Threatened Ecological Community Nomination Form - for listing or changing the status of an ecological community under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) N.B. This nomination form is intended to be a stand-alone document. Relevant information should be quoted directly from source documents and full references provided. Nominations close 5pm, 25th March 2010.

Nominator details Note: Nominator details are subject to the provision of the Privacy Act 1988 and will not be divulged to third parties if advice regarding the nomination is sought from such parties 1. Full name 2. Body, organisation or company name (if applicable) 3. Contact details 4. Declaration: I declare that the information in this nomination and its attachments is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Signed (If available, please attach an electronic signature when submitting by email): 5. Date signed

Nominated Ecological Community - Summary of eligibility 6. Name of Ecological Community Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh 7. Category for which the ecological community is nominated under the EPBC Act Current listing category Proposed listing category  Critically Endangered  Critically Endangered  Endangered  Endangered  Vulnerable  Vulnerable  None – not listed

8. Criteria that form the basis for this nomination, i.e. under which criteria is the ecological community eligible to be listed?  Criterion 1 – Decline in geographic distribution.  Criterion 2 – Small geographic distribution coupled with demonstrable threat.  Criterion 3 – Loss or decline of functionally important species.  Criterion 4 - Reduction in community integrity.  Criterion 5 - Rate of continuing detrimental change.  Criterion 6 – Quantitative analysis showing probability of extinction.

Version 09/10 1

Important notes for completing this form • This nomination form is intended to be a stand-alone document. Relevant information should be quoted directly from the source document and full references provided.Complete the form as far as possible. It is important for the Threatened Species Scientific Committee to have clear and comprehensive information and the best case on which to judge an ecological community’s eligibility against the EPBC Act criteria for listing (Attachment A). Clear and comprehensive nominations (where data exists) have a greater likelihood to be prioritised for assessment. • Nominations that do not meet the EPBC Amendment Regulations 2000 will not proceed. Division 7.2 of the EPBC Amendment Regulations at http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/about specifies the required information for a nomination. If after research you find the information is not available, please state this under the relevant questions (as described in subregulation 7.05(3) of the EPBC Act Regulations).To ensure you have the most up to date information, it is recommended that you contact relevant Natural Resource Management authorities. For details see: www.nrm.gov.au • Keep in mind that the purpose of the questions is to help identify why the ecological community is eligible for listing in the nominated conservation category. For information about how to determine if the ecological community is eligible for listing, please refer to the guidelines at Attachment A. • The purpose of the form is to assist the Committee to gain an understanding of the ecological community at the national scale. In that sense, it is important that you consider the full, national extent of an ecological community, not just its occurrence in specific areas or regions. • The questions are separated into sections, which indirectly or directly relate to the criteria for listing. The Committee provides the following general description of what kind of information informs its judgements against the EPBC Act criteria for listing (Attachment A). • For all facts and all information presented - identify your references and sources of information. Document the reasons and supportive data. Indicate the quality of facts/information and any uncertainty in the information. For example, was it based on a peer-reviewed research publication or anecdote; or on observed data, an inference/extrapolation from the data, or a reasonable premise not yet supported by hard data? • Personal communications - The opinion of appropriate scientific experts may also be cited (with their approval) in support of a nomination. If this is done the names of the experts, their qualifications and full contact details must also be provided at the end of this nomination. • Confidential material – Identify any confidential material and explain the sensitivity. • Tables – Can be included at the end of the form or prepared as separate electronic documents included as appendixes or attachments. Refer to tables in the relevant area of the text. • Maps – Must be supplied and are to be adequately labelled. If maps cannot be supplied electronically, please provide them in hardcopy. • Photographs – Are to be adequately labelled and used as supporting material only. The criteria need to be addressed in written form. • Cross-reference relevant areas of the nomination form where needed (but answer each question thoroughly).

Version 09/10 2

How to lodge your nomination Completed nominations must be lodged (by 5pm, 25th March 2010) either: by email to: [email protected] OR by mail to: The Director, Ecological Communities Section, Department of The Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, GPO Box 787, Canberra ACT 2601

Further information The Threatened Species Scientific Committee has developed guidelines to assist nominators. The guidelines are attached to this form (Attachment A). They include the statutory criteria and guidelines for the ‘critically endangered’, ‘endangered’ and ‘vulnerable’ categories. The guidelines also include indicative thresholds, which may be used by the Committee to assess whether an ecological community is eligible for listing against the criteria prescribed by the EPBC Regulations. It should be noted that the Committee does not adhere strictly to these thresholds, but has regard to them when making judgements about ecological communities on a case-by-case basis. In particular, they may not be applicable to all types of ecological communities.

More detailed information on all categories for threatened ecological communities can be found in Section 182 of the EPBC Act and the statutory criteria can be found in Division 7.1 of the EPBC Regulations 2000. These are available at: www.environment.gov.au/epbc/about/index.html

For questions regarding nominations contact: The Director Ecological Communities Section Department of The Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts GPO Box 787 Canberra ACT 2601 Telephone (02) 6274 2317 Fax (02) 6274 2214

Version 09/10 3 Section 1 – Conservation Assessment Information in this form is required for assessing ecological communities nominated as threatened under the EPBC Act. Provide answers in the space below each question. If no or insufficient information exists to answer a question, please indicate this instead of leaving the space blank.

Conservation Theme 1. The conservation themes for the assessment period commencing 1 October 2010 (for which nominations close 5pm, 25th March 2010) are ‘heathlands and mallee woodlands’, and ‘terrestrial, estuarine and near–shore environments of Australia’s coast’. How does this nomination relate to the Conservation Themes? N.B. Nominations consistent with these conservation themes are encouraged, however nominations outside the themes will also be considered for priority assessments.

The nominated community is within the theme ‘terrestrial, estuarine and near–shore environments of Australia’s coast’.

Classification By nominating a broader community, you will enable the Committee to consider the national extent and condition of the community and determine the limits of the listed ecological community. 2. What is the name of the ecological community? Note any other names that have been used recently, including where different names apply to different jurisdictions. For example, is it known by separate names in different States or regions?

‘Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh’ – a term specific to this application.

3. What authorities/surveys/studies support or use the name?

‘Coastal saltmarsh’ is a widely used term for the general vegetation type (see for e.g. Adam 1990) and is used in the listing of this community within NSW under the Threatened Species Conservation Act. The specific name is based primarily on the findings of Saintilan 2009, which establishes the differentiation between coastal saltmarsh north or south of the Tropic of Capricorn (23 degrees latitude).

Version 09/10 4

4. How does the nominated ecological community relate to other communities that occur nearby or that may be similar to it? Does it intergrade with any other ecological communities and, if so, how wide are the intergradation zones? Please describe how you might distinguish the ecological community in areas where there is overlap.

It is important to distinguish coastal saltmarsh from inland saltmarsh. The nomination is specific to coastal forms but is not limited to intertidal coastal saltmarsh. There can be significant commonality of species between coastal and inland saltmarshes but the communities can be distinguished by their biological and non-biological components. A key non-biological feature of coastal saltmarsh is that it primarily occurs in the intertidal zone, with a rare exception where saltmarsh occurs on coastal headlands and cliffs that receive high levels of salt exposure. Inland saltmarshes are primarily associated with non-tidal saline lakes and claypans.

The nominated community may intergrade with mangrove communities and may adjoin estuarine aquatic communities and terrestrial vegetation communities. Intergradation with mangroves at the interface with saltmarsh is common and appears to be complicated by observations of increasing colonisation of saltmarsh by mangrove species (per Saintilan and Williams 1999). An ecotone between these communities will be apparent and may vary in width and composition depending on hydrological and geomorphological variables. The ecotone should be treated as being within the scope of the nominated community, though a threshold of transition from saltmarsh to mangrove will need to be defined for regulatory purposes. This is addressed later in this nomination.

The nominated community can be distinguished from adjoining estuarine aquatic communities (such as sea grass meadows) on floristics and by the nominated community occurring upslope of the mean low tidal limit. There will be some intergradation but the nominated community does not include extensive areas of aquatic plant species in a watercourse directly connected to the estuary. Areas of permanent or semi-permanent ponds that may support aquatic species are within the scope of the community, as are the artificial or semi-artificial drainage channels constructed for the purposes of reducing mosquito breeding habitat (the construction of such channels is termed ‘runnelling’).

The nominated community can be distinguished from adjoining terrestrial communities (such as swamp forests or scrubs of e.g. Casuarina glauca, Melaleuca quinquenervia, M. ericifolia) on floristics and the nominated community being generally restricted to below the mean high tidal limit. There will be some intergradation within the ecotone but the nominated community is generally dominated by intertidal species.

Version 09/10 5

4.Continued The nomination includes the rare circumstances in which non-intertidal coastal saltmarshes are present on coastal headlands and cliffs etc., that receive a high salt load as a result of their exposure to the ocean e.g. to spray from wave action. These communities can be distinguished from adjoining terrestrial communities such as coastal heath and scrub, by their being dominated by halophytes, including many of the species found in intertidal saltmarsh.

Subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh is treated as a community based on the work of Saintilan 2009, who shows that the coastal saltmarsh of Australia can sensibly be divided into two main communities: tropical and non-tropical (i.e. subtropical and temperate, those south of 23 degrees latitude). Coastal saltmarsh communities north of 23 degrees latitude (tropical) show markedly lower species diversity than non-tropical communities, apparently due to higher temperatures impeding germination (Saintilan 2009). For example, there are approximately 26 saltmarsh species along the Great Barrier Reef coast (Johns 2006) compared to approximately 50 saltmarsh species in temperate regions of Australia (Australian State of the Environment Committee 2001, Goudkamp and Chin 2006). The mix of species is also strongly distinct between tropical and non-tropical saltmarshes (per Saintilan 2009).

At the national scale, some east/west delineation of non-tropical saltmarsh communities is possible but is not as clear or broad as the north/side delineation (Saintilan 2009). However, within NSW, saltmarsh species diversity is greater on the south coast than on the north coast, with Jervis Bay being the northern limit for many species (Adam et al. 1988).

Obviously, the boundary between the nominated community and that north of 23 degrees latitude is not clearly defined in the field – there is a gradual transition from the more diverse southern communities to the less diverse northern forms, with 23 degrees nominated as the practical break point for ecological and regulatory purposes. Tropical saltmarsh may be assessed and if appropriate, nominated separately as a threatened community

Version 09/10 6 Legal Status 5. What is its current conservation status under Australian State/Territory Government legislation? Please record whether there is an existing State listing for the nominated ecological community, its category (e.g. critically endangered, vulnerable) and its title. ‘Coastal Saltmarsh in the NSW North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East Corner Bioregions’ is listed as an Endangered ecological community in NSW (TSC Act). This listing is restricted to intertidal saltmarsh, i.e. it does not include fully terrestrial forms such as occur on sea cliffs and headlands with high oceanic salt exposure. “Mangrove and (coastal) saltmarsh plants are legally protected under the Queensland Fisheries Act 1994, which includes the use of permits and Fish Habitat Areas to regulate activities that may disturb marine plants. There are 41 Fish Habitat Areas along the Great Barrier Reef coast, which afford a high level of protection to marine and estuarine ecosystems in these specific locations” (Goudkamp and Chin 2006). However, it should be noted that the Fish Habitat Areas along the Great Barrier Reef coast only protected a limited stretch of subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh, approximately from the Tropic of Capricorn to North of Bundaberg. The community does not appear to have specific legal protection in other relevant jurisdictions.

Version 09/10 7

6. Does the ecological community provide a habitat for any listed threatened species? If so, please note whether the species are listed on State/Territory and/or national lists and the nature of its dependence on the ecological community. Yes, see below: Flora • Distichlis distichophylla (NSW E) occurs in coastal and other saltmarshes; • Juncus revolutus (VIC rare) • Limonium australe (TAS rare) occurs in coastal and other saltmarshes; • Limonium baudinii (TAS V, EPBC V) restricted to saltmarsh; • Tecticornia flabelliformis (EPBC V, SA V, VIC Threatened (Endangered), WA Poorly Known). This species was originally listed under its former name Halosarcia flabelliformis, but all Australia species in Halosarcia were subsequently incorporated in the genus Tecticornia (Shepherd and Wilson 2007). This species occurs in coastal and arid saltmarsh with most coastal occurrences in SA; • Triglochin minutissimum (VIC rare) • Wilsonia backhousei (NSW V) occurs mainly in coastal saltmarsh; • Wilsonia humilis (TAS rare) occurs in coastal and other saltmarshes; • Wilsonia rotundifolia (NSW E) occurs mainly in coastal saltmarsh; Fauna • Australasian Bittern (NSW V, IUCN E, SA V, VIC E, WA R) saltmarsh is one of its habitats; • Australian Painted Snipe (EPBC V, QLD V, NT V, NSW E; SA R, VIC Threatened, WA R or likely to become extinct) saltmarsh is one of its habitats. • Beach Stone Curlew (QLD V, NSW CE) saltmarsh is one of its habitats; • Bush Stone Curlew (NSW E, VIC E, SA E) saltmarsh is one of its habitats; • False Water Rat (EPBC V, QLD V, NT ‘data deficient’ [indicative V]), saltmarsh is one of its feeding habitats; • Lewin’s Rail (SA V), saltmarsh is one of its habitats; • Orange-bellied Parrot (TAS E, VIC E, SA E, NSW E, EPBC E) feeds and overwinters in saltmarsh – highly dependent on it; • Saltmarsh Looper Moth (TAS V) (apparently restricted to saltmarsh); • Southern Emu-wren (SA CE and EPBC E [Mt Lofty ssp.], VIC threatened) saltmarsh is one of its habitats; • White-fronted Chat (NSW V – Preliminary listing) coastal populations depend on saltmarsh (breeding and feeding); • Yellow Chat (Dawson) (EPBC CE, QLD E) saltmarsh is apparently of major significance for this species; • At least two species of microchiropteran bat (both listed as V in NSW) are known to feed over saltmarsh. It is likely that a far larger number of bat species use this habitat, with some potentially being resident in mangrove or adjacent terrestrial vegetation. Numerous migratory waders including JAMBA, CAMBA, ROKAMBA species, EPBC Act migratory species, and threatened species also utilise coastal saltmarsh. See also: Schahinger, R. and Smith, A. (2008). Threatened flora surveys of salt marshes in southern Tasmania: March-May 2008, Threatened Species Section, Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment, Hobart TAS.

Version 09/10 8

Description 7. List the main features that distinguish this ecological community from all other ecological communities? Characteristic features can be biological (e.g. taxa or taxonomic groups of plants and animals characteristic to the community; a type of vegetation or other biotic structure), or associated non- biological landscape characteristics (e.g. soil type or substrate, habitat feature, hydrological feature). Please limit your answer to those features that are specific to the ecological community and can be used to distinguish it from other ecological communities.

Biotic features The vegetation structure includes herbfield, low shrubland, grassland, and reed/rush/sedgeland (which may be tall). All component flora is salt-tolerant, and a high component may be true halophytes (e.g. saltbushes, samphires). The dominant plant families are Chenopodiaceae, Poaceae, Cyperaceae, Aizoaceae and Asteraceae (Saintilan 2009B). Mangroves are absent or infrequent except on the ecotone. The ecotone may be patchy due to localised differences in tidal influence.

Abiotic features The community is largely restricted to the intertidal zone of the subtropical and temperate coasts of Australia (including Tasmania and other islands). A minority of saltmarsh within the nominated community occur on coastal cliffs and headlands well above the intertidal zone but reliance on very high exposure to salt and moisture from ocean spray.

Substrates of intertidal saltmarsh are Quaternary or recent alluvium and are saline to hypersaline depending on the extent of inundation and tidal flushing. Sites with low or seasonally low rainfall may be at least seasonally hypersaline. The community includes areas of standing water that may remain at low tide but are inundated at high tide. It may include saltpans. Forms on coastal cliffs and headlands occur on an unspecified range of geologies.

“Saltmarsh sediments generally consist of poorly-sorted anoxic sandy silts and clays. Carbonate concentrations are generally low, and concentrations of organic material are generally high. As with saltflats the sediments may have salinity levels that are much higher than that of seawater. These sediments are also usually anoxic and have large accumulations of iron sulfides. Disturbing these acid sulfate soils can cause sulfuric acid to drain into coastal waterways. Saltmarshes are often associated with saltflats or exposed bare areas” (Dale et al. 2010).

Version 09/10 9

8. Give a description of the biological components of the ecological community. For instance, what species of plants and animals commonly occur in the community; what is the typical vegetation structure (if relevant). There is no list of dominant or characteristic species available for the entirety of the nominated community, as it has not been studied in this form previously. Several references provide information on dominant and/or characteristic species within different forms of the community but none address this at a national scale. The closest available information is the biogeographic analysis of Australian saltmarsh species by Saintilan (2009B). His list of species does not deal with dominants but instead deals with species that typify the nominated community and that differentiate it from other saltmarsh, namely the tropical forms:

“Species occurring primarily in the southern bioregions include Samolus repens, Atriplex cinerea, Apium prostratum, Myoporum insulare, and Cotula coronifolia” (Saintilan 2009 p5). Within the nominated subtropical & temperate coastal saltmarsh, Saintilan 2009 identifies further subcommunal groupings of eastern, southern and western. “Examples of primarily eastern species include Baumea teretifolia, Carpobrotus glaucescens, Aster australasica, Fimbristylis ferrugubea, and Sesuvium portulacastrum. Primarily southern species include Sarcocornia blackiana, Hemichroa pentandra, Tecticornia arbuscula and Distichlis distichophylla” (Saintilan 2009 p5).

Saintilan (2009A) refers to the dominant species of Australian saltmarsh, which are likely to be the most significant ecologically, as; Sporobolus vlrginicus, Sarcocornia quinqueflora, Juncus kraussii, Samolus repens, Suaeda australis, Tectlcornia pergranulata, Triglochln striata, Gahnia filum. Of these, the distinctive species to subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarshes are Sarcocornia quinqueflora, Juncus kraussii, and Gahnia filum.

The NSW listing of the community as Endangered lists the characteristic plants (not the same as dominants) as including Baumea juncea, Juncus krausii, Sarcocornia quinqueflora, Sporobolus virginicus, Triglochin striata, Isolepis nodosa, Samolus repens, Selliera radicans, Suaeda australis and Zoysia macrantha.

Victoria’s DPI West Gippsland provides another description: “Coastal Saltmarsh comprises several zones. The lowest and most frequently inundated zones are dominated by Beaded Glasswort Sarcocornia quinqueflora. The next most landward zone is herbs represented by Salt-grass Distichlis distichophylla, Creeping Brookweed Samolus repens, Shiny Swamp-mat Selliera radicans, Rounded Noon-flower Disphyma crassifolium spp clavellatum, Southern Sea-heath Frankenia pauciflora subsp. pauciflora, Creeping Monkey Flower Mimulus repens, Sea Celery Apium prostratum and Streaked Arrow-grass Triglochin striata. Sea Rush Juncus kraussii subsp. australiensis and Chaffy Saw-sedge Gahnia filum dominate the most landward zone.” http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/DPI/Vro/wgregn.nsf/0d08cd6930912d1e4a2567d2002579cb/160bf29ad2877 1b6ca2574ef001a3cde/$FILE/EVC%209%20%20%20Coastal%20Saltmarsh.pdf (accessed on 25/03/2010).

Version 09/10 10

8. Continued Further research is required to provide a suitably comprehensive national-scale description of the community’s biological characteristics at the species level. Generically, the community could be described as per section 7 of this nomination: The vegetation structure includes herbfield, low shrubland, grassland, and reed/rush/sedgeland (which may be tall). All component flora is salt-tolerant, and a high component may be true halophytes (e.g. saltbushes, samphires). The dominant plant families are Chenopodiaceae, Poaceae, Cyperaceae, Aizoaceae and Asteraceae (Saintilan 2009). Mangroves are absent or infrequent except on the ecotone. The ecotone may be patchy due to localised differences in tidal influence.

Adam (in Saintilan 2009A) states with regard to non-vascular flora that “While there have been many studies of algae in Australian mangroves, saltmarsh algae have been rarely studied. However, they are likely to be as important as algae in saltmarshes elsewhere – contributing to primary productivity, stabilising sediment surfaces, being the food source for filter and surface feeders and, in the case of cyanobacteria, which form part of the algae skin on the sediment surface, functioning as nitrogen fixers”.

“In their detailed consideration of the distribution and ecology of Tasmanian saltmarshes, Kirkpatrick and Glasby (1981) define a series of saltmarsh structural forms which could validly be applied more widely: 1. Communities dominated by succulent shrubs (e.g. the genera Tecticornia); 2. Communities dominated by grasses (e.g. Sporobolus virginicus, Stipa stipodes, Zoysia macrantha); 3. Communities dominated by sedges and grasses (e.g. Juncus krausii, Gahnia filum); 4. Communities dominated by herbs (low-growing creeping plants such as Wilsonia backhousei, Samolus repens, Schoenus nitens).

The distribution of these forms varies across the intertidal zone. Within New South Wales, the lower intertidal is dominated by herbs and grasses which gives way to sedges and rushes in the landwards sections of the intertidal zone. Within Victorian saltmarshes, the lower saltmarsh zone is dominated by succulent shrubs of the genera Tecticornia and Sarcocornia. The herbs and grasses are more commonly found in landward, upper-intertidal zones which are also the most species diverse (see, for example, Schindl 2002).

Coleman (2005) described plants characteristic of four elevation zones within the saltmarshes of South Australia. A low marsh community is characterised by Suaeda australis and Sarcocornia quinqueflora. Species characteristics of the mid-marsh are Frankenia pauciflora and species of the genus Tecticornia. The high marsh is characterised by a diverse array of species including Mimulus repens (in brackish areas), Puccinellia stricta, Wilsonia humilis, Apium annuum, Samolus repens, Disphyma crassifolium, Spergularia spp., Atriplex semibaccata and Trigoichin striata. A landward community of saltmarsh plants, above the level of normal spring high tide inundation, includes Nitraria billardierei, Distichlis distichophylla, and Dianella brevicaulis.

Most studies have indicated that a combination of moisture content and salinity explain the distribution of vegetation communities within the saltmarsh. Soil moisture content decreases between the mangrove and terrestrial environments. Soil chlorinity varies less predictably, and will respond to micro-scale hydraulic controls (such as evaporative depressions), as well as plant activity (accumulating salts within the root zone). Temporal variability in salinity may also be high, and related to rainfall, groundwater discharge, and the periodicity of the tides. On New South Wales coasts, for example, spring tides reach their maximum inundation in summer (daylight hours) and winter (night), which are also the times of variability in tide height. The periods which inundate the upper-intertidal are also those which least frequently inundate the lower saltmarsh. In summer, the additional evaporative losses resulting from higher temperatures make this the period of maximum soil salinity in the saltmarsh (Clarke and Hannon 1969).” (Saintilan 2009A).

Version 09/10 11

9. Give a description of the associated non-biological landscape characteristics or components of the ecological community. For instance, what is the typical landscape in which the community occurs; is it associated with a particular soil type or substrate; what major climatic variables drive the distribution of the ecological community (e.g. rainfall)? The nominated community may be present in the intertidal zones of estuaries, estuarine coastal lagoons, and sheltered embayments, and rarely on coastal headlands and cliffs with high salt loading.

As per section 7 of this nomination, the community is largely restricted to the intertidal zone of the subtropical and temperate coasts of Australia (including Tasmania and other islands). A minority of saltmarsh within the nominated community occur on coastal cliffs and headlands well above the intertidal zone but reliance on very high exposure to salt and moisture from ocean spray.

Substrates of intertidal saltmarsh are Quaternary or recent alluvium and are saline to hypersaline depending on the extent of inundation and tidal flushing. Sites with low or seasonally low rainfall may be at least seasonally hypersaline. The community includes areas of standing water that may remain at low tide but are inundated at high tide. It may include saltpans. Forms on coastal cliffs and headlands occur on an unspecified range of geologies.

“Saltmarsh sediments generally consist of poorly-sorted anoxic sandy silts and clays. Carbonate concentrations are generally low, and concentrations of organic material are generally high. As with saltflats the sediments may have salinity levels that are much higher than that of seawater. These sediments are also usually anoxic and have large accumulations of iron sulfides. Disturbing these acid sulfate soils can cause sulfuric acid to drain into coastal waterways. Saltmarshes are often associated with saltflats or exposed bare areas” (Dale et al. 2010). 10. Provide information on the ecological processes by which the biological and non-biological components interact (where known). The primary interaction is between the high soil and water salinity, and the tidal immersion or partial immersion, operating to make for a narrow and highly specialised niche in which coastal saltmarsh occurs. Even very subtle changes in these parameters can have significant effects on saltmarsh composition, health, and viability. Increasing sea level can cause rapid landward migration of mangroves into saltmarsh, pushing saltmarsh landward, largely at a rate too fast for it to colonise, or in many cases, pushing it into unsuitable/absent habitat e.g. sea walls, farmland, salt farms, etc. Similarly, increased rainfall can have a detrimental effect on saltmarsh by increasing, at least seasonally, its exposure to freshwater runoff (made worse if this is concentrated by human modifications to natural drainage). Anthropogenic increases in sedimentation can advantage saltmarsh in some circumstances, by providing new habitat, though in combination with rising sea levels, any new saltmarsh will likely be displaced by mangroves. Other climatic changes can affect saltmarsh. Observed and forecast climatic warming will likely see the nominated community progressively replaced by tropical saltmarsh if all other factors are equal.

11. Does the ecological community show any consistent regional or other variation across its national extent, such as differences in species composition or structure? If so, please describe these. Yes, variation is evident with latitude (the primary determinant of variation), and with position on the coast (an eastern, southern and western variant are evident) (Saintilan 2009B p5). There is also variation with rainfall and rainfall seasonality (e.g. broadly a division of ‘dry coast’ and ‘wet coast’ plus the seasonal variation e.g. areas with a strongly Mediterranean [winter dominant] rainfall). See response to section 8.

Version 09/10 12

12. Identify major studies on the ecological community (authors, dates, name of study and publishing details where relevant). Adam, P. (1990). Saltmarsh ecology. Cambridge UK, Cambridge University Press. Adam, P. (2009). Australian saltmarshes in global context. Australian Saltmarsh Ecology. N. Saintilan (Ed.), Canberra, CSIRO Publishing: 1-21. Adam, P., Wilson, N.C. and Huntley, B. (1988). "The phytosociology of coastal saltmarsh vegetation in New South Wales." Wetlands (Australia) 7(2): 35-85. Australian State of the Environment Committee (2001). Coasts and Oceans. Australia State of the Environment Report 2001 (Theme Report) Canberra, CSIRO Publishing on behalf of the Department of the Environment and Heritage. Goudkamp, K. and Chin, A. (2006). Mangroves and Saltmarshes. The state of the Great Barrier Reef On- line. A. Chin (Ed.), Townsville QLD, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. Howden, M., Hughes, L., Dunlop, M., Zethoven, I., Hilbert, D. and Chilcott, C. (2003). Climate change impacts on biodiversity in Australia: outcomes of a workshop sponsored by the Biological Diversity Advisory Committee, 1-2 October. Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia. Johns, L. (2006). Field guide to common saltmarsh plants of Queensland. Brisbane, Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries. Kelleway, J. (2005). "Ecological impacts of recreational vehicle use on saltmarshes of the Georges River, Sydney." Wetlands (Australia) 22: 52-66. Kelleway, J. and Williams, R.J. (2008). "Threats facing coastal saltmarsh in urban areas." Australasian Plant Conservation 16(4): 18-19. Kelleway, J., Williams, R.J. and Allen, C.B. (2007). An assessment of the saltmarsh of the Parramatta River and Sydney Harbour Sydney, NSW Department of Primary Industries - Fisheries. Kirkpatrick, J.B. and Glasby, J. (1981). Salt marshes in Tasmania: their distribution, community composition and conservation Hobart TAS, Department of Geography, University of Tasmania. Laegdsgaard, P. (2006). "Ecology, disturbance and restoration of coastal saltmarsh in Australia: a review." Wetlands Ecology and Management(14): 379-3999. Saintilan, N. (Ed.), (2009A). Australian Saltmarsh Ecology. Canberra, CSIRO Publishing. Saintilan, N. (2009B). "Biogeography of Australian saltmarsh plants." Austral Ecology 34: 929-937. Saintilan, N. and Rogers, K. (2009). Coastal saltmarsh vulnerability to climate change in SE Australia. 18th NSW Coastal Conference 2009, Ballina NSW, Rivers & Wetlands Unit, NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change & Water. Saintilan, N., Rogers, K. and McKee, K. (2009). Salt marsh-mangrove interactions in Australasia and the Americas. Coastal wetlands: an integrated ecosystem approach. G. M. E. Perillo, E. Wolanski, D. R. Cahoon and M. M. Brinson (Eds.), Amsterdam and Boston, Elsevier. Saintilan, N. and Williams, R.J. (1999). "Mangrove transgression into saltmarsh environments in south- east Australia." Global Ecology and Biogeography(8): 117-124. Saintilan, N. and Williams, R.J. (2000). "The decline of saltmarshes in Southeast Australia: results of recent surveys." Wetlands (Australia) 18: 49-54. Schahinger, R. and Smith, A. (2008). Threatened flora surveys of salt marshes in southern Tasmania: March-May 2008 Hobart TAS, Threatened Species Section, Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment. Shepherd, K.A. and Wilson, P.G. (2007). "Incorporation of the genera Halosarcia, Pachycornia, Sclerostegia, and Tegicornia into Tecticornia (Salicornioideae, Chenopodiaceae)." Australian Systematic Botany 20: 319-331. West, R.J., Thorogood, C., Walford, T. and Williams, R.J. (1985). An estuarine inventory for New South Wales. Fisheries Bulletin 2, Sydney, NSW Department of Agriculture. Williams, R.J. and Watford, F.A. (1997). Change in the distribution of mangrove and saltmarsh in Berowra and Marramarra Creeks, 1941-1992 Cronulla NSW, NSW Fisheries Research Institute. Williams, R.J., Watford, F.A. and Balashov, V. (2000). Kooragang Wetland Rehabilitation Project: history of changes to estuarine wetlands in the lower Hunter River Sydney, NSW Fisheries. Wilton, K.M. (2002). Coastal wetland habitat dynamics in selected New South Wales estuaries. Australia's National Coastal Conference, Tweed Heads NSW. http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/publications/series/paper6/biotas.html

Version 09/10 13 Distribution 13. Describe the national distribution in Australia. If possible, include appropriate bioregions (see Attachment A) where the ecological community occurs and attach a map showing its distribution.

“Saltmarsh is found on coasts of all states (Adam, 1996) but the most extensive saltmarsh development is along the south-eastern coast from Sydney to Adelaide, and the eastern coast of Tasmania. Along the central Western Australian coastline saltmarshes are poorly developed because of the arid climate and consequent limited freshwater inflow” (Bridgewater and Cresswell 1999).

A single map is not available to show the distribution at a national scale, other than the very coarse mapping within Geoscience Australia’s OzEstuaries website and associated project. OzEstuaries and OzCoasts show the total national extent of saltmarsh as 1,302,895 ha. This does not allow any distinction to be made between the relatively tropical and non-tropical saltmarsh, and the very coarse resolution of the mapping means that the estimated area of saltmarsh will be far higher than the actual area. As noted by Bridgewater and Cresswell 1999, “Vegetation assemblages are usually mapped at coarse scales for management, which is not suitable for delimitation of mangal (mangroves) and saltmarsh where assemblages can change over a matter of metres…In the case of saltmarsh species, environmental gradients are often very sharp, both within the saltmarsh itself and the transition to terrestrial vegetation. Assessment based on broad vegetation units may not clearly identify the full variability present in any marsh system.” This is often seen by the compound mapping of saltmarsh and mangroves at coarse scales, due to the relatively labour and cost intensive aspect of separating these communities with a reasonable degree of reliability.

Several maps are available at or below State scales. It is beyond the scope of this nomination to compile those maps. A very broad indication of national extent is available in the work of Saintilan 2009, though his data includes inland saltmarshes.

Version 09/10 14

13. Continued Further information about the community’s distribution is provided in section 14 below.

(From Saintilan 2009B)

By referring to the bioregion map in Saintilan (2009B) (replicated above) and excluding those north of the described 23o cut off point for this community, the relevant bioregions relating to southern temperate coastal salt marsh could be derived as: South East Queensland, NSW North Coast, Sydney Basin, South

Version 09/10 15

13 Continued East Corner, South East Coastal Plain, Flinders, Tasmanian South East, Tasmanian Southern Ranges, Tasmanian West, Tasmanian Northern Slopes, King, Naracoorte Coastal Plain, Murray Darling Depression, Kanmantoo, Gawler, Eyre Yorke Block, Nullabor, Hampton, Esperence, Warren, Swan Coastal Plain, Geraldton Sandplains and Carnarvon.

(From Saintilan 2009A)

“The primary division is between a northern and southern saltmarsh flora, separated at 23oS, defining a northern division extending from the Central Mackay Coast to the Carnarvon bioregion on the West Coast. The two halves of the content have less than 25% of species in common. Species occurring primarily in the southern bioregions include: Samolus repens; Atriplex cinerea; Atrium prostratum; Myoporum insulare and Cotula coronifolia.” (Saintilan 2009A).

“The cluster analysis represented in Figure 4 (replicated above) suggests a tertiary level of division based on contiguous stretches of coastline demarcated by orientation. These subgroups characteristically share between 70% and 80% of the species. In the southern division these may be described as eastern, southern and western assemblages. Examples of primarily eastern species include: B. teretifolia; C. glaucescens; Aster australasica; Fimbristylis ferruginea and Sesuvium portulacastrum. Primarily southern species include: Sarcocornia blackiana; Hemichroa pentandra; Tecticornia arbuscula and Distichlis distichophylla.” (Saintilan 2009A).

Version 09/10 16

14. What is the national distribution (in ha) for the ecological community? Identify whether any values represent extent of occurrence or area of occupancy (as described in Attachment B); explain how it was calculated and datasets used. a. What is the current distribution (in ha)? b. What is the pre-European extent or its former known extent (in ha)? c. What is the estimated percentage decline of the ecological community? d. What data are there to indicate future changes in distribution will occur? a) and b) Definitive or even credibly indicative data on the current or pre-European national distribution of the community is not available as research of this nature has not been undertaken. Only very coarse and potentially highly misleading information has been produced (some mapping and modelling methods produce gross over-estimates of the area of saltmarsh, usually because the mapping is too coarse in scale and subsequently tends to group saltmarsh with mangroves; other efforts at a much finer scale can significantly under-estimate the area of saltmarsh because relatively small or highly linear patches are mistakenly grouped with mangroves or other non-saltmarsh map units, meaning that only the largest areas of saltmarsh are mapped). It has been bought to our attention that some more useful data is available, or will be becoming available in the near future (e.g. Victorian data) on a state and regional basis, but this has not been agglomerated at this point in time. Any state and regional maps will be submitted as supplementary information when they become available. NSW “There are abundant data on NSW saltmarsh, including that in the Fisheries Mapping (West et al 1985.), the maps in the NSW component of the National Oilspill plan, my phytosociological account etc.” (XXXX, pers. comm.). http://www.mesa.edu.au/seaweek2010/saltmarsh.asp indicates a statewide mapping project is underway. The on-line Natural Resource Atlas does not distinguish saltmarsh from estuarine wetlands.

“Within NSW, saltmarsh area is contracting. A study by Wilton (2002) of mangrove and saltmarsh dynamics in 9 estuaries in NSW showed that saltmarsh loss ranged from 12% to 97%, largely due to landward mangrove incursion into saltmarsh habitats. Williams & Watford (1997) found that within Berowra and Marramarra Creeks, tributaries of the Hawkesbury River, the area of saltmarsh had decreased by 38% between 1941 and 1992. In the Hunter River, the area of saltmarsh has fallen by approximately 53% from 2133 ha in 1954 to 1112 ha in 1994 (Williams et al., 2000)” (NSW Fisheries – Fishnote 1126). NSW area (km2) of major areas of saltmarsh (West et al. 1985): Tweed/Morton 5.5, Manning 36.5, Hawkesbury 4.9, Batemans 10.7, Twofold 1.5, TOTAL 59.1.

QLD The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority appears to have mapped saltmarsh in its area of jurisdiction. The Coastal Habitats Resources Information System (online GIS) http://chrisweb.dpi.qld.gov.au/website/ArcIMS_CHRIS/viewer.htm?Project=3 was checked but does not have data for saltmarsh, or at least is unable to show saltmarsh separately from other coastal ‘wetland’ units. “DPI (Fisheries) has a great deal of data” (XXXX, pers. comm.). “Every saltmarsh north of Brisbane is grazed, and Qld is losing saltmarsh at a rate of one football field a week” (XXXXXXXX, pers. comm.).

“Total subtropical and temperate coastal saltmarsh area in QLD is approximately 51 800 hectares, with a pre-European extent of approximately 65 000 hectares. There are estimated losses in the Tweed / Moreton zone of around 40%. There has been a major decline in the area of 3 key plant species (Sporobolus virginicus, Suaeda australis, Sarcocornia quinqueflora) providing structural habitat and binding sediments against erosion” (XXXXXXXX, pers. comm.).

Version 09/10 17

14. Continued SA Doug Fothering (DEH) has been involved in mapping saltmarsh and assessing the extent to which it is threatened by sea level rise. Maps are being made available to DEWHA. Saltmarsh in SA is under severe threat, particularly from housing developments and salt mining (a growth industry, with a huge proportion of SA covered by mining leases). Indicative losses are a rate of 4 to 5 ha/yr to mangrove encroachment (mangroves are moving about 10 - 15 m/year inland and saltmarsh is squeezed out due to infrastructure barriers) (XXXXXXXXXXXX, pers. comm.). SA have been looking at threats from Sea Level Rise (Newton, pers. comm.). “South Australia has lots of data in SARDI (collected by XXXXXXXXXXXX) - but this is not available” (XXXX, pers. comm.). “Total area of coastal saltmarsh in SA is estimated to be 87 630 ha, down from an original extent of 92 000 ha. Long term monitoring transects were in place between 1987 and 2005” (XXXXXXXXXXXX, pers comm.). VIC Paul Boon (DSE) indicated that statewide mapping has been undertaken but is not publicly available because it is under peer review. ETA 1-2 months. WA Peter Bridgewater appears to have access to relevant information but his publications suggest that there are major data deficiencies for saltmarsh mapping in WA. Bridgewater, P.B. and Cresswell, I.D. (1993). "Phytosociology and phytogeography of coastal saltmarshes in Western Australia." Fragmenta floristica et geobotanica, Supplementum No. 2: 609-629, may be of some use but was not readily accessible and is unlikely to include sufficiently detailed mapping. “There are numerous individual estuary studies published mainly 20 years ago which cover from the Swan to Esperance. North of this, there are data in the papers of Peter Bridgewater and his colleagues” (XXXX, pers. comm.). TAS DEWHA’s Native vegetation clearance, habitat loss and biodiversity decline publication (available online at http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/publications/series/paper6/biotas.html, accessed on 25/03/1020) lists the pre-European extent of saltmarsh as 4000 hectares, with a current extent of 3300 hectares. However, the current extent figure is obtained from Kirkpatrick and Glasby (1981), a book nearing 30 years in age and thus probably inaccurate. A paper by Schahinger and Smith (2008) titled “Threatened flora surveys of salt marshes in southern Tasmania: March-May 2008 Hobart TAS” may be useful for obtaining more up to date data, but was unavailable to the author at the time of nomination. c) As above, there is no national data that provides a credible estimate or measure of the percentage decline in the community. There are only data for particular estuaries and regions, extending to some composite data at the State level (mostly not available at the time of this nomination). For example, “Within NSW, saltmarsh area is contracting. A study by Wilton (2002) of mangrove and saltmarsh dynamics in nine estuaries in NSW showed that saltmarsh loss ranged from 12% to 97%, largely due to landward mangrove incursion into saltmarsh habitats. Williams and Watford (1997) found that within Berowra and Marramarra Creeks, tributaries of the Hawkesbury River, the area of saltmarsh had decreased by 38% between 1941 and 1992. In the Hunter River, the area of saltmarsh has fallen by approximately 52% from 2133ha in 1954 to 1112ha in 1994 (Williams et al. 2000)” (cited in Burns and Davey 2010). It is beyond the scope of this nomination to compile and appropriately agglomerate all of the datasets required to provide a national perspective on the rate of decline of the nominated community. d) Again, there is no national scale information of sufficient resolution to be useful here. Instead, refer to section 23 below (Threats) for an indication of the nature and potential rate of further decline of the community.

Version 09/10 18

15. Is the ecological community considered to be naturally rare or restricted, based on its original (e.g. pre-European) distribution? An ecological community is considered to be naturally restricted if it has a pre-European area of occupancy that is less than 10 000 ha or a pre-European extent of occurrence that is less than 100 000 ha (refer to attachment A).

No information of sufficient reliability was available to address this question.

16. What is the typical size (in ha) for a patch of the ecological community (if known)? Explain how it was calculated and the datasets that are used. Relevant data includes the average patch size, the proportion of patches that are certain sizes , particularly proportions below 10 ha and below 100 ha, but also below 1 ha and above 100 ha (for example).

Insufficient data. Highly variable. Can be <1 hectare to hundreds of hectares (XXXX, pers. comm.).

17. Quantify the percentage or area required for a patch to be considered viable. This refers to the minimum size of a remnant that can remain viable without active management. What would you consider is the smallest area for which a patch of the ecological community can be considered viable? It may be determined through the requirements for dominant native species, level of species diversity, or the nature of invasive weeds.

“The specialised saltmarsh environment is relatively resistant to those edge effects that can so readily change the nature of formations such as heathland (Kirtkpatrick 1977). Thus, relatively small reserves are viable, even if abutted by developed land, as long as firing and grazing can be prevented.” (Kirkpatrick and Glasby 1981).

Even very small patches can be viable (XXXX, pers. comm.).

Functionality 18. Is the present distribution of the ecological community severely fragmented? If so, what are likely causes of fragmentation? Severely fragmented refers to the situation in which increased extinction risk to the ecological community results from most remnants being found in small and relatively isolated patches. These small patches may go extinct, with a reduced probability of decolonisation. If fragmentation is a natural or positive characteristic of this ecological community, please explain this and state the reason.

The community is naturally fragmented due to its reliance on particular geomorphological parameters associated with estuaries and embayments. The community was never contiguous throughout its range because its estuarine habitat is separated by large areas of unsuitable coastline. Furthermore, even within a particular estuary or embayment, the community could be naturally fragmented through the lack of contiguous habitat at that scale as a result of geological, geomorphological, and hydrological factors.

Whilst naturally fragmented across its area of occurrence and within particular localities, the community has been further fragmented through direct destruction (e.g. landfilling or excavation, impacts of recreational vehicles and pollution) and indirect destruction (contraction due to sea level rise, freshwater incursion, displacement by mangroves, loss or severe degradation due to weed invasion).

There are insufficient data currently available to determine the extent of anthropogenic fragmentation of the community at a national scale. Data are available at various scales ranging from a particular estuary or embayment, through to the regional and potentially the State scale.

Version 09/10 19

19. Has there been a loss or decline of functionally important species? If yes, which species are affected? How are they functionally important and to what extent have they declined? This refers to native species that are critically important in the processes that sustain or play a major role in the ecological community and whose removal has the potential to precipitate change in community structure or function sufficient to undermine the community’s viability. Unknown, though key species comprising saltmarsh can be lost due to acute weed infestation (displacement of e.g. Juncus kraussii by J. acutus or less so by Spartina anglica). Key components of and eventually the whole community can be lost to mangrove incursion and to freshwater incursion or sedimentation. 20. Reduction in community integrity. Please describe any processes that have resulted in a reduction in integrity and the consequences of these processes e.g. loss of understorey. Include any available information on the rate of these changes. This recognizes that an ecological community can be threatened with extinction through on-going modifications that do not necessarily lead to total destruction of all elements of the community. Changes in integrity can be measured by comparison with a benchmark state that reflects as closely as possible the natural condition of the community with respect to the composition and arrangement of its abiotic and biotic elements and the processes that sustain them. Please provide a description of the benchmark state where available. For further information please refer to the Guidelines (Attachment A). See above. In addition, climate change-induced warming of air and sea temperatures is likely to shift the boundary between the less diverse tropical saltmarsh and the more diverse subtropical/temperate saltmarsh such that the tropical form and its species shifts southward. This will see a reduction in the integrity of the nominated community as it shifts, all other factors aside, to become a different and substantially less diverse community that supports a different species mix.

Other factors reducing community integrity include recreational vehicle use (including BMX) and anthropogenic stormwater discharges (urban and rural, both in terms of freshwater contamination and anthropogenic pollutants) (XXXX, pers. comm.; Kelleway and Williams 2008).

A single benchmark state is not feasible for the nominated community due to the extent to which it varies with latitude, and to a lesser extent with longitude. Several benchmark states could be defined for samples of the community that represent particular variants, e.g. subtropical and temperate forms of the east, west and south coast of the mainland, plus the temperate form in Tasmania.

Dale and Knight’s (2006) research into the environmental effects and impacts of runnelling (the practice of cutting channels through salt marsh in order to partially drain it and reduce mosquito breeding habitat through flushing marsh habitats and allowing predator access) on inter-tidal coastal marshes showed the following results: - Significant effects of runnelling on substrate salinity. Specifically, studies revealed significantly lower salinity levels than the control site. - Grass Sporobolus significantly taller in modified areas, which were seen to be direct effects of runnels and resulting increased wetness of the areas. - Fewer pneumatophores of Avicennia marina in runnelled sites. - Decreased plant density at large over a much longer period than the actual study period. A 14 year study of the site found that bare ground was an emerging state in the system. - Trapping indicated that there were greater numbers of crab holes and some crab species in the Coomera runnelled marsh than in the control area (Chapman et al. 1998, in Dale and Knight, n.d., p. 218)

Version 09/10 20 Condition Classes 21. The Committee recognises that ecological communities can exist in various condition states. In reaching its decision the Committee uses condition classes and/or thresholds to determine the patches which are included or excluded from the listed ecological community (see www.environment.gov.au/epbc/publications/pubs/ecological-communities-listing- approach.pdf for details of the process of determining condition classes). Do you think condition classes/thresholds apply to this ecological community? If not, give reasons. If so, what features or variables do you consider to be most valuable for identifying a patch of the ecological community in good condition? Variables for establishing the condition class may include patch size, connectivity, native plant species diversity, overstorey foliage cover, understorey composition and cover and recognised faunal values.

As very small patches can be viable, the use of condition classes for this community is more problematic and less relevant than with others. This issue requires the assembly of a panel of suitable experts.

Survey and Monitoring 22. Has the ecological community been reasonably well surveyed? Provide an overview of surveys to date and the likelihood of its current known distribution and/or patch size being its actual distribution (consider area of occupancy and area of extent, including any data on number and size of patches). Where possible, please indicate areas that haven’t been surveyed but may add to the information required in determining the community’s overall viability and quality.

Yes, but mainly in particular localities, e.g. certain estuaries or embayments, but increasingly at a State level, though not nationally. Refer to information provided in section 14 a and b.

Is there an ongoing monitoring program? If so, please describe the extent and length of the program.

Not at the national scale. See above.

Version 09/10 21

Threats 23. Identify past, current and future threats to the ecological community indicating whether they are actual or potential. For each threat, describe: a. how and where it impacts on this ecological community? b. what its effect has been so far (indicate whether it is known or suspected; provide supporting information/research; does the threat only affect certain patches)? c. what is its expected effect in the future (is there supporting research/information; is the threat only suspected; does the threat only affect certain patches)? Climate Change “Although warming is likely to be a universal phenomenon, other aspects of the climate – rainfall amount, intensity and temporal distribution, general storminess and frequency and intensity of major storms – are likely to vary at local and regional scales although currently available mathematical models do not permit detailed modelling of probable changes. However, changes in any of these factors are likely to be reflected in changes in saltmarshes – changes in rainfall regimes will alter the patterns of variation in soil salinity, change in storminess, but particularly in the intensity of major storm events, could result in the erosion of saltmarsh vegetation. Warming may result in an expansion southwards of the range of northern species, and through competition this might produce a contraction in southern species. Increased temperatures might favour might favour mangroves at the expense of saltmarsh, and might also favour some weeds over native species” (Adam in Saintilan 2009A). Temperate Increase and Sea Level Rise “In SE Australia and New Zealand, the growth of the mangrove Avicennia marina will be aided not only by increased temperatures toward its southern limit of distribution, but also by higher sea levels. Presently, the upslope limit of A. marina is defined by the mean high water mark. While there is continued debate over the causes of mangrove encroachment into the salt marsh of eastern Australia, there is growing evidence for a role of relative sea-level rise, evidenced by the relationship between the rate of encroachment and relative sea-level trends, and an increase rate of relative sea-level rise in temperate Australasian salt marshes over the past century. The subtle elevation gradients defining the position of mangrove and salt marsh in these situations provide an early indication of the effects of sea-level rise in the coastal wetlands of the region. The concern in these situations is that the landward transition of salt marsh may be impeded by topographic constraints, both cultural and natural. Where feasible, thought should be given to the designation of landward “accommodation space” in anticipation of projected rates of sea-level rise, so that the full range of wetland vegetation communities can continue to coexist in these estuaries” (Saintilan et al. 2009). “Sea-level rise is not the only potential impact of climate change on Australian saltmarshes. The increase in saltmarsh diversity with latitude is strongly correlated with minimum monthly air temperature (Saintilan in press). The germination of several species of saltmarsh may be inhibited by higher temperatures, explaining the depauperate tropical saltmarsh flora, in spite of the extensive area of intertidal habitat available for colonisation in these latitudes. The southward translation of climatic zones in Australia would threaten the diversity hotspots of the southern mainland coastline and Tasmania” (Saintilan and Rogers 2009). “The inability of many saltmarsh species to colonise the intertidal flats of tropical Australia is most probably related to an intolerance of higher temperatures, or a combination of higher temperatures and seasonally higher salinities, which appear to inhibit the germination of some species (Greenwood and MacFarlane 2006). One potential impact of global warming may therefore be a decline in diversity of Australian saltmarsh flora within many bioregions of southern Australia.” (Saintilan 2009A).

Version 09/10 22

23. Continued Increased Storms, Cyclones and Floods “Disturbance events such as storms, cyclones and floods can cause widespread mortality of mangroves and saltmarshes. In Port Curtis during October 1994, a hailstorm affected approximately 170 ha of mangroves and 41 ha of saltmarshes. The yellow mangrove (Ceriops tagal) experienced higher mortality than other species such as the red mangrove (Rhizophora stylosa) and grey mangrove (Avicennia marina). Surveys two years later found that the canopy cover and species composition had changed, and some saltmarsh plants such as Sporobolus virginicus had died.49” (GBRMPA publication, available at http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/publications/sotr/latest_updates/mangroves_and _saltmarshes, accessed on 25/03/2010).

Displacement by Mangroves “Numerous studies from SE Australia have demonstrated the encroachment of mangrove into upper-intertidal salt marsh. Saintilan and Williams (2000) cited 28 surveys that demonstrated salt marsh loss to mangrove encroachment over the period covered by archival air photographs (usually 1940s – present). The trend is apparent across all east coast bioregions and a range of geomorphic settings. Within southern Queensland, Pleistocene sand barriers protect wide, shallow backbarrier deposits which support extensive mangrove and salt marsh. Mangrove encroachment into salt marsh in these environments is well documented (McTainsh et al., 1986; Hyland and Butler, 1988; Morton, 1994; Manson et al., 2003). In northern NSW, mangroves and salt marshes occupy the mouths of large rivers. While losses of mangrove and salt marsh to agriculture have been extensive (West, 1993), mangroves are encroaching upon salt marsh and some agricultural pastures (Saintilan, 1998). In central coast NSW, widespread losses of salt marsh to mangrove have been reported from both shallow coastal lakes (Winning, 1990) and drowned river valleys (Mitchell and Adam, 1989a,b; Evans and Williams, 1997; Williams and Watford, 1997; Williams et al., 1999; McLoughlin, 2000; Haworth, 2002; Williams and Meehan, 2004). South coast NSW estuaries, mostly smaller “barrier” estuaries (Roy et al., 2001) have shown similar trends with a median loss of approximately 40% of the salt marsh to mangrove encroachment (Meehan, 1997; Chafer, 1998; Saintilan and Wilton, 2001). Within Victoria, salt marshes and mangroves occupy the shorelines of large coastal embayments. Here, loss of salt marsh to mangrove encroachment has been consistent though less dramatic. Declines of 5–12% of salt marsh to mangrove encroachment have been reported for the salt marshes of Western Port Bay (Rogers et al., 2005b) and losses have also been noted for Corner Inlet (Vanderzee, 1988) and the Gulf St. Vincent in South Australia (Burton, 1982). Within New Zealand, the proliferation of mangrove is more commonly described as a seaward colonisation (Cragg et al., 2001; Park, 2001; Morrisey et al., 2003) though landward encroachment has been noted (Burns and Ogden, 1985)” (Saintilan et al. 2009). Saintilan and Wilton 2001 document saltmarsh losses to landward migration of mangrove and seaward incursion of Melaleuca/Casuarina of 52% and 35% for two systems at Jervis Bay. Sea level rise is ruled out as a major cause. “A more plausible hypothesis involves an increase in the delivery of freshwater and nutrients to the intertidal environments in response to higher rainfall and catchment modifications”.

Version 09/10 23

23. Continued Anthropogenic Disturbances Coastal Development “Over the last 150 years, the removal of mangrove and saltmarsh habitats in some areas of the Great Barrier Reef coast has been recorded. This removal has primarily been undertaken to reclaim land for urban and industrial development, port expansion, salt farms, mining, aquaculture, and agriculture.6,7,15,36,38,77 Some examples include:

• Gladstone and Boyne region: between 1941 and 1999, 1470 ha of mangroves and 1342 ha of saltmarshes were cleared.36 Most of the inter-tidal wetland loss was experienced in the Port Curtis region. Between 1941 and 1989, approximately 650 ha of mangroves and 950 ha of saltmarshes were cleared mainly for industrial and urban development.7 Further clearing of 520 ha was permitted in the mid 1990s for expansion of the port.88 • Fitzroy estuary: between 1946 and 2002, approximately 840 ha of mangroves and saltmarshes were reclaimed for salt farms, agriculture and the expansion of Port Alma.36 An estimated 2700 ha of salt evaporation ponds occupy inter-tidal areas near Raglan Creek.17 • Mackay region: between 1953 – 1995, approximately nine per cent of mangroves and 43 per cent of saltmarsh originally in the region were cleared.16 • Cairns regions: during the 1970s, 700 ha of mangroves and saltmarshes were cleared in Trinity Inlet for sugarcane production.6 • Mossman region: approximately 30 years ago, 10 ha of mangroves were reclaimed for agriculture.74

Even when relatively small areas of mangroves and saltmarshes are removed from the Great Barrier Reef coast and estuaries, the impact of these changes on the surrounding environment may accumulate over time.29

Coastal development continues to place pressure on mangrove and saltmarsh ecosystems along the Great Barrier Reef coast. The Port of Gladstone is currently undergoing an extensive expansion programme that may result in the removal of mangroves and saltmarshes. The development of marinas and resorts may also be a threat to mangrove and saltmarsh habitats, especially where areas need to be reclaimed. Further, the construction of infrastructure such as bridges, causeways and pontoons that service these developments may pose secondary pressure from increased vehicle traffic (that causes soil compaction), physical damage to plants, and changes in drainage patterns. Vehicle traffic, especially 4WDs, have been linked to the degradation of saltmarshes.14,41” (GBRMPA publication, available at http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/publications/sotr/latest_updates/mangroves_and_saltm arshes, accessed on 25/03/2010).

Version 09/10 24

23. Continued Runnelling Runnelling is the practice of cutting channels through salt marsh in order to partially drain it and reduce mosquito breeding habitat through flushing marsh habitats and allowing predator access. Runnelling is used as an alternative to chemical or biochemical treatments for reducing mosquito populations which pose potential risks to nearby human populations. The current location of coastal salt-marshes modified with runnelling is unknown. However, studies have shown that there are ecological communities affected by runnelling in sub-tropical coastal salt marshes on Coomera Island, south-east Queensland, which is a Fisheries Habitat Area and Conservation Zone of Moreton Bay Marine Park. Generally, runnelling is best suited to sites with simple and relatively clearly defined water movement patterns and where length of runnel is relatively short, so that flushing reaches well into the marsh through the shallow channels. Some intertidal wetland sites are not suited to runnelling. (Dale and Knight, 2006, p.212) The environmental effects and impacts of runnelling were studied at a Coomera Island site which has had runnels implemented since 1985. Dale and Knight’s (2006) research into the environmental impacts of modifying inter-tidal coastal marshes through the implementation of runnelling showed the following results (pp. 215-219): - Significant effects of runnelling on substrate salinity. Specifically, studies revealed significantly lower salinity levels than the control site. - Grass Sporobolus significantly taller in modified areas, which were seen to be direct effects of runnels and resulting increased wetness of the areas. - Fewer pneumatophores of Avicennia marina in runnelled sites. - Decreased plant density at large over a much longer period than the actual study period. A 14 year study of the site found that bare ground was an emerging state in the system. - Trapping indicated that there were greater numbers of crab holes and some crab species in the Coomera runnelled marsh than in the control area (Chapman et al. 1998, in Dale and Knight, n.d., p. 218) Expected potential threats include the following risks as suggested and supported by research (Dale and Knight, n.d., pp.218-219): - In coastal areas of Australia acid sulfate soils often underlie habitats where mosquitos breed, that is, coastal salt-marshes. There is inherent risk of creating an acid sulphate problem if substrate is disturbed due to runnelling and acid sulphate soils are exposed to the air, which in turn can have severe environmental consequences. (Soukup and Portnoy 1986, in Dale, P., n.d., p80) - Runnelling can be expected to affect marsh hydrology, with increased wetness of substrates due to the fact that runnells effectively allow tidal incursions at tide levels that may not have flooded the marshes before modification This increased wetness is important when acid sulfates are a risk. Maintaining a wet substrate and high water table will minimise oxidation and production of sulfuric acid and acid sulfate runoff. - The increased wetness and occurrence of some mangroves is likely to lead to changes in the fauna, with invasion by lower marsh organisms into the more frequently flooded and wetter areas. - Runnels effectively allow tidal incursions at tide levels that may not have flooded the marshes before modification, at least along the runnel lines. This could lead to increased flushing and access for predators.

Version 09/10 25

23. Continued Agriculture “Runoff of nutrients, herbicides and pesticides into estuaries has impacts on saltmarshes. Eutrophication of waterways has resulted in algal blooms smothering saltmarshes. For the Peel- Harvey estuary (WA), addressing this eutrophication was a very expensive catchment wide process, involving measures to reduce fertiliser application and runoff, and re-engineering a new opening of the estuary into the ocean (Brearly 2005). Herbicide residues (particularly simazine) have been shown to adversely affect microalgae in European saltmarshes (Mason et al 2003). As these algae help stabilise the marsh sediment this is regarded as an important issue to be addressed. Few data are available from which to determine whether there are similar impacts in Australia.” (Adams, in Saintilan 2009).

The effects of pesticides from agricultural runoff on saltmarsh communities are currently unknown, however surveys conducted in estuaries within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, which suggest that pesticides such as diuron from adjacent agricultural areas have caused extensive dieback of grey mangroves, could be indicative of a threat to the adjoining saltmarsh communities.

“Saltmarshes are particularly sensitive to impacts associated with some agricultural practices such as increased drainage, ponded pastures, and physical damage from livestock.14 Levee banks or bund walls have been built to restrict tidal flow to certain areas, which reduces the salinity of the soils on the landward side. Between 1971 and 1975, a 7.2 km long bund wall with tidal floodgates and a network of deep drains was constructed in East Trinity Inlet, Cairns. The construction was designed to reclaim inter-tidal land for sugarcane production. In 1977, 18 ha of mangroves in East Trinity Inlet (predominantly Rhizophora stylosa) died due to the dramatic change in the salinity regime as a direct result of the bund wall.48 More recently, mortality of mangroves in East Trinity Inlet has been associated with the disturbance of Acid Sulfate Soils69. East Trinity Inlet has not been used for sugarcane production since 1998, as the area produced low crop yields.

Bund walls have also been built throughout the inter-tidal areas of the Queensland coast in order to increase useable land for livestock. There has been extensive construction of ponded pastures in the Broadsound and Fitzroy River region.17 Ponded pastures transform areas of saltmarsh habitats into less saline habitat to make it more suitable for pasture.41 Saltmarshes are critical habitats for many juvenile species, such as barramundi, mullet and penaeid prawns and the construction of bund walls restricts their movement and access to these habitats.17 In central Queensland, ponded pastures have been reported to trap and kill barramundi and can promote the growth of pest grasses.18“ (GBRMPA publication, available at http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/publications/sotr/latest_updates/mangroves_and_s altmarshes, accessed on 25/03/2010).

Version 09/10 26

23. Continued

“Since European settlement, large proportions of the natural vegetation in the Great Barrier Reef catchments have been cleared or thinned for grazing, agricultural cultivation, mining, aquaculture, and industrial and urban development.15 Clearing vegetation in catchments significantly increases the amount of sediment and nutrients flowing into rivers, estuaries and the Great Barrier Reef lagoon.16,36,77 Increased sedimentation in the last 40 years has been linked to significant changes in mangrove distribution in some areas of the Great Barrier Reef coast.36 In all of the estuaries that have been investigated for changes in sedimentation, mangroves have expanded. These changes are not considered as signs of improved estuarine health, as these expansions are responses to unnatural increases in sedimentation.38

The loss or removal of mangroves and saltmarshes affects not only the immediate area, but can lead to increased sedimentation and loss of other ecosystem functions in adjacent habitats, such as seagrass meadows and inshore coral reefs. It has been estimated that if there had been no removal of mangroves and saltmarshes within Trinity Inlet, these communities would have trapped more than half a million tonnes of sediment that has been discharged into surrounding marine habitats in the last 40 years.84

Dredging activities can also generate large amounts of suspended sediment that may accumulate in nearby areas, particularly near where dredge-spoil is dumped. This is evident in Cockle Bay on Magnetic Island where dredging and spoil disposal between 1937 and 1991 have been linked to significant increases in the mangroves in areas that originally had little fine sediment and few mangroves.38

Mangrove and saltmarsh systems are generally low in nitrogen and phosphorus and in some cases, increased nutrient levels can enhance mangrove growth and reproduction.22 However, excessive levels of nutrients, such as nitrogen and phosphorus, can result in eutrophication. This can cause a change in food webs and microbial communities, resulting in a shift from healthy to unhealthy ecosystems.3 In some cases fish–kills may occur. Increased nutrients can also fuel algal blooms that smother the breathing roots of the mangroves and cause extensive dieback. In Moreton Bay, southeast Queensland, algal blooms have been linked to extensive mangrove dieback,53 and in other parts of Australia, nutrient related dieback of saltmarshes has been recorded.2 Reports of eutrophication in the Great Barrier Reef mangrove and saltmarsh habitats are rare.16” (GBRMPA publication, available at http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/publications/sotr/latest_updates/mangroves_and_s altmarshes, accessed on 25/03/2010).

Mining Salt mining is a threat particularly in South Australia, where many coastal areas are under lease from mining companies which supply salt for the petrochemical industry. There is little information on the exact figures around the area threatened by this mining, but it is regarded as the highest threat to South Australian saltmarsh regions, above sea level rise, development, mangrove incursion, weeds and climate change respectively (XXXXXXXXXXXX pers. comm.).

Shipping and Oil Spills According to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority’s publication on the state of the Great Barrier Reef (available online at http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/publications/sotr/latest_updates/mangroves_and_saltm arshes/, accessed on 25/03/2010) the majority of oil spills that have occurred in Australia have resulted from shipping incidents, and although major shipping incidents and oil spills are actually rare, they can be catastrophic events with long-term impacts. Oil in mangrove and saltmarsh ecosystems can persist and remain toxic for decades, the severity of an oil spill depending on the extent of oil coverage, the time of year the spill occurs (plants are more vulnerable during their main growing season), the species involved (some plants are more sensitive than others), and tides and currents.

Version 09/10 27

23. Continued Landfill “The major loss of saltmarsh through landfilling had been through rubbish tips which are subsequently covered by soil and grassed… Road widening and straightening has also destroyed saltmarsh… Any great loss to landfill can be expected to be largely confined to salt marshes close to cities and large towns.” (Kirkpatrick and Glasby 1981). The NSW TSCA listing included in-filling for development, including roads, residential, industrial, recreational, waste disposal and agricultural purposes as threats to coastal saltmarsh. Invasive Species Adam 2009 – “many introduced species…found on Australian saltmarshes. Some…are clearly becoming major threats such as groundsel bush (Baccharis halmifolia) which from its initial introduction in Queensland is now spreading south on the NSW coast.” Other key problem species identified by Adam 2009 are: Spartina anglica (extensive in TAS and VIC. Threatens biodiversity by expanding into unvegetated mudflats (causing loss of habitat for migratory waders), genetically contaminating indigenous Spartina spp., and forming low diversity communities in which S. anglica is dominant. Other threats include changes to saltmarsh may arise through S. anglica’s ability to alter estuarine hydrodynamics and nutrient cycling. This extends to possible depletion of sediment flow to mangroves landward of S. anglica infestations). See Bridgewater and Cresswell 1999 p122-3 for more information on the history and challenges of Spartina invasion; and Juncus acutus (not restricted to coastal saltmarsh. Present in coastal saltmarsh in NSW, VIC, SA, WA, TAS. “…a major weed of pasture and coastal saltmarsh…it can form dense monospecific stands, crowding out the native J. krausii). Adam 2009 notes the uncertainty about the weedy behaviour of Phragmites australis in Australian saltmarshes, and that there are reports of this species spreading and displacing saltmarsh species. He also discusses the risk that whilst many of the weeds of saltmarsh are “generally viewed as unlikely threats to ecosystem integrity”, “Many of the worst environmental weeds in Australia were for long periods (decades) ‘sleepers’ – present in vegetation but not becoming dominant or appearing aggressive invaders until they suddenly underwent a population explosion and became recognised as serious threats… It is possible that amongst species already present in saltmarshes are some ‘sleepers’… One species which may be showing signs of making the transition from being benign to being a problem is Aster subulatus, a North American species which has been present in NSW saltmarshes for many decades. Although almost ubiquitous it is rarely abundant, but Keith et al. (2007) recently published a photograph of a dense stand of A. subulatus on a saltmarsh on the south coast of NSW; perhaps a sign of what is to come.” Adam 2009 also notes that studies in Californian saltmarshes (which share many exotic plants with those in Australia) have indicated some adverse interactions between native and exotic species, such as competitive dominance of exotics. Remedies for the problem of exotic plants in saltmarsh may require addressing landscape-scale alterations to hydrological changes that have advantaged weeds over natives. (Kirkpatrick & Glasby 1981; Schahinger & Smith 2008) note the threat of weed invasion, especially African boxthorn (Lycium ferocissimum). The Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment list the Buckshorn Plantain (Plantago coronopus), Rough Sow-thistle (Sonchus asper), Sow-thistle (Sonchus oleraceus), Spear Thistle (Cirsium vulgare), Aster-weed (Aster subulatus), Yorkshire Fog (Holcus lanatus), Water Buttons (Cotula coronopifolia), Coast Sand-spurrey (Spergularia media), Creeping Saltbush (Atriplex prostrata), Annual Beard-grass (Polypogon monspeliensis), Hairy Hawkbit (Leontodon taraxacoides) and Branched Centaury (Centaurium tenuiflorum) as weed species present in coastal saltmarsh. Plantago coronopus is also mentioned as a significant issue in Tasmanian saltmarsh.

Version 09/10 28

24. Catastrophic threats (if not included above) i.e. threats with a low predictability that are likely to severely affect the ecological community. Identify the threat, explain its likely impact and indicate the likelihood of it occurring (e.g. a drought/cyclone in the area every 100 years)

These are largely addressed above. Catastrophic threats include severe pollution events (oil spills, other toxic chemic spills), and climate change (droughts can advantage coastal saltmarsh; increased rainfall tends to disadvantage the community; sea level rise is a severe threat but more so if catastrophically dramatic e.g. if the Greenland or any one of the Antarctic icesheets slid into the ocean causing rapid sea level rise). It is also possible that a new weed species or a ‘sleeper’ weed species has a severe impact on saltmarsh.

25. Identify and explain any additional biological characteristics particular to the community or species within that are threatening to its survival (e.g. Low genetic diversity)? Identify and explain any models addressing survival or particular features. a. How does it respond to disturbance? b. How long does it take to regenerate and/or recover? a) The particular ecological requirements of the community, or more specifically, its halophytic plant components, make it especially vulnerable to rising sea levels associated with climate change. Most of the component plants have narrow niches. The present and predicted rate of sea level rise combined with geomorphological and anthropogenic limitations on habitat availability are such that many coastal saltmarshes will have ‘nowhere to go’ (see for e.g. Goudkamp and Chin 2006; Howden et al. 2003; Kelleway and Williams 2008; Kelleway et al. 2007; Laegdsgaard 2006; Saintilan and Rogers 2009).

“Plants occupying the saltmarsh must be able to withstand periodic soil salinity and inundation. There is a range of strategies amongst the 100 or more species found in Australian saltmarshes. The adaptations to saline conditions are often at the expense of growth rate, and it is this that explains the narrow penetration of saltmarsh plants into upslope freshwater terrestrial environments (Adam 1990)” (Saintilan 2009A). b) As explained above, the characteristics of saltmarsh combined with other factors result in it being unable to regenerate or recover, as it is simply trapped and taken over.

26. Relative status of remnants within the community? How much of the community would you describe as in relatively good condition, (i.e. Likely to persist into the long-term with minimal management?) Please describe how you would identify areas in good condition using one or a combination of indicators such as species richness, structure, remnant size, weed invasion etc. How much of the community would you describe as in relatively medium condition (i.e. Likely to persist into the long-term future with management?) Please describe how you would identify areas in medium condition using one or a combination of indicator such as species diversity, structure, remnant size, weed invasion etc. How much of the community would you describe as in relatively poor condition, (i.e. Unlikely to be recoverable with active management?) Please describe how you would identify area in poor condition using one or a combination of indicators such as species diversity, structure, remnant size, weed invasion etc. Unknown.

Version 09/10 29

Threat Abatement and Recovery 27. Identify key management documentation available for the ecological community, e.g. recovery plans, conservation plans, threat abatement plans or site specific management plans e.g. (for a reserve).

After the listing of ‘Coastal Saltmarsh in the NSW North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East Corner Bioregions’ under the NSW TSC Act, a profile was developed by the NSW Department of Environment and Conservation, which is available online at http://www.threatenedspecies.environment.nsw.gov.au/tsprofile/pas_profile.aspx?id=10866. This profile outlines “What needs to be done to recover this ecological community”, and identifies 7 priority actions to help recover the Coastal Saltmarsh in the NSW North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East Corner Bioregions.

The nominator is not aware of other key management documentation.

28. Give an overview of how threats are being abated/could be abated and other recovery actions underway/proposed. Identify who is undertaking these activities and how successful the activities have been to date.

Key issue is to prevent further direct and indirect loss of habitat and to provide habitat for the community to colonise as it moves landward with sea level rise.

29. What portion of the current extent of the ecological community is protected in a reserve system? Which of these are actively managed? Give details including the name of the reserves, and the extent the ecological community is protected within these reserves. Note which, if any, reserves have management plans and if they are being implemented.

No national data is available. Only patchy data available at State level, some of which is not publicly available.

Version 09/10 30

Section 2 - Justification for this nomination In order for the nomination to be considered further, one or more of the following criteria needs to be fulfilled and substantiated. More than one criteria may indicate the ecological community is a higher priority for listing but not necessarily. The nomination certainly does not need to fulfil all 6 criteria. A clear case for why the ecological community is eligible for listing under the criteria is required, including evidence as to how it meets the requirements for listing under a particular category e.g. critically endangered.

30. Provide data that demonstrates why the ecological community meets at least one of the following criteria for the nominated category of threat. This data may already have been provided in previous sections. Please refer to the data again and demonstrate how it specifically meets at least one of the following criteria. Advice on how to interpret the listing criteria is provided in the Guidelines at Attachment A. Criterion 1: Decline in geographic distribution.

Range not known to be reduced but area of occupancy reduced significantly though not consistently across its range. Major losses on east coast. Range likely to reduce with warming and sea level rise. Across its range, losses are probably in the Vulnerable ~=>70% range but there might be a case for increasing the threshold… Saintilan and Williams (2000) cited 28 surveys that demonstrated salt marsh loss to mangrove encroachment over the period covered by archival air photographs (usually 1940s – present). The trend is apparent across all east coast bioregions and a range of geomorphic settings. Within southern Queensland, Pleistocene sand barriers protect wide, shallow backbarrier deposits which support extensive mangrove and salt marsh. Mangrove encroachment into salt marsh in these environments is well documented (McTainsh et al., 1986; Hyland and Butler, 1988; Morton, 1994; Manson et al., 2003). In northern NSW, mangroves and salt marshes occupy the mouths of large rivers. While losses of mangrove and salt marsh to agriculture have been extensive (West, 1993), mangroves are encroaching upon salt marsh and some agricultural pastures (Saintilan, 1998). In central coast NSW, widespread losses of salt marsh to mangrove have been reported from both shallow coastal lakes (Winning, 1990) and drowned river valleys (Mitchell and Adam, 1989a,b; Evans and Williams, 1997; Williams and Watford, 1997; Williams et al., 1999; McLoughlin, 2000; Haworth, 2002; Williams and Meehan, 2004). South coast NSW estuaries, mostly smaller “barrier” estuaries (Roy et al., 2001) have shown similar trends with a median loss of approximately 40% of the salt marsh to mangrove encroachment (Meehan, 1997; Chafer, 1998; Saintilan and Wilton, 2001). Within Victoria, salt marshes and mangroves occupy the shorelines of large coastal embayments. Here, loss of salt marsh to mangrove encroachment has been consistent though less dramatic. Declines of 5– 12% of salt marsh to mangrove encroachment have been reported for the salt marshes of Western Port Bay (Rogers et al., 2005b) and losses have also been noted for Corner Inlet (Vanderzee, 1988) and the Gulf St. Vincent in South Australia (Burton, 1982)” (Saintilan et al. 2009). In SE Australia and New Zealand, the growth of the mangrove Avicennia marina will be aided not only by increased temperatures toward its southern limit of distribution, but also by higher sea levels. Presently, the upslope limit of A. marina is defined by the mean high water mark. While there is continued debate over the causes of mangrove encroachment into the salt marsh of eastern Australia, there is growing evidence for a role of relative sea-level rise, evidenced by the relationship between the rate of encroachment and relative sea-level trends, and an increase rate of relative sea-level rise in temperate Australasian salt marshes over the past century. The subtle elevation gradients defining the position of mangrove and salt marsh in these situations provide an early indication of the effects of sea- level rise in the coastal wetlands of the region. The concern in these situations is that the landward transition of salt marsh may be impeded by topographic constraints, both cultural and natural. Where feasible, thought should be given to the designation of landward “accommodation space” in anticipation of projected rates of sea-level rise, so that the full range of wetland vegetation communities can continue to coexist in these estuaries” (Saintilan et al. 2009). “Note that around 3,000 ha of saltmarsh were lost between 1974 and 1999” (DPI & F 1999) cited.

Version 09/10 31

Criterion 2: Small geographic distribution coupled with demonstrable threat.

Estimate of extent of occurrence may be in the <1000 km2 parameter (Limited), although the total area of occupancy is unknown.

There is a very demonstrable threat, processes such as mining, climate change, mangrove incursion and agriculture all pressure saltmarsh communities, as outlined in section 23.

Total national area of Australian saltmarsh: 1,302,895 ha (Geoscience Australia) NSW area = 59.1 km2 (Burns and Davey 2010)

Criterion 3: Loss or decline of functionally important species.

Justification under this criterion is possible in the context of severe weed infestations that displace key saltmarsh species and that can change structure, floristics and even abiotic parameters e.g. alter sediment patterns / hydrology. Also possible in the context of displacement by mangroves and alteration under warming e.g. loss of characteristic Subtropical/Temperate species and possible incursion of Tropical ones – overall loss of diversity and shift from one community to another.

Unfortunately, until information is made available by various state and regional bodies, the level of decline is not able to be calculated. Loose estimates would class it in the ‘Vulnerable’ category for this criterion.

Criterion 4: Reduction in community integrity.

Reductions in community integrity is demonstrable in relation to serious weed invasion e.g. J. acutus, Spartina anglica, and Baccharis, as well as reduced integrity through invasion of mangroves and Phragmites. Climate change, and processes such as runnelling may also reduce community integrity, refer to section 20 of this nomination for more information.

Criterion 5: Rate of continuing detrimental change.

There is a good case for listing under rates of continuing detrimental change. The threats section (23) of this nomination deals with many ongoing pressures which are changing coastal saltmarsh habitat. There is some data in this section providing figures for particular states / regions such as Queensland and South Australia.

Forecast sea level and temperature rises indicate that many of the threatening processes will become greater of time.

Criterion 6: Quantitative analysis showing probability of extinction.

Quantative analysis showing the probability of extinction could likely be achieved by modelling habitat and sea level rise over time. There would need to be consideration of the scope for landward colonisation with sterilised areas broadly mapped from other vegetation data sets.

Version 09/10 32 Section 3 – Recovery, Conservation, Protection

Additional information on distribution 31. Give locations of sites for proposed management, preferably that have been identified in recovery plans and key sites considered to demonstrate those remnants of highest quality and/or most under threat.

“The development of an interim bioregionalisation os Australia is a useful aid to the systematic conservation of Australia’s aquatic resources. The analysis of this approach is obvious when used as the basis for exploring saltmarsh biogeographic patterns. Clearly, some bioregions are of particular significance in containing a high proportion of the nation’s saltmarsh species, with the South Australian bioregions of Kanmantoo, Murray-Darling Depression and Eyre Yorke Block being good examples, with each containing more than 60% of the 110 saltmarsh species listed in Appendix 2.1. In defining the location of saltmarsh reserves, these would be a good place to begin.” (Saintilan 2009)

From Saintilan 2009B

The above table, also from Saintilan (2009B), provides data on the % of the total Australian saltmarsh flora present in each bioregion, and could be used as a guide for prioritising management. It should be noted that the bioregions of Kanmantoo, Murray-Darling Depression and Eyre Yorke Block, which have the highest % of saltmarsh flora, would also be under additional threat from salt mining.

Locations of priority management would need to be assessed on a case by case basis through opportunities that arise, a workshop on temperate subtropical coastal saltmarsh would certainly assist in developing priorities.

Version 09/10 33

Conservation Advice 32. Give details of recovery actions that are or could be carried out at the local and regional level. e.g. develop and implement management plan for the control of specific weed species (regional), undertake weeding of known sites (local).

Oil Spills “In Australia saltmarshes have been identified as ecologically sensitive communities in oil spill contingency planning; if at all possible booms would be deployed to prevent oil reaching saltmarshes, and if oiling of saltmarshes does occur, dispersants would not be used (for example see Carter 1994). As well as tide-borne incursions of oil, terrestrial chemical and oil spills (from road or rail accidents) could reach saltmarshes, and the emergency services would need to manage any oil and chemicals in stormwater drains and waterways so as to minimise impacts on saltmarshes.” (Adams, in Saintilan 2009).

Overview of Primary Actions - Weed control (in particular J. acutus, S. anglica and Baccharis) - Habitat conservation e.g. no more direct losses to landfill or dredging etc. - Identify and provide suitable habitat for landward migration - Prevent freshwater discharges into/through habitat - General water pollution reduction measures - Reduce sediment loads to natural levels - Protect from physical damage e.g. recreational impacts (barriers, signage, patrols, education, public prosecutions)

Community Networks 33. Is there an existing support network for the ecological community that facilitates recovery? e.g. an active Landcare group, Conservation Management Network or funding.

Landcare groups specific to coastal regions such as Coastcare, as well as Wetlands groups would be those most likely to have an existing support network for coastal saltmarsh. However, the nominator is unaware of any specific recovery facilitations currently occurring.

Survey Methods 34. Describe methods for identifying the ecological community including when to conduct surveys (e.g. season, time of day, weather conditions); length, intensity and pattern of search effort; and limitations and expert acceptance; recommended methods; survey-effort guide.

There are no known specific constraints on surveying the community, other than ensuring the effects of certain weather events are accounted for (ie. After severe storms etc.)

35. Give details of the distinctiveness and detectability of the ecological community.

Refer to section 4 of this nomination.

Version 09/10 34

Other 36. Are there other aspects relating to the survival of this ecological community that you would like to address?

While not directly relating to the threats to or survival of Subtropical temperate saltmarsh, there are a number of important environmental factors that should be taken into consideration upon assessment. The first of these is the important role that saltmarsh plays in carbon storage. The nominator only became aware of this important environmental feature of saltmarsh late in the nomination process, and as a result no scientific papers have been compiled on this topic. It is the intention of the nominator to submit further information on this aspect of coastal saltmarshes as supplementary material. Another likely consequence of inadequate saltmarsh protection is the release of heavy metals, particularly in areas of mining activity such as those around Adelaide, SA. Adam (in Saintilan, 2009) writes “Given that estuaries have been sites for industrial development for centuries, there is a considerable legacy of industrial pollution in estuarine saltmarshes. Metals released into estuaries may be incorporated into saltmarsh sediment, where under reducing conditions their biological availability is lessened. Disturbance to sediments (through dredging or reclamation) may result in oxidation of these metals and their release into the environment in much more biologically available and toxic forms. High levels of heavy metals in saltmarsh sediments have been recorded in many estuaries around the world, and in Australia the association of industry, particularly smelting, with estuaries in the southern part of the continent is reflected in elevated levels of metals in waters, sediments and vegetation (see for example Woods et al. 2007). While the Precautionary Principle would indicate that metal accumulation should be regarded as a concern, and measures taken to prevent new discharges and reduce or eliminate existing sources, the ecosystem-level consequences of metal contamination are less clear (Williams et al. 1994; Valiela 2006) possibly because of the lack of studies which have examined ecosystem processes. Most saltmarsh plants, which are physiologically adapted to a stressful environment, may be constitutively tolerant of metal pollution… But the effects of metals in saltmarsh plants on the detrital food chain and on direct herbivory by fauna have been poorly studied”.

Section 4 – References Notes: The opinion of appropriate scientific experts may be cited (with their approval) in support of a nomination. If this is done the names of the experts, their qualifications and full contact details must also be provided in the reference list below. Please provide copies of key documentation/references used in the nomination 38. Reference list Adam, P. (1990). Saltmarsh ecology. Cambridge UK, Cambridge University Press. Adam, P. (2009). Australian saltmarshes in global context. Australian Saltmarsh Ecology. N. Saintilan (Ed.), Canberra, CSIRO Publishing: 1-21. Adam, P., Wilson, N.C. and Huntley, B. (1988). "The phytosociology of coastal saltmarsh vegetation in New South Wales." Wetlands (Australia) 7(2): 35-85. Australian State of the Environment Committee (2001). Coasts and Oceans. Australia State of the Environment Report 2001 (Theme Report) Canberra, CSIRO Publishing on behalf of the Department of the Environment and Heritage

Version 09/10 35

38. Reference list continued

Brearly, A. (2005) Ernesy Hodgkin’s Swanland: Estuaries and Coastal Lagoons of Southwestern Australia. University of Western Australia Press: Crawley. Bridgewater, P.B. and Cresswell, I.D. (1993). "Phytosociology and phytogeography of coastal saltmarshes in Western Australia." Fragmenta floristica et geobotanica Supplementum No. 2: 609-629. Bridgewater, P.B. and Cresswell, I.D. (1999). "Biogeography of mangrove and saltmarsh vegetation: implications for conservation and management in Australia." Mangroves and Salt Marshes(3): 117-125. Carter, S. (1994) Coastal Resource Atlas for Oil Spills from Barrenjoey Head to Bellambi Point. Environment Protection Agency of New South Wales: Chatswood. Clarke, L.D. and Hannon, N.J. (1969) The mangrove and saltmarsh communities of the Sydney district II. The holocoenotic complex with particular reference to physiography. Journal of Ecology 57, 213-234 Dale, P.E.R., Knight, J.M., Breitfuss, M., Radke, L. and Rogers, K. (2010). "OzCoasts (Australian Online Coastal Information): Saltmarsh and sandflat areas." Retrieved 16/03/2010, from http://www.ozcoasts.org.au/indicators/changes_saltmarsh_area.jsp Dale, P.E.R., & Knight, J.M., 2006, Managing salt marshes for mosquito control: impacts of Runnelling, Open Marsh Water Management and grid-ditching in sub- tropical Australia, Wetlands Ecology and Management, 14:211-220. Dale, P., n.d., Long-term impacts of Runnelling on an intertidal saltmarsh, Arbovirus Research in Australia, vol. 9, available online at http://marc.qimr.edu.au/MARC%20research%20pdfs/Paper%2022.pdf (accessed 24/3/10) Goudkamp, K. and Chin, A. (2006). Mangroves and Saltmarshes. The state of the Great Barrier Reef On-line. A. Chin (Ed.), Townsville QLD, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. Howden, M., Hughes, L., Dunlop, M., Zethoven, I., Hilbert, D. and Chilcott, C. (2003). Climate change impacts on biodiversity in Australia: outcomes of a workshop sponsored by the Biological Diversity Advisory Committee, 1-2 October. Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia. Johns, L. (2006). Field guide to common saltmarsh plants of Queensland. Brisbane, Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries. Kelleway, J. (2005). "Ecological impacts of recreational vehicle use on saltmarshes of the Georges River, Sydney." Wetlands (Australia) 22: 52-66. Kelleway, J. and Williams, R.J. (2008). "Threats facing coastal saltmarsh in urban areas." Australasian Plant Conservation 16(4): 18-19. Kelleway, J., Williams, R.J. and Allen, C.B. (2007). An assessment of the saltmarsh of the Parramatta River and Sydney Harbour Sydney, NSW Department of Primary Industries - Fisheries. Kirkpatrick, J.B. and Glasby, C.J. (1981) Salt marshes in Tasmania: Distribution, Community Composition and Conservation. Occasional Paper No. 8. Department of Geography, University of Tasmania: Hobart. Kirkpatrick, J.B. (1977) The Disappearing Heath. Tasmanian Conservation Trust: Hobart

Version 09/10 36

38. Reference list Continued Laegdsgaard, P. (2006). "Ecology, disturbance and restoration of coastal saltmarsh in Australia: a review." Wetlands Ecology and Management(14): 379-3999. Mason, C.F. et al. (2003) The role of herbicides in the erosion of salt marshes in eastern England. Environmental Pollution 122, 41-49. Mount, R. and Bricher, P. (2008). Estuarine, Coastal and Marine (ECM) National Habitat Mapping Project Report. Hobart, TAS, School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania. Report to the Department of Climate Change, and the National Land & Water Resources Audit (Canberra). Saintilan, N. (Ed.), (2009). Australian Saltmarsh Ecology. Canberra, CSIRO Publishing. Saintilan, N. (2009). "Biogeography of Australian saltmarsh plants." Austral Ecology 34: 929-937. Saintilan, N. and Rogers, K. (2009). Coastal saltmarsh vulnerability to climate change in SE Australia. 18th NSW Coastal Conference 2009, Ballina NSW, Rivers & Wetlands Unit, NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change & Water. Saintilan, N., Rogers, K. and McKee, K. (2009). Salt marsh-mangrove interactions in Australasia and the Americas. Coastal wetlands: an integrated ecosystem approach. G. M. E. Perillo, E. Wolanski, D. R. Cahoon and M. M. Brinson (Eds.), Amsterdam and Boston, Elsevier. Saintilan, N. and Williams, R.J. (1999). "Mangrove transgression into saltmarsh environments in south-east Australia." Global Ecology and Biogeography(8): 117-124. Schahinger, R. and Smith, A. (2008). Threatened flora surveys of salt marshes in southern Tasmania: March-May 2008, Hobart TAS, Threatened Species Section, Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment. Schindl, T.J. (2002) Environmental and physical factors controlling species composition within the Warneet saltmarsh. BSc thesis, Monash University, Australia. Shepherd, K.A. and Wilson, P.G. (2007). "Incorporation of the genera Halosarcia, Pachycornia, Sclerostegia, and Tegicornia into Tecticornia (Salicornioideae, Chenopodiaceae)." Australian Systematic Botany 20: 319-331. Valiela, I. (2006) Global Coastal Change. Blackwell Publishing: Carlton. West, R.J., Thorogood, C., Walford, T. and Williams, R.J. (1985). An estuarine inventory for New South Wales. Fisheries Bulletin 2, Sydney, NSW Department of Agriculture. Williams, T.P., Bubb, J.M., and Lester, J.N. (1994) Metal accumulation within saltmarsh environments; A review. Marine Pollution Bulletin 28, 277-290 Williams, R.J. and Watford, F.A. (1997). Change in the distribution of mangrove and saltmarsh in Berowra and Marramarra Creeks, 1941-1992 Cronulla NSW, NSW Fisheries Research Institute. Williams, R.J., Watford, F.A. and Balashov, V. (2000). Kooragang Wetland Rehabilitation Project: history of changes to estuarine wetlands in the lower Hunter River Sydney, NSW Fisheries. Wilton, K.M. (2002). Coastal wetland habitat dynamics in selected New South Wales estuaries. Australia's National Coastal Conference, Tweed Heads NSW. Woods, J.L.D, Brown, T.H., Gangaiya, P., and Morrison, R.J. (2007) Water quality in Tom Thumb Lagoon, a highly disturbed urban estuary in Port Kembla, New South Wales, Australia. Wetlands (Australia) 24, 44-66 39. Has this document been reviewed and/or have relevant experts been consulted? If so, indicate by whom. [Yes]

Version 09/10 37

Version 09/10 38