel, R.J. (2000). Australia, Perth. Monitoring aquatic invertebrates and waterbirds at Toolibin and Agriculture Western Australia, Department of Conservation and Walbyring Lakes in the Western Australian Wheatbelt. Journal of Land Management, Department of Environmental Protection, the Royal Society of Western Australia . 83 : 17-28. Water and Rivers Commission. 1996b. Western Australian Halse, S.A. and Massenbauer, T. 2005. Incorporating research Salinity Action Plan. Government of Western Australia, Perth. results into wetland management: lessons from recovery CALM (Department of Conservation and Land Management). catchments in saline landscapes. Hydrobiologia 552 : 33-44. 2004. Search Project Report. Department of Conservation and Harrinton, C., Curtis, A., and Black, R. 2008. Locating Land Management, Perth. Communities in Natural Resource Management. Journal of Colls, K. and Whittaker, R. 1990. The Australian Weather Book. Environmental Policy & Planning 10 (2): 199–215. National Book Distributions, New South Wales. Hooper, D.U., Chapin III, F. S., Ewel, J. J., Hector, A., Inchausti, P., Commonwealth of Australia. 2008. Caring for our Country Lavorel, S., Lawton, J. H., Lodge, D. M., Loreau, M., Naeem, S., Business Plan 2009-2010. Commonwealth of Australia, Schmid, B., Setälä, H., Symstad, A. J., Vandermeer, J., Wardle, D. Canberra. A. 2005. Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a consensus of current knowledge. Ecological Monographs 75 (1): Department of Environment and Conservation. 2007. Buntine- 3-35 Marchagee Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment: Recovery Plan: 2007-2027. Huggett, A.J., Parsons, B., Atkins, L. and Ingram, J.A. 2004. Taking on the challenge: Landscape design for bird conservation Department of Environment. 2003. Salinity Investment in Buntine-Marchagee Catchment. Internal technical report on Framework Interim Report – Phase I, 2003. Department of Component 1 of ‘Testing approaches to landscape design in Environment, Salinity and Land Use Impacts Series No. SLUI 32. cropping land’ project. Perth, Western Australia and Canberra, Department of Environment. 2005. Section 46 Progress Report – ACT, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems. State of the Gnangara Mound. Department of Environment, Jones, S., Lacey, P., and Walshe, T. 2009. A dynamic hydrological Government of Western Australia. Monte Carlo simulation model to inform decision-making at Lake Ecoscape. 2009. Vegetation Monitoring of Lake Toolibin and Toolibin, Western Australia. Journal of Environmental Reserves , report for the Department of Environment and Management 90 :1761–1769. Conservation, Perth. Keighery, G.J., Halse, S.A., and McKenzie, N. 2002. Why Environmental Protection Authority. State of the Environment wheatbelt valleys are valuable and vulnerable: the ecology of Report Western Australia 2007. Government of Western wheatbelt valleys and threats to their survival. Dealing with Australia, Perth. Salinity in Wheatbelt Valleys: Processes, Prospects and Practical Options . Water and Rivers Commission, Perth. George, R.J., Beasley, R., Gordon, I., Heislers, D., Speed, R., Brodie, R., McConnell, C., and Woodgate, P. 1999. Evaluation of Keighery, G. J., Halse, S. A., Harvey, M. S. and McKenzie, N. L. Airborne Geophysics for Catchment management, National 2004. A Biodiversity Survey of the Western Australian Agricultural Report, pp 81. Zone. Welshpool, Western Australia. Western Australian Museum, Supplement No. 67. George, R.J. and Woodgate, P. 2002. Critical factors affecting the adoption of airborne geophysics for management of dryland Lane, J. A. K., Pearson, G. B., Clarke, A. G., Winchcombe, Y. C. salinity. Exploration Geophysics 33 (2):90-96. and Munro, D. R. (dec). 2004. Depths and Salinities of Wetlands in South-Western Australia: 1977-2000. Department of George, R.J., Dogramaci, S., and Wyland, J. 2004. Can Conservation and Land Management, Perth. groundwater pumps and surface water engineering protect Lake Toolibin? 1st National Salinity Engineering Conference 9-12 McFarlane, D.J., George, R.J. and Farrington, P. 1993. Changes November 2004 Perth, Western Australia. Institution of in the hydrologic cycle. Pp 146-86 in Reintegrating Fragmented Engineers, Australia, Barton. Landscapes: Towards Sustainable Production and Nature Conservation , eds R.J. Hobbs and D.A. Saunders. Springer-Verlag, George, R.J., Speed R.J., Simons, J.A., Smith, R.H., Ferdowsian, New York. R., Raper, G.P. and Bennett D.L. (2008). Long-term groundwater trends and their impact on the future extent of dryland salinity in McFarlane, D.J., George, R.J. and Caccetta, P.A. 2004. The Western Australia in a variable climate. Australia Proc. Second Int. extent and potential area of salt-affected land in Western Salinity Forum. Available at Australia estimated using remote sensing and digital terrain www.internationalsalinityforum.org/14_final.html. models. Pp 55-60 in 1st National Salinity Engineering Conference 9-12 November 2004 Perth, Western Australia. Institution of Gibbs, W.J., Maher, J.V., and Coughlan, M.J. 1978. Patterns of Engineers, Australia, Barton. shorter-term change and variability. In Climatic Change and Variability. A Southern Perspective , eds A.B. Pittock, L.A. Frakes, Munro, J.K. and Moore, S.A. 2007. Using landholder perspectives D. Jenssen, J.A. Peterson, J.W. Zillman on behalf of Australian to evaluate and improve recovery planning for Toolibin Lake in Branch, Royal Meteorological Society. Cambridge University the West Australian wheatbelt. Ecological Management and Press, Melbourne. Restoration 6, 111-117. Gibson, N., and Keighery, G.J. 2000. Flora and vegetation of the Myers, N. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Byenup-Muir reserve system, south-west Western Australia. Nature 403 :853-858. CALMScience 3(3), 323-402.

53 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Noorduijn, S.L., Ghadouani, A., Vogwill, R., Smettem, K. R. J., Wallace, K.J. and Lloyd, C.R. 2008. Managing salinity and water and Legendre, P. Response of the water table to an experimental for conservation outcomes. 2nd International Salinity Forum: alley farming trial: dissecting the spatial and temporal structure of Salinity, water and society–global issues, local action. Available at the data. Submitted to Ecological Applicationsi . www.internationalsalinityforum.org/14_final.html. Noorduijn, S.L., Smettem, K. R. J., Vogwill, R., and, Ghadouani, Walshe, T.V., Halse, S.A., McKenzie, N.L. and Gibson, N. 2004. A. 2009. Relative impacts of key drivers on the response of the Towards an identification of an efficient set of natural diversity water table to a major alley farming experiment. Submitted to recovery catchments in the Western Australian wheatbelt. Hydrology and Earth Systems Sciences 13 : 2095-2104. Records of the Western Australian Museum Supplement No. 67:365-384. Richardson, J., Langley, M. Meissner, R. and Hopkins, A. 2004. Biodiversity Assessment and Vegetation Mapping of the Northern Walshe, T. 2005. Decision Framework for Natural Diversity Agricultural Region, Western Australia. Northern Agricultural Program: Scoping Project. Unpublished report for the Catchment Council and the Department of Conservation and Department of Conservation and Land Management. Centre of Land Management, Perth, Western Australia. 106 pages. Excellence in Natural Resource Management, University of Western Australia, Perth. Robertson, D., and Massenbauer, T. 2005. Robertson D. and Massenbauer T. (2005) Applying Hydrological Thresholds to Walshe, T., Jones, S., and Massenbauer, T. 2007. Decision Wetland Management for Waterbirds, Using Bathymetric Surveys Framework for Natural Diversity Recovery Program and GIS. In Zerger, A. and Argent, R.M. (eds) MODSIM 2005 (Implementation). Unpublished report for the Department of International Congress on Modelling and Simulation. Modelling Environment and Conservation. University of Melbourne, and Simulation Society of Australia and New Zealand, December Victoria. 2005, pp. 2407-2413. ISBN: 0-9758400-2-9. Walshe, T., and Massenbauer, T. 2008. Decision-making under http://www.mssanz.org.au/modsim05/papers/robertson_2.pdf climatic uncertainty: A case study involving an Australian Ramsar- Robertson, M.J., Measham, T.G., Batchelor, G., George, R., listed wetland. Ecological Management and Restoration 9 Kingwell, R., and Hosking, K. 2009. Effectiveness of a publicly- (3):202-208. funded demonstration program to promote management of Woodgis Environmental Assessment and Management. 2009. dryland salinity. Journal of Environmental Management in press. Desktop Assessment: Rangelands Context for Potential Natural Ruprecht, Li Y., Campbell, E., and Hope, P. 2005. How extreme Diversity Recovery Catchments. Unpublished report for the south-west rainfalls have changed. Indian Ocean Climate Department of Environment and Conservation. Perth. Initiative, Climate Note 6/05. Worley Parsons. 2009. Economics Assessment of Renewable Smith, Patrick. 2009. Biodiversity Benefits of Oil Mallees. Fact Energy Options. A report prepared for Verve Energy, Western Sheet. CSIRO and Future Farm Industries Cooperative Research Australia. Centre. Sparks, T., George, R., Wallace, K., Pannell, D., Burnside, D., and Stelfox, L. 2006. Salinity Investment Framework Phase II . Western Australia Department of Water, Salinity and Land Use Impacts Series, Report No. SLUI 34. State Salinity Council. 2000. Natural Resource Management in Western Australia: Salinity. Government of Western Australia, Perth. URS. 2004. Salinity Investment Framework Phase II, assessment of technical and economic feasibility of investing in managing salinity threats to Tier 1 State assets. Unpublished report prepared for the Department of Environment, Western Australia. Wallace, K.J. 1995. Remnant Native Vegetation Ten Years On: A Decade of Research and Management. Department of Conservation and Land Management, Western Australia. Wallace, K.J. (compiler). 2001. State Salinity Action Plan 1996: Review of the Department of Conservation and Land Management’s Programs, January 1997 to June 2000. Department of Conservation and Land Management, Perth. Available at http://www.naturebase.net/pdf/projects/ salinity_report_june2001.pdf Wallace, K.J., Beecham, B.C., and Bone, B.H. 2003b. Managing Biodiversity in the Western Australian Wheatbelt: A Conceptual Framework. Department of Conservation and Land Management, Perth. Wallace, K.J. 2006. A decision framework for natural resource management: a case study using plant introductions. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46 (11): 1397-1405.

54 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS

CALM Department of Conservation and Land Management

CAMBA China-Australia Migratory Bird Agreements

CMS Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals

DAFWA Department of Agriculture and Food (WA)

DEC Department of Environment and Conservation

DRF Declared rare flora

DoW Department of Water

IBRA Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation of Australia

JAMBA Japan-Australia Migratory Bird Agreements

LWWS Lake Warden Wetland System

NAP National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality

NHT Natural Heritage Trust

NRM Natural resource management

PEC Priority ecological community

ROKAMBA Republic of Korea-Australia Migratory Bird Agreements

TEC Threatened ecological community

WA Western Australia

55 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review APPENDIX 1: Benefits arising from biodiversity assets in recovery catchments and associated recovery works

Benefit Description of benefit and dot point examples from recovery catchment works

Productive use These are the benefits from biodiversity and associated recovery works that are derived either from direct commercial harvesting or indirectly through enhancing the production of commercial goods. In recovery catchments benefits include: • food and fibre, in this case improved hydrological management through surface water engineering, revegetation, and protection/management of remnant vegetation will decrease production losses due to waterlogging and salinity. In addition, strategically placed revegetation (particularly mallee belts) will also contribute to increased production 28 through decreased wind and water erosion, increased stock protection, etc. Elements of these benefits occur across all recovery catchments. • structural materials (for example, wood products) from some forms of revegetation – largely a potential, rather than realised, benefit. Lake Warden, Muir-Unicup and Toolibin Lake catchments in particular. • energy, in the form of biofuels or bioenergy (for example, wood pellets or electricity generation) derived from mallee plantings established for hydrological control with incentive payments from recovery catchment funds. Benefit will be realised provided the developing mallee industry becomes fully commercial. Toolibin, and to a lesser extent Lake Warden and Buntine-Marchagee. • medical and other oil products derived from mallee plantings established for hydrological control with incentive payments from recovery catchment funds. Benefit will be realised provided the developing mallee industry becomes fully commercial. Toolibin, and to a lesser extent Lake Warden and Buntine-Marchagee.

Consumptive use These are the benefits from biodiversity and associated recovery works that are harvested for domestic uses and do not pass through a market. These include:

• firewood and structural timbers harvested sustainably from revegetation established for hydrological control – currently a potential, rather than realised, benefit.

Infrastructure for travel Includes positive effects on roads, railways, etc.

• surface water engineering and revegetation protect and improve the maintenance of public roads and related infrastructure, such as culverts, in four recovery catchments (Buntine-Marchagee, Toolibin, Lake Bryde and Lake Warden).

Recreation The importance of biodiversity for leisure activities is well known. In recovery catchments activities include birdwatching, nature photography, bushwalking, canoeing and picnicking. Research links recreation in natural environments to both physical and mental health. There are strong links between recreation and amenity (aesthetic) values. Loss of native plants and animals and loss in water quality in wetlands all have a negative impact on aesthetics and leisure. Specific examples of recovery catchment benefits with regard to leisure include:

• tourist and local community sites at Lake Warden and Muir Unicup based on the wetlands • local community sites at Toolibin, Lake Bryde • general use of reserves for leisure in all recovery catchments, including annual visits by large groups in some cases.

28. Note that revegetation and structures can also occupy agricultural land, and may result in production losses. Outcomes need to be generated for a specific site.

56 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Benefit Description of benefit and dot point examples from recovery catchment works

Health (physical and These are benefits from biodiversity that contribute to the quality of our chemical and chemical environment) physical environment. For example, remnant vegetation is often retained to provide shade or wind protection for people, revegetation with native species may be used to minimise dust in the atmosphere (and therefore allergic problems). Work in all recovery catchments: • in the case of revegetation, contributes to a more benign climate through carbon sequestration and lowering wind speeds at landscape scales where plantings are sufficiently extensive • dust reduction through retained vegetation and revegetation may have a positive effect on human health through decreasing allergies • maintaining biodiversity in the landscape increases the probability that bio-indicators will provide an early warning of problems in the environment (for example, experience with lead poisoning at Esperance where death of native birds highlighted the problem).

Health (protection from Biodiversity helps to maintain our health by protecting us from other damaging other organisms) organisms. Includes: • maintaining biologically diverse wetlands and drainage lines reduces the probability of poisonous cyanobacteria blooms. Biodiversity may also contribute to suppression of disease organisms or disease-spreading organisms (inferred on the basis of general principles as outlined in Hooper et al. 2005). • medical products from eucalypts (see productive use above).

Aesthetics Scenic and other aesthetic benefits from natural landscapes, beauty of wildflowers and birds. Includes sense of place values, although this could be incorporated into the next category. Maintaining recovery catchments in good condition is a major contribution to this value. For example, two farmers participating in an expert assessment of the impacts of belt plantings of mallees estimated that the resulting improvement in landscape aesthetics was 20–60 per cent compared with the landscape without belts (unpublished data).

Philosophical/spiritual/intrinsic All humans operate within either an explicit or implicit set of philosophical beliefs that establish and explain the role of humans in the world/universe and these beliefs provide guidance for how people think they should live their lives and interact with other people, other organisms, and the inanimate world. Biodiversity is often an important part of our spiritual/philosophical and moral framework. Intrinsic values are incorporated here given that they are a statement of beliefs. Species extinctions and degradation of wetland communities would be a major negative in this regard, thus conservation of wetlands and their biodiversity contributes to benefits in this area.

Knowledge and education Natural biodiversity is widely used for scientific research and educational purposes. In a very real sense, natural areas provide a library of knowledge about how more complex systems function, and this knowledge may be explored and used to inform human understanding and progress. A very simple example of this is the use of native bushland remnants as baseline sites for comparison with farmland to assess changes in soil structure and condition. Other examples include the widespread use of bushland to research natural processes, and as an educational resource used by schools to explore the relationships between living and non-living components of the environment. In recovery catchments, benefits include: • educational use of all recovery catchments, including constructed nature trails and/or information sites in three recovery catchments (Lake Warden, Muir-Unicup and Toolibin) • applied, scientific research across all recovery catchments is a major contribution to improving management of agricultural landscapes across southern Australia, particularly the south-west. This includes an important contribution to managing climate variability through building an understanding of the hydrological interactions with climate at catchment scales.

57 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review Benefit Description of benefit and dot point examples from recovery catchment works

Opportunity The conservation of biodiversity provides for a range of future opportunities in any of the above categories. The most obvious example is the genetic resource in native plants. Opportunity values include those values listed elsewhere in this table that are not currently realised. In recovery catchments, they will include maintaining the opportunity for:

• discovery of currently unknown benefits in our native biota (including germplasm resource in native plants) • retained opportunities to utilise aesthetic and recreational values of natural areas as surrounding environments become increasingly degraded • future generations to make their own decisions concerning biodiversity values and their use.

58 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review 3 0 4 0 2 6 1 e 6 4 1 7 4 4 5 r 8 0 6 2 1 5 6 , , , , , , , u t 3 7 3 8 3 9 5 i 4 7 4 0 2 1 1 d 7 2 3 8 8 1 n , 1 e p x E S L A T O 5 4 0 9 6 0 0 5 5 9 1 0 0 0 5 8 6 3 7 9 8 0 0 7 9 4 T 9 3 8 6 4 0 4 1 3 3 0 1 8 2 0 8 2 6 3 1 9 s 6 3 3 5 3 1 1 1 5 3 , , , , , c i 3 4 1 1 1 t 5 4 6 s i 7 8 1 , t 1 a t S d l u ) l o e h v s e e t l s a l t e s a v r e n e o s n i e o g r i e t l r a a t v u r a ( e d i s v d n i d d e o d t e e c n d v v e i l l l e o , o o p v t e l d v v t d n m d e o n n i i i e o s o e v t c s n e a s n s s c ( i r r a h e e s m e e c h r s d p n ) r o r c d d e s u l l c o r e u e d g g i v d s n c o o l u t p i d e n n e o l a n i i t h h a p o t g y s s s c c o o e v a d d l l d r e n d t d n n h d i s n e e i n n n o v i e l d r m c e e n e d c c r i a a e s s s t d f f r r e l l e i n a e s n u d b a f g g g l r r e a a f f d m s f f e f t e e a r a r n n n i f l f c g t p p o o i i i l v o o u o h s l l l i m o r a o f f n n s c b . . s s s e c a d d d d d b o e o a o y r m m a o o e e e f f l e e a a s c e e e a n n e t t t . k k r r n n e e e e i i i o p o s e e e a a h v m o r r r a r l l m l l s s s s s s l l e r e e r t n k a a a a a a a r f f f f f a a ...... i u b t t o t t e e e l l l l o o o s o s o o o o o o o s r r r f o o a o o a y a a a ...... r l N N N t N N N T T t t t t e T T A A A o o o o o o o r e n ...... o o . o o . . . n b c a e a d b c T N A N o T a b c e d N T N N T N N P e ) m a e e t r t - s s u o a h t g a l r v b . f n i h l c o d r , f c o f o e t r l e d f p n r o r t e . u e n o a e i s a s n e r n p a ) t t r c s o r s o , , c a n o n d u s c s t e o . s e a d i y f n e i e r s g k c y h r r e a r f u y t g e r l n e d l i v n u i o e o v r r o e p a l n e n e v C i s c s u v w l t o g t n e s t u v a a . r e n e y a a l n i , s s t v l t n v v o i i h I c a i e a e f a p r t r . s t t s n n r e s p o o c m . s a s r d e a f e t s e f r d c m m d n c h v s m e p i e o n n i e c n r s a e a f s r t r d c o e u a e o . s i o f l r e u o g m n s e t r d r y i r f o p p s c n , o d s u g p b e f i i s s l o e o f r t n n t d c t c f t ) y i y h i o a a l e n e c n s l o t n u t l n t v t i v i s r a e s a i r a a b o t i i l t i i t n n u p n r e h d o c s c o o o s s c r o r s h w r n n t m e n l r n e e r f e g o p a m e a p t u t s r o v r t u s , l p r m p u d c e e o s C e i o o x o t o d b n r r e c m f b n e ( v e v n n a y h p u e o i h o n l t s t t s a o d I t c i p r n y a a d e s s l . d s e s e t d v l o . o g i t n a d i e n e a p t a e r t n n b s y a a i b v o e i l o l n v t t i o a r o c r a i i u i r t i s d t r c t a e c s y a t h p a a e e c u c e r f s d o l i t a s r g a e e f e t e d t g e c e n m a r t t v e p e e n r n i n y g o i a i v ) s u a l i m e d g o g r d l e t v d g o . t t e a i o d , v a n o o r i a r u r i i n g r v c o l e d i p . t p v g a p e b r r r c n r f t s o e e ( i e ( t t y n o o e f n t o n l n i x t n d l s a e c c s i o ( a s s o t e r s e a e n f g n y y n n i i e s t s l f o g e s o o e e c r o i l e g o u o r d c m n k v v e e r r i t i r e r r n f . m e e i r f b c a y g p f a v r r o u u o n t v o i n m i n u e d s s i o d a l i t o o r w g l e i i t c b n l l t n e f a d m t , n u r b c r – t a a a i s o u i o a y g g s t i o a o l c c l a a t t i c i i d i s f s c e n n c r h r e i i v y s g g b s e n s d t t k n i e s g a g e i a o o r t n a u a a h p d t l l n h e v l m t t i h n p e e r o c o a n v o o r c s r r e i i r r o u x o u e h e u n n U r R i p c f n C C s t o B t E W B i p t u e o l b a d i v n t r a o p e p r u s u t o i t s d e n c r e u o p s e x r : E l a 2 c i 6 g X 0 o I l s 0 o n D c 2 o e i t N s f – a t o l E a 6 u k e P p r 9 c o h a P 9 T L p 1 A

59 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review 0 2 8 7 6 2 0 e 5 9 9 9 2 7 6 r 2 5 9 8 6 6 1 , , , , , , u t 8 9 3 7 5 6 i 6 6 8 d 7 1 n e p x E S L A T O 1 4 0 0 2 0 1 0 6 9 1 0 0 0 9 1 0 6 1 1 1 5 9 6 T 1 1 0 2 0 1 5 3 9 6 2 4 s 0 3 3 1 1 , , c i 2 5 t s i t a t S y y y y l l l l n n n n o o o o d d d d l l l l s u u u u t o o o o n h h h h e s s s s m s s s s s u e e e e n c v v v v r r r r o o i e e e e t d s s s s a r e e e e g r r r r e i t l l l l h t s a a a a e o u u u u v d d d d d i i i i n i n v v v v i i i i a d d d d d n s n n n n i i i i a n d , , , , a s s e l e e e e t s s s s t t t t v e p r l e e e e r o o o o o t t t t f o i i i i n n n n u v p o ( ( ( ( s s s s s e d n t i r y y y y a d d d d e d s t t t t r i f e e e e s e r r r r ) ) ) ) e l t t t t r e r s o e e e e e e e e t v a a a a e e m n c c c c s d d d d p p p p ) n e e e e t o v d e e e e e n n n n y l o o o o r r r r t l c a t t t t e n o r r r r t t t t g o o o o t o e i c c a a a a n a p p p p s n t d d d d r s s s s h i e e e e n d d d d n e s a e e e e m r r r r e e e e d c e e e e t e e e e w r t t t t t t t t a e i t t t t v v v v e m n n t a r r r r d d d d r s a a a a i a a a a e s s s s e e r r r r a m e e e e e e e e p r l s t f v v v v f f e e e e r r r r i i i i o o o o r s s s s e t t t t a t t t t o o f f f r r r r f c c c c i i i i e e e e r s o p p s r p s r s r s r p o o o ( o e e e e f a a a a a a a r r r r ...... r t p e e e e e e o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o s r r r r r r m e e e e e e i b N b N N N b A b N N A N N N N N N A A K A N N N A S L P e t a v i r p n o . n s t o i n t a a t n . e e y v g t r e o e c v p e n o v r o i i t p t a a e n v t r f a e v o s i r t n p n o c e n y o m . b e e n g s v o t a i o t n n b a a a a t n e m d g m e d e e t r v n s i . l a t r e . : t e n n n n a g h a o a o v t n i i n s i h t i o r s t d c m a p e i r e . u – i l e l l f t r t e l c i o o o d h f o r r n v . t . r t i n l o e i l p t o n a t o g s o n g r o r c d e a h t o g t i c n r e a c i t c n n n e r v r t i c i o v o a k e o d n n c b c r r o e p e e n b s p x o C F e o g a a e i l r o m P F R W R P • • p I W . g e l n i e b c d a . i n o s v l s a e o a l e c t b i f r r n t m , i o u i a t t v p n b i h s r t i a p g c u d u u t d a s l s o n l i a r l o a c d t d i A s , s y s t l . . e y e t n t n n h c n a n o r l o p e l e ) u p f e c d o m m y o h d s e e t c e e s e u g , g r s c e n i a e a i l u r t n m n i a e d i f n a r a c o i g i o s r f m m e g c t a , r ( r o n e e l l i h s o r g i a o f c f n f t a c u o o t d n e i s o s e t e s t , s f t s a s s t o l i c m t e o a i u t h a r n p k e t t a p p r e c o l e t o r v h a e m p L r I p A e D T

60 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review 9 4 0 5 6 0 8 1 1 6 4 5 e 3 4 8 9 0 9 4 7 7 4 7 8 r 3 4 0 9 0 4 8 2 7 1 3 0 , , , , , , , , , , , u , t 8 2 9 6 5 6 1 5 8 5 0 3 i 2 0 3 2 3 8 1 4 0 1 7 d 8 8 1 5 6 1 2 6 1 n , , , , 3 3 1 e 6 1 p x E S L A T O 2 9 4 9 5 0 7 1 2 0 0 2 0 6 1 9 7 9 0 4 0 5 0 7 5 8 7 8 4 T 1 9 2 5 0 2 2 1 4 4 4 1 9 3 3 0 4 0 7 3 5 7 1 3 1 s 2 3 3 1 0 3 8 3 1 9 9 , , , , , c i 5 1 7 1 3 t 2 1 5 s i 2 2 8 , t 1 a t S s e r s s s o t t t b r r r o o o g p p p n i e e e r r r r e , , , t s s s a n n n o o o w i i i s d d - t t t e e e e s a a a c v v d g i l l g g g s i i i v n f o o t t t i r e v v s t h h o s s s e r t t n n e e e n i i r S r r i i m u v v v a s e o o s e l r w w s s n n n e t b r r i i i ; ; p i o a t t s d t l l e e e e d d f f f i e m a e r r e n a a e e d d s o o o e s u l l i t t v u u e e o l i m g g s t t i ) ) ) s s n o o a a V t e d d t c c n n e y y y d d r g g , e e h h i i s e l l l e a c h u u d r r s s e e r r e c c n n d d s t e e e v r r c t t t t a o i i t i n e p p t t t p r d d t t n n i l l n n r g n n r n a e s s s s a a a a u u e e e s s e e i d d d w a a p n t r r r e a a t t f f a l l s r e e i e e o o l l f f e e e t s t t t t n a a a t t a a r r s n p f f i i l f f i i p p o o e e k n I e m u e e p p p m g g i s s r s s o o s s o o a o o l r r r e r e e e O a a c h h a t t f f f f f f e . . . . o . . s s s t t o p e e P o o o o m o o v d o o N ( ( ( o o o o m m r r f d g g a a p ...... r t t t K K N N N N N N e e e n n n A A a o o o o o o o s s o s o o r r e ...... e i i e a . i e . . . f N N N N N N N S L A I L L a c N b c b L a e L L e d N A d N P e c d i t e n r c i r . l t a a a a . l r o n s e u r l m p e e t . c c i , s . u n h t m g t l f s e t r o i h n n a e o c i a c c v e u n w t d p l y l l t e a m u l ) a a i r l e . c s y c v a d o c s i s t s r f s r t u n o g p e e i t e a e a s o u d n l s t s p t l e o c e s o i o t a r o u a l r g a r s ( g p n i N b d e l p r c n r y u s i g i e . l e e n h e t p a , i t g b h x a s f n t c a t n u i e h e i c o e v o t a p i c e f e r p r t l t e r t n l s o t d p v i o c e e i a r f e e t g h d n m t p t v c d n s e i o i o o e t n m v e j r o ( n c s t i a o o d b p e s r a c a u o y s r l p e n p o t t e r c s d t r o i n l i m a i t e n o e i t i s I t r a a r p r a f d d . a p o l o . s e g m e o n l r i e r h y e n t a l r o t i t p l l h a r e s c t n u t e a i e d g e l i e n e a n t v c n c , p w l r a o w n m a s n f i ) c v a e o / . p i o o y r c r y l e r i . t h o r m t a o v l t r a p C y c l i e l a e c r e e n t l m l i v c n n v c a . h e p a c o g o ) t u r e o o e e c i o c o e m e s d o r d p l s s e v t e w e e s n h p r o k k r t . e o s g r t e , o i r r f n e r g h b e a d n g n o o d t t o i o w ( p a n y e n o i t n a s t i w w t i i h a o c v s y t n n a n i l t n a v f i l n a a r . i o o g g m i e . l i i g c o e a e e f p n t n n t t y i i f r r , i i t n m c c o o c a a i r r n e e i a i g u n r t t r s l e e e a t v u e s n b o e e t e i e o o g t i e e i a t e t c g g r d m k i a p n s n e n n c c m t e i i i r e e r u j n n u a e n t l m n l j c v v g g d m o o a o e c a o o o e e e o b l r n n r n o n C V N p p R M M a E E R I c o a R W C l o r t e n v o a c . h r t g e n n n t i e o i a i . g l r t s t g a e e u r s o l b t s N r s e y e e c . t a u o n a r q m p w w e t l e s o u s d a h c n u b n s i e o , r a e m y b u d c t y t e r r i e l t h a i u v u d i c c o n c t u i o s l l c d e e e c a a t r n g s n a i a o y i g t i l r n n g a b n i p e t n h o o s i d t e e r t e p e p a p b r e p h e p t e t i m r t t a r o l o o h t n s I A N T C s n i

61 Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment Program: 2010 Review 201026 8-811-1 000