Community Based Monitoring of NRM North Coastal Saltmarshes

Review Paper August 2014

By Vishnu Prahalad University of

Background to the review

This review paper forms part of the project titled Steps to Saltmarsh Conservation in Northern Tasmania 2014.

The project aims to increase understanding of temperate saltmarsh communities in Northern Tasmania, for planning and management (Stage 1), and to enable community-based monitoring of Tasmanian saltmarshes through the provision of monitoring and information materials (Stage 2).

The project steps, outputs and the two stage process have been depicted in the diagram below:

This review paper (highlighted in bold letters in the above diagram) forms a critical component of the preliminary research (Stage 1) required to progress the community engagement aspects (Stage 2), particularly the forthcoming saltmarsh monitoring toolkit – a series of monitoring guide sheets for community groups and individuals (including land owners) to monitor saltmarshes.

Key stakeholders from the scientific community engaged in saltmarsh related research (identified below) have been communicated with to develop this review paper. It is expected that this engagement will be ongoing and the review paper will generate some discussion and highlight research needs for better understanding and management of Tasmanian saltmarshes. Name Institution Expertise/Interest Dr Jamie Kirkpatrick University of Tasmania , ecosystem Dr Richard Schahinger Tasmanian DPIPWE Plants Dr Peter McQuillan University of Tasmania Insects, spiders, frogs John Aalders University of Tasmania Insects, spiders, soil Dr Alastair Richardson University of Tasmania Crabs, snails, fish Dr Peter Davies University of Tasmania Fish Dr Eric Woehler BirdLife Birds Chris Sharples University of Tasmania Geomorphology Nick Bowden University of Tasmania Shoreline monitoring Dr Arko Lucieer University of Tasmania Remote sensing Josh Kelcey University of Tasmania Remote sensing Yoav Bar-Ness Outreach Ecology Citizen science Emma Williams NRM North NRM Kaylene Allen Friends of PWOL NRM Lyndel Wilson NRM South NRM

Acknowledgements of other contributions

Violet Harrison-Day (University of Tasmania), for contribution to Appendix 1 on vascular monitoring. Chris Sharples (UTAS), for contribution to Appendix 2 on geomorphic monitoring. John Aalders (UTAS), for contribution to Appendix 3 on spiders and beetles monitoring. Adelina Latinovic (UTAS), for contribution to Appendix 4 on bird monitoring.

Michael Helman (Visual Science) developed the Tasmanian Saltmarsh Components and Processes conceptual diagram and the Tasmanian Saltmarsh Monitoring – Conceptual Framework illustration.

All photos used in this paper are by the author, Vishnu Prahalad.

Report author and contact details Vishnu Prahalad, Discipline of Geography and Spatial Science, School of Land and Food, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 78 Hobart, Tasmania 7001, Australia vishnu. [email protected]

Disclaimer NRM North use reasonable means to verify the validity and accuracy of the data contained herein at the date of this publication, however to the extent allowed by law, it does not warrant or represent that the data will be correct, current, fit/suitable for a particular purpose or not-misleading. NRM North, and all persons acting on their behalf preparing data that has been used in this report, accept no liability for the accuracy of or inferences from material contained in this publication, or for action as a result of any person’s or group’s interpretation, deductions, conclusions or actions in relying on this material. Contents

Background to the review ...... 3

Contents ...... 5

Coastal saltmarsh wetlands ...... 7 Definition and distribution ...... 7 Saltmarsh life forms and processes (adapted from Mount et al., 2010) ..... 9

Community-based monitoring ...... 13

Bio-physical indicators of saltmarsh health ...... 16 Level 1: Plants and microbes ...... 16

Vascular plants (‘higher plants’) ...... 16 Microorganisms and nuisance algae ...... 21 Level 0: Geomorphology and edaphic (soil) factors ...... 22 Geomorphic indicators of saltmarsh stability ...... 22 Shoreline movement – positional change due to erosion or accretion ...... 23

Edaphic factors ...... 25 Level 2: Invertebrates ...... 27 Crustaceans and molluscs ...... 27 Insects and spiders (written by P. McQuillan) ...... 28 Level 3: Vertebrates (ex: humans) ...... 30 Native mammals and introduced rabbits ...... 30

Birds ...... 31 Fish ...... 33 Level 4: Human interactions ...... 34 Detrimental human impacts ...... 34 Wise use of saltmarshes ...... 36 Level 5: Global change factors ...... 36

Flooding regime and sea level rise...... 36 Climate, rainfall, wind conditions ...... 37

Concluding recommendations ...... 37

5 | P a g e

Background Resources ...... 38

Appendix 1: Vascular plants of Tasmanian saltmarshes (database by Violet Harrison-Day) ...... 44

Appendix 2: Shoreline Geomorphology – Identifying and Mapping of Geomorphic Facies for Saltmarsh Monitoring (authored by Chris Sharples) ...... 55

Appendix 3: Spiders and beetles of a Tasmanian saltmarsh (database by John Aalders) ...... 68

Appendix 4: Birds of Tasmanian saltmarshes (database by Adelina Latinovic)...... 70

6 | P a g e

Coastal saltmarsh wetlands

Definition and distribution In Tasmania, saltmarshes are formally defined and mapped by their vegetation communities as outlined by the Tasmanian Vegetation Monitoring and Mapping Program (TASVEG, available through www.thelist.tas.gov.au). Tasmanian coastal saltmarshes include two major community types (defined below) and are closely associated with wetlands, commonly grouped as saltmarsh and wetland, and are classified as non-forest vegetation community types (Table 1). This excludes ‘swamps’ and ‘wet heath’ which are dominated by trees and woody shrubs, and only includes ‘marshes’ dominated by herbs, succulent shrubs and graminoids (grasses, sedges and rushes). TASVEG also excludes marine habitats such as seagrass and rocky reef that occur below the mean high tide mark often as a continuum of habitats with saltmarshes (Mount et al., 2010). These seabed habitat types are mapped by SeaMap Tasmania (available through seamap.imas.utas.edu.au).

Table 1. Tasmanian Vegetation Monitoring and Mapping Program (TASVEG) non-forest vegetation community types representing saltmarsh and wetland. Two saltmarsh community types ASS and ARS are identified in bold letters. TASVEG Community Code, Name Water Influence Dominant Plant Form Salinity AHF Permanent or Dominated by herbs, Fresh semi-permanent sedges (Eleocharis) Freshwater Aquatic Herbland AHL Intermittent and Dominated by herbs, Fresh to episodic occasional grasses brackish Lacustrine Herbland ASF Permanent or Dominated by sedges Fresh to semi-permanent and rushes, occasional brackish Freshwater Aquatic Sedgeland grasses and Rushland AHS Permanent or Dominated by herbs, Saline semi-permanent grass (Ruppia) Saline Aquatic Herbland ASS Intermittent Dominated by Saline and regular succulent herbs and Succulent Saline Herbland (tidal) shrubs, occasional grasses ARS Intermittent Dominated by sedges Saline to and episodic and rushes, brackish Saline Sedgeland/ Rushland occasional grasses

Besides the definition by TASVEG that focuses on vegetation, other non-vegetated areas such as tidal channels, salt scalds/flats and marsh pools have been included by saltmarsh mapping projects (Prahalad, 2009; Mount et al., 2010; Prahalad and Pearson, 2013). The inclusion of these non-vegetated areas has been justified as they form an integral part of the saltmarsh and occupy the same ecological niche in the tidal profile starting below the mean high tide mark and extending landward to the extent of storm tide flooding. Particularly, tidal channels are regarded as a defining aspect of saltmarshes, forming networks in more extensive marshes and functioning to distribute tidal water with biotic and abiotic material to and from the marsh to lower down in the tidal profile (Allen, 2000).

7 | P a g e

The two TASVEG vegetation community types that represent saltmarsh include (after Kitchener and Harris, 2013): Succulent Saline Herbland (ASS) Vegetation dominated by herbaceous species growing on the margins of highly saline, protected, flat estuarine shorelines inundated with sea water during high tides, dominated by halophytic plants, predominantly Sarcocornia quinqueflora and/or Sclerostegia arbuscula [now arbuscula]. Saline Sedgeland/Rushland (ARS) Vegetation dominated by sedges, rushes and occasionally grasses growing in highly saline environments, often inundated by tidal water, dominated by halophytic plants commonly filum and kraussii.

These two broad TASVEG community types are based largely on the study by Kirkpatrick and Glasby (1981) who recorded 15 distinct floristic communities based on ‘structural dominance’ along with key indicator species to assist in their identification (also in Kitchener and Harris, 2013, Saltmarsh and wetland section). One of these 15 community types is Spartina anglica grassland made up of the exotic and highly invasive S. anglica (rice grass), and is mapped separately by TASVEG as Spartina marshland (FSM). TASVEG mapping is represented at a common scale of 1:25 000 (though actual mapping may be done at a higher resolution as per the dictates of particular mapping projects) and records saltmarshes as polygons. Either ARS or ASS community type is assigned to a saltmarsh polygon based on the vegetation type that occupies greater than 50% of the polygon area. Where vegetation community level mapping is not completed, a saltmarsh polygon is attributed as saltmarsh (undifferentiated) (AUS). In the TASVEG version 3.0 released in November 2013, a total of about 989 ha of saltmarsh have been mapped within the Northern NRM region. The State-wide mapping accuracy is variable with marshes in the Southern NRM region and in the far north-west (Cradle Coast NRM region) having been identified and mapped at a high resolution of 1:500-1:3000. Mapping in other parts of Cradle Coast NRM region has been largely incomplete, unverified and of low resolution. Mapping in Northern NRM region was undertaken as part of this project and the outputs are available in three formats: 1. Mapping Report (July 2014): describes the mapping process undertaken and summaries key results along with illustrative maps.

2. GIS Database (June 2014): Geographical Information Systems (GIS) vector spatial layer and dataset, NRMNorth_Saltmarsh_Wetland_Extent_30June2014.

3. Atlas of NRM North Saltmarsh Wetlands (July 2014): a guide booklet depicting (as a visual summary) the mapped wetland areas along with an information synthesis presented in a publicly accessible format.

All the three resources are available through NRM North, contact: Emma Williams at [email protected]

8 | P a g e

Saltmarsh life forms and processes (adapted from Mount et al., 2010) Vegetation plays the central role in saltmarshes in structuring the ecosystem and providing the habitat occupied and further shaped by fauna (Adam, 1990). The halophytic (salt tolerant) saltmarsh species are highly specialised with a range of physiological adaptations to overcome the severe stresses presented by the saltmarsh environment, primarily excess salt and waterlogging. These two environmental variables determine, to a large extent, the position of each type of saltmarsh vegetation within the marsh (Clarke and Hannon, 1971; Kirkpatrick and Glasby, 1981). Both salinity and waterlogging are predominantly controlled by the tidal flooding regime, which is regarded as the single most important factor in the development, extent and function of the saltmarsh ecosystem (Chapman, 1974; Huiskes, 1990). Salinity and waterlogging can be highly variable within the saltmarsh with factors such as freshwater flows, evaporation rates and drainage (local topographic relief) interplaying with the tidal inundation regime and producing intricate vegetation patterns. Saltmarsh often exhibits distinct vegetation zonation. Three vegetation zones have been generally recognised based on tidal flooding frequency and include the low marsh, inundated by every tide; the mid marsh, inundated by most tides; and the high marsh, very rarely inundated (Adam, 1990). All three of these zones can be observed in Tasmanian saltmarshes. The low marsh zone inundated daily has pioneer saltmarsh flora dominated by Sarcocornia quinqueflora. In many areas however, where enough freshwater inputs are available, Juncus kraussii occurs in this zone. The mid marsh inundated less frequently is dominated mainly by longer-lived Tecticornia arbuscula shrubs, sometimes mixed with Gahnia filum sedges. The high marsh is inundated rarely and dominated by grasses and rushes such as Austrostipa stipoides and Juncus kraussii. The high marsh zone borders the terrestrial zone which is predominantly dominated by Melaleuca swamp forests. The presence or absence of one or several of these zones within a given saltmarsh depends on the size of the marsh and the effect of localised environmental factors (Glasby, 1975). Apart from the structurally dominant higher plants of the saltmarsh, there is a vastly extensive benthic (bottom dwelling) algal community that live on the uppermost layers of the saltmarsh substrate, including the tidal channels and marsh pools (also called as edaphic algae). These microscopic algae are an important component of saltmarsh food-web and can equal or exceed the primary productivity of higher plants (Sullivan and Currin, 2000). Saltmarsh plants are generally hardy (evolved to withstand the mechanical damage caused by waves) and have little nutritional value (Long and Mason, 1983). Hence they are not preferred by herbivores, with the exception of livestock that can feed extensively on saltmarshes causing much detriment via removal and disturbance. In the absence of herbivores, detritivores become the primary consumers in the saltmarsh food-web breaking down the plant material and facilitating the flow of energy and organic nutrients (Adam, 1990; Deegan et al., 2000). These inconspicuous detritivores, including snails, amphipods, isopods and crabs, form the most abundant component of the invertebrate fauna of Tasmanian saltmarshes (Wong et al., 1993). Besides providing organic material that supports marine species (especially fish), they help to build the saltmarsh substrate and keep it aerated (thereby reducing anoxic conditions). They also support a range of birdlife which can directly feed on them, including migratory shorebirds (Spencer et al., 2009).

9 | P a g e

Under suitable growth conditions, saltmarshes function by trapping and binding mineral sediment, stabilise the soil by reducing wave energy (decreasing scour) and produce organic material which helps to further build up the marsh substrate. As the building process continues, the saltmarsh expands and intricate drainage (tidal) channel networks develop. These channels play an important role in delivering and removing tidal water along with mineral and organic matter to and from the marsh platform (Lawrence et al., 2004). The growth and extent of saltmarshes within any particular location will be determined in part by the degree of protection afforded by adjacent coastal features, the nearshore seabed topography and the availability of fine sediments (Long and Mason, 1983). In Tasmania, saltmarshes form extensively on shallow low energy shorelines (i.e. “protected” from high wave action by coastal barriers) of tide-dominated environments, where they generally occur between the area below the mean high tide mark and the highest tide mark. When suitable growth conditions change, such as associated with climate change and sea level rise, the abovementioned function of the saltmarsh is subjected to severe stress. Where the saltmarsh is not able to respond in time to these stresses, they start reducing in extent (through peripheral erosion) and vigour (vegetation loss and internal erosion). Recently, climate change and sea level rise has been related to changes in the extent and vegetation composition of south east Tasmanian saltmarshes (Prahalad et al., 2011). On the seaward boundary, increased sea level and storminess have been noted to cause widespread marsh edge erosion and the deposition of sand sheets and shell ridges over the marsh surface. On the landward boundary, the response to sea level rise is usually the gradual movement of halophytic (salt-loving) saltmarsh vegetation inland replacing either glycophytic (salt-intolerant) terrestrial vegetation or into agricultural land (Choi et al., 2001). Across the saltmarsh platform, the changes are usually associated with the replacement of the long lived high marsh vegetation by the pioneer low marsh vegetation which is more tolerant to waterlogging (Donnelly and Bertness, 2001). The marsh platform itself is subjected to a process known as “internal marsh erosion” where mud mounds (or vegetation hummocks) are formed, marsh accretion rates fall and there is an increase (or coalescence) of marsh pools reducing plant cover (Allen and Pye, 1992). Reduction of plant cover (biomass) and increased loading of water can cause autocompaction of the marsh sediment and provide as positive feedback for further saltmarsh erosion and deterioration with sea level rise. Essentially, saltmarsh morphodynamics in Tasmania can be said to be governed by the environmental “forcing factors” (after Allen, 2000) which include: the influence of the sea and wave energy; the amount and quality of sediment available; plant productivity; and autocompaction (Figure 1). In addition to these forcing factors, two other agents of change that can considerably affect saltmarsh morphodynamics are subsidence (e.g. tectonic) and direct anthropogenic influence. In some parts of the world, such as in south-east England, saltmarshes are being lost extensively due to the subsidence of the coast caused by tectonic movements (Boorman, 1999). Tasmania however, has been tectonically stable during the Holocene epoch (Murray-Wallace and Goede, 1991) and hence subsidence is not of consequence for shaping saltmarshes in the study area. Humans have been known to be one of the major causes of saltmarsh loss worldwide (Kennish, 2001; Doody, 2008), in Australia (Laegdsgaard et al., 2009) and in Tasmania (Prahalad, 2009). Human influences on saltmarshes are numerous and can be either direct or indirect (Adam, 2002) and can be summarised as follows: development (landfill, tidal restriction/manipulation),

10 | P a g e eutrophication, grazing, trampling, firing, use of off road vehicles, weeds, littering, removal of fringing vegetation, catchment modification, anthropogenic climate change and sea level rise and eliminating the landward buffers that would otherwise accommodate the natural saltmarsh response to sea level rise.

Figure 1. Factors determining the morphology and extent of Tasmanian saltmarshes. Environmental factors (forcing factors) are from Allen (2000), figure from Prahalad (2009).

Saltmarsh life forms and processes together generate a range of ecosystem services that benefit people either directly or indirectly (see Figure 2). These ecosystem services are made available at various spatial and temporal scales depending on the life forms and processes in play. Some of the ecosystem services include (e.g., Boorman, 1999; Deegan et al., 2000; Teal and Howes, 2000; Doody, 2008):

 Supporting elements of biodiversity;

 Increasing coastal food production;

 Improving coastal water quality;

 Acting as buffers against storm surges and sea level rise;

 Attenuate global warming by sequestering carbon;

 Providing recreational, amenity and educational values; and

 Living laboratories for research and development in science and technology.

11 | P a g e

Figure 2. Conceptual diagrams of saltmarsh components and processes typical of northern Tasmanian saltmarshes associated with coastal lagoons.

12 | P a g e

Community-based monitoring

“I love a good , and they certainly need friends!” Alastair Richardson, Tasmanian saltmarsh zoologist

Individuals and community groups engage in a range of activities and have varying interests in relation to biodiversity and natural resource management. Local community groups have interest in taking care of their local natural assets through on- ground works, educational and promotional activities. Naturalist groups (including bird-watchers) have interest in exploring, experiencing and documenting natural flora and fauna. Student groups from Schools and University engage in educational and scientific endeavours. Resource users such as recreational and commercial fisherman engage in fishing activities. Some niche resource users include people who try saltmarsh plants in cooking (e.g., Mure and Bennett, 2013). Individuals in the community can hold interests on particular aspects such as spiders, birds and coastal erosion. Indeed, these varied interests have been channelled through dedicated programmes that engage volunteers from the community for science and management. Such programmes have been on the rise and are termed broadly as Citizen Science or Science 2.0 (Cohn, 2008; Bonney et al., 2009).

It is acknowledged here that it is a fine thing that individuals and community groups have such varied interests and already engage in several Citizen Science activities, here referred to as community-based monitoring. The objective of this review then is to examine the existing scientific knowledge of Tasmanian saltmarsh wetlands and identify where and how the range of interests and activities of individuals and community groups can be channelled through the provision of saltmarsh monitoring resources and guidelines as part of the Saltmarsh Monitoring Toolkit.

This review recognises that Tasmanian saltmarshes are still poorly understood and lack sufficient appreciation of their ecosystem services from the broader community (e.g., Prahalad and Kriwoken, 2010; Mount et al., 2010; Boon, 2012). Future conservation of saltmarshes therefore requires better community-engagement in their scientific exploration, conservation and monitoring. In line with this, the review aims to address the following two key questions: Where: What can be measured (and monitored) to help improve our understanding and management of saltmarshes? (see Figure 3) How: How can individuals and community groups be involved in this process? What resources and guidelines would they require? (see Table 1)

13 | P a g e

Figure 3. A conceptual framework depicting the various aspects of saltmarsh monitoring classified into 6 levels. 14 | P a g e

Table 1. Compilation of various indicators and methods that can be used in saltmarsh monitoring. PPM – photo point monitoring; API – aerial photo interpretation; UAV – unmanned aerial vehicle. Indicators for saltmarsh conservation Potential monitoring methods Notes Level 1: Plants and microorganisms Listed flora species Transect or visual survey, PPM Diversity of flora (no of species) Transect or visual survey, PPM Density of flora cover (% cover) Transect survey, PPM, UAV Maturity of flora cover (mean height) Transect survey, PPM, UAV Introduced species Transect survey, PPM, UAV Bryophytes, pond weeds, seagrasses Visual survey Algae Filamentous algae cover (relative abundance) Visual survey, PPM, UAV Microalgae assemblages Transect or visual survey Level 0: Geomorphology and edaphic factors Shoreline facies Transect survey, PPM, UAV? Shoreline movement TASMARC survey, API, UAV? Sedimentation Surface elevation Surface Elevation Table (SET) Edaphic factors Drainage, texture See Table 2 pH, salinity See Table 2 Level 2: Invertebrates Listed invertebrate species Visual survey, pitfall trapping Diversity of invertebrates (no of species) Pitfall trapping, beat sheets Density of invertebrates (relative abundance) Pitfall trapping, beat sheets Introduced species Visual survey, pitfall trapping Level 3: Vertebrates Marsupials Presence of native marsupials Visual survey, scat counts Presence of rabbits and pigs Visual survey of scats, digging Birds Listed bird species Visual survey Linked to birddata Diversity of birds (no of species) Visual survey Linked to birddata Density of birds (relative abundance) Visual survey Linked to birddata Fish Diversity of fish species (no of species) To be developed Density of fish species (relative abundance) To be developed Level 4: Human interactions Inappropriate development Visual survey, PPM, API Grazing and trampling Visual survey, PPM, UAV Off-road vehicles Visual survey, PPM, UAV Invasive species Visual survey, PPM Dumping rubbish Visual survey, PPM, UAV Removal of fringing vegetation Visual survey, PPM, API Eutrophication (nutrient enrichment) Visual survey, PPM, UAV Catchment modification Visual survey, API Wise-use Sea level rise adaption measures Visual survey, PPM Other conservation activities Visual survey, PPM Research outputs Google search Level 5: Global change factors Flooding extent GIS-based inundation modelling Landward boundary of flooding Witness King Ties Temperature, rainfall, wind conditions Various

15 | P a g e

Bio-physical indicators of saltmarsh health

Level 1: Plants and microbes Vascular plants (‘higher plants’) Tasmanian saltmarshes support several vascular plants (‘higher plants’) which have developed a range of physiological adaptations to waterlogging, salinity and exposure to the elements (sun, waves and wind). These include both species that are largely confined to Tasmanian saltmarshes (obligates) and species that are less confined and occurs in non-saltmarsh habitats. Obligate species are generally used to identify and map saltmarsh habitats (e.g., as under TASVEG: Kitchener and Harris, 2013). Plants play the central role in structuring the saltmarsh ecosystem and their composition and structure strongly reflect environmental variation (Adam, 1990). Hence, plants are well regarded as excellent indicators for saltmarsh management and can also be relatively easy to identify (with the provision of a plant list and identification guide).

Four known published lists are available of Tasmanian saltmarsh plants. The first list was produced by Kirkpatrick and Glasby (1981) who documented the distribution of saltmarsh and saltmarsh plant species across Tasmania, including Flinders Island. This remains to date as the most detailed collection of primary data on the distribution of saltmarsh plants across the State. The second list was generated by Bridgewater et al. (1981) as part of their identification guide for The Saltmarsh Plants of Southern Australia. This publication still remains as the only dedicated guide available that is relevant for Tasmanian saltmarsh plants though currently out-dated and difficult to obtain (Boon, 2012). The third list was produced by Saintilan (2009a) alongside species lists for all other states in Australia in his edited book Australian Saltmarsh Ecology (Saintilan, 2009b). The fourth list is available from TASVEG Version 1.0 Benchmark for Vegetation Condition Assessment and is largely derived from the work of Kirkpatrick and Glasby (1981). Apart from these published lists, several local or regional reports on saltmarshes (‘grey literature studies’) include records of saltmarsh plants. These include a thesis by Prahalad (2009), and reports by Prahalad and Mount (2011), Fazackerley (2002), Prahalad and Pearson (2013), and Prahalad (2012a).

Also of interest are the several generic field guides available for identifying higher plants in Tasmania including both printed books (e.g., Howells, 2012; Wapstra et al., 2013) and online databases (e.g., G. Jordan’s www.utas.edu.au/dicotkey). These resources list plants according to their families and genera rather than their habitat associations, i.e. saltmarsh in the present case. However they do sometimes note the association of certain species with saltmarsh habitats.

To provide as an important baseline and guide in using higher plants for monitoring saltmarshes, an effort was made to integrate all four published lists of Tasmanian saltmarsh plants, and include any additional species recorded in the local or regional reports on saltmarshes. In some cases, the generic plant guides by Howells (2012) and G. Jordan (www.utas.edu.au/dicotkey) were examined for any notes on the association of certain species with saltmarsh habitats. This process has generated the most comprehensive and up-to-date List of Tasmanian Saltmarsh Plants including 132 species (not counting subspecies in some cases) from 34 families (presented in Appendix 1: Vascular plants of Tasmanian saltmarshes). This list also includes 28 introduced (non-native) species. The Guide to the Plants of Tasmanian Saltmarsh

16 | P a g e

Wetlands (to be released October 2014) includes this plant list and provides aids for their identification in the field.

Introduced species The relatively common introduced species included in the list are: Cotula coronopifolia (water buttons), Senecio elegans (purple groundsel), Vellereophyton dealbatum (white cudweed), Spergularia rubra (greater sandspurrey), Atriplex prostrata (creeping oracle), Centaurium tenuiflorum (slender centaury), Plantago coronopus (buckshorn plantain), Rumex crispus (curled dock), Juncus acutus (sharp rush), Festuca arundinacea (tall fescue), Parapholis incurva (coast barbgrass), Poa annua (winter grass), Polypogon monspeliensis (annual beardgrass), Spartina anglica (‘rice grass’ or common cordgrass) and Thinopyrum junceiforme (sea wheatgrass). Of these, rice grass is considered to be the single most important introduced and invasive species in Australian saltmarshes and the adjacent intertidal areas (Adam 2009), and is of very high priority for monitoring (Figure 4). Not included in the list, though encountered in saltmarshes less commonly are other introduced species such as: Lycium ferocissimum (african boxthorn), Ulex europaeus (gorse), Onopordum acanthium (scotch thistle), and Juncus acutiflorus (sharpflower rush). Some of these introduced species closely resemble native saltmarsh species of the same genera and require closer examination for species level identification (e.g., common native J. kraussii and uncommon weed J. acutus, see Figure 5).

The abundance of the introduced species in saltmarshes varies greatly and depends on a range of factors including seed availability and level of human disturbance. Weeds can therefore be good indicators for saltmarsh management, particularly in relation to human disturbance.

Figure 4. Spartina anglica (rice grass) infestation in Georges Bay.

17 | P a g e

Figure 5. Common native saltmarsh plant Juncus kraussii (left) and the uncommon weed J. acutus (right).

Listed species The list includes several species that have been formally recognised as ‘rare’ and at risk under the Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 (Figure 6). These are: australe (yellow sea-lavender), Limonium baudinii (tasmanian sea- lavender), humilis (silky wilsonia), Wilsonia rotundifolia (roundleaf wilsonia), Sporobolus virginicus (salt couch), minutissimum (tiny arrowgrass), Triglochin mucronata (prickly arrowgrass), Frankenia pauciflora var. gunnii (southern seaheath), Cuscuta tasmanica (golden dodder) and Cotula vulgaris var. australasica (slender buttons). In addition to these, other listed flora can occur on the margins of saltmarshes, such as Calocephalus citreus (lemon beautyheads) or Vittadinia muelleri (narrowleaf new-holland-daisy).

Recording and ongoing monitoring of these species can assist in determining the relative biodiversity conservation significance of the saltmarsh and to inform the management of these listed species both in and immediately around the saltmarsh.

Generic site-specific species lists The list can be used as a starting point for monitoring the plants of particular saltmarsh sites by recording the presence and absence of species. This could be done through a ‘bio-blitz’ conducted during the warmer months (when most species are in flower and are easier to identify) once in a few years. These data will help improve our understanding of the State-wide distribution of saltmarsh plants, their ecology and biogeography (relating distribution data to local and regional environmental factors). When these data is collected over a long term (over decades), it can also indicate any species-range shifts that occur as a consequence of climate change.

18 | P a g e

Figure 6. Rare saltmarsh plants from clockwise: Limonium australe, Limonium baudinii, Wilsonia rotundifolia, and Wilsonia humilis.

Vegetation structure and extent Species lists do not indicate the relative abundance of species, which may respond to changes before any species becomes locally extinct or invade. Photo-point monitoring can give a strong indication of such change from a small investment in effort (Michel et al., 2010; NRM South Photopoint Monitoring Factsheet). This technique involves taking photographs of a fixed saltmarsh area and observing temporal changes to vegetation structure and composition from the photo series. Photo-point monitoring can be easy to use (with smartphone cameras and online GIS-based databases) and involves limited set up time and cost (e.g., though www.projectrephoto.com currently trialled by NRM South, L. Wilson, pers. comm.). Specific user guidelines in the form of a Photopoint Monitoring of Saltmarsh Wetlands - Guide Sheet would be required to facilitate this process and control data variability (camera settings, tilt, sun angle etc.).

The advances in internet technologies (e.g., Instagram, photo sphere) along with smart phones and ipads/tablets allows for a range of new interactive techniques to be developed in engaging community groups with saltmarshes and saltmarsh plants via photography (e.g., www.planthunter.com.au). There is considerable scope for integration of photo-point monitoring with internet-based technologies to allow for community-based Citizen Science monitoring of saltmarsh ecosystem health and function (Y. Bar-Ness, pers. comm.).

19 | P a g e

Photo-point monitoring can also be applied sometimes with transect and quadrat- based vegetation surveys (e.g., Prahalad, 2012a). Permanent vegetation monitoring transects can be set up in saltmarshes (Figure 7) and can be monitored once every 3-4 years (reducing trampling impacts on fragile saltmarsh vegetation while also having reasonably frequent data collection). This technique can be used to monitor relative abundance of plant species, their structural change (by measuring height), and positional change along the saltmarsh platform (low marsh to high marsh). Transect and quadrat survey data can be useful to understand the impacts of local (e.g., grazing, nutrient addition) and global (e.g., temperature, rainfall) change factors on saltmarsh vegetation. This is also a useful technique to accompany saltmarsh restoration activities, e.g., by doing a baseline survey before management intervention (such as fencing or removal of tidal restriction) and follow-up surveys paired with a control site to account for natural variations not linked to the management intervention (e.g., Prahalad, 2012a; Prahalad, 2012b). However, the saltmarsh platform can be difficult to navigate to undertake the survey with dense T. arbuscula shrubs and muddy sections (Figure 7). Further, the accuracy of data measurements in this method will depend on how closely the survey followed the initial transect line and the observer bias in approximating measurements. Hence this method is best employed for targeted needs and with the same person involved in doing the repeat measurements (to control for observer bias).

Figure 7. Left: Use of permanent transects (marked by permanent stakes planted securely on the marsh) and 1x1 m quadrant to undertake vegetation survey. Right: The marsh platform can be difficult to navigate to undertake the survey and can lead to observer errors if the method is not standardised and strictly followed.

Remote sensing of saltmarsh vegetation is another technique that can be used to monitor changes. A study by Prahalad et al. (2011) used GIS-based remote sensing techniques coupled with extensive on-ground surveys to examine changes in saltmarsh vegetation communities from 1975 to 2009. Rich historic data from 1975 formed the baseline against which changes from 2009 were measured. The study highlights the value of high resolution vegetation community mapping data for future change analysis. Other remote sensing techniques are being developed by A. Lucieer and others at the University of Tasmania (www.terraluma.net). These include analysis of spectral signatures obtained from satellite imagery to very high resolution imagery obtained from unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Precise changes in saltmarsh vegetation community extent and structure can be studied using these methods (Kelcey and Lucieer, 2012, 2013); including rapid assessments of carbon and biomass storage in saltmarsh plants (J. Kelcey, in preparation).

20 | P a g e

Microorganisms and nuisance algae Apart from the structurally dominant vascular plants (higher plants), saltmarshes also support an extensive non- (lower plants) community. This includes the edaphic algae living in the saltmarsh soil profile, epilithic algae concentrated on the saltmarsh substrate and epiphytic algae living on the higher plants. These microscopic algae are an important component of the saltmarsh ecosystem and can equal or exceed the higher plants in terms of primary productivity (Sullivan and Currin, 2000). Few studies exist however that document these algae in the context Australian saltmarshes (with the subject mostly ignored in the book Australian Saltmarsh Ecology by Saintilan, 2009b). As such in Tasmania, the general knowledge of State’s lower plants is much lesser compared to the higher plants (Dunn, 2005). However in a more recent study from New South Wales, Green et al. (2010) have documented the use of monitoring soil microalgal community in saltmarsh management. They demonstrate the use of Chlorophyll a to analyse these soil algae and compare their abundances between a restored saltmarsh site and a control (reference) site. Saltmarshes can also support filamentous algae which can become a nuisance. Nutrient enrichment is a process through which higher saltmarsh plants can be replaced by fast growing blue-green or filamentous algae (Schramm and Nienhuis, 1996). Such areas in the saltmarsh with excessive growth of nuisance algae are termed as ‘rotten spots’ and can be a useful indicator of nutrient enrichment (Figure 8, Prahalad et al., 2011). Rotten spots are a particular concern for saltmarsh management as they significantly reduce the habitat quality for both flora and fauna (Figure 8). Filamentous algae can be monitored in the same way as higher plants.

Figure 8. Top: Two instances of excessive filamentous algae on succulent saltmarsh (creating ‘rotten spots’) indicating high nutrient inputs from surrounding land uses (Left: semi-urban land use; Right: irrigated ). Bottom: Photos of different locations within the same saltmarsh (Left: with excessive growth of algae; Right: with lesser algae and numerous snails).

21 | P a g e

Level 0: Geomorphology and edaphic (soil) factors Geomorphic indicators of saltmarsh stability Allen (2000) describes four main ‘forcing factors’ that shape the geomorphology (i.e., physical expression) of saltmarshes: 1. Environmental Change – including changes to sea levels, tidal range and storminess (this is captured under Level 5: Global change factors). 2. Sediment Supply – mineral sediment supply available to the marsh (allochthonous sediment supply from terrestrial and marine sources). 3. Plant Productivity – both above and belowground plant primary productivity (autochthonous organic sediment generation and supplemented by external sources such as seagrass wrack). 4. Autocompaction – the lowering of the marsh surface due to autogenic compaction of the sediment.

These four factors together determine the physical expression of the marsh in terms of the marsh vertical and lateral extent. The vertical extent is the height of the marsh surface relative to the sea level (marsh elevation). Any increase in the sea level therefore results in an increase in vertical accretion rates, with generally higher rates of accretion in the low marsh compared to the high marsh (Cahoon et al., 1996). Vertical accretion in this context can be defined as the net increase in the surface elevation of the saltmarsh as a product of both sediment supply and plant productivity (FitzGerald et al., 2008). In the case of an accelerated rise in the relative sea level, if the sediment supply and plant productivity are not able to maintain sufficient rates of vertical accretion, marsh lateral extent experiences retreat on the seaward side. Where low lying upland areas exist, saltmarshes may be able to migrate inland (following the rising tidal flooding regimes) and compensate for loss of seaward lateral retreat.

The relative ability of saltmarshes to respond to accelerated sea level rise depends however on a range of anthropogenic factors. For example, above ground plant productivity can be affected by human disturbance such as livestock grazing, direct removal of vegetation (land clearing), or excessive nutrient addition (Kirwan et al., 2008; Deegan et al., 2012). This interplays with below ground processes including subsidence, soil compaction, plant productivity (as root growth), groundwater and tidal flows (Saintilan et al., 2009). In the case of Tasmania, there is no evidence for present-day vertical tectonic subsidence on a scale sufficient to noticeably influence coastal processes (Mount et al., 2010). However local subsidence may still occur due to organic factors involving plant and animal activity. Surface Elevation Tables (SET) have been developed as a relatively accurate method of measuring surface elevation and the influence of below ground processes (outlined in Saintilan et al., 2009, and detailed in http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/set). A few studies exist now in Australia that document the use of SET to measure saltmarsh vertical accretion and elevation change (Rogers et al., 2006; Oliver et al., 2012; Rogers et al., 2012). There is potential to use these studies as a guide and employ SETs in Tasmania, especially in coastal environments where there is active evidence of sediment inputs from terrestrial sources (e.g., through presence of indicative features such as sandy point bars and recent deltaic deposits; the ebb delta of Georges River in St Helens being an example of the latter, Figure 9).

22 | P a g e

Figure 9. Sandy ebb delta associated with Colchis Creek in Georges Bay, indicative of high terrestrial sediment inputs available for saltmarsh vertical growth.

However, many of Tasmanian coastal environments have a negative sand budget with little capacity for sandy sediment accumulation (Mount et al., 2010). Where saltmarshes occur in areas subject to low terrestrial sediment inputs, the factor that determines the saltmarsh geomorphology is the relative exposure to wind generated waves (Prahalad et al., in prep). In such cases, an easier and more direct may to monitor the effects of wind-wave exposure on saltmarshes can be developed by identifying typical ‘geomorphic facies’ that can be encountered in Tasmanian saltmarshes (discussed in Appendix 2: Shoreline Geomorphology – Identifying and Mapping of Geomorphic Facies for Saltmarsh Monitoring, authored by C. Sharples).

Shoreline movement – positional change due to erosion or accretion The Tasmanian Shoreline Monitoring and Archiving Project (TASMARC) measures beach profiles to generate historical information about the way in which Tasmanian shoreline is responding to storm events and sea level rise (www.tasmarc.info). The project began with 16 beaches across Tasmania in 2005 and now includes 42 monitoring sites (Figure 10); with a few more newly established (N. Bowden, pers. comm.). The project branched out from beaches to saltmarshes in 2010, setting up monitoring sites at the eastern, middle and western sections of Pipe Clay Lagoon in south-east Tasmania. These sites have been monitored only once recently in 2014 after the initial measurement in 2010. Engagement of local community groups is necessary to increase the frequency of these measurements to up to once every 2-3 months, the recommended monitoring frequency. Another saltmarsh site in Boullanger Bay was surveyed in 2010 (for Mount et al., 2010) and has the potential to be integrated into a TASMARC site.

23 | P a g e

Figure 10. Forty two TASMARC monitoring sites across Tasmania. Source: Antarctic Climate & Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre, Australia; version 09:15 13/03/2012.

TASMARC offers considerable potential to generate intra-annual data (up to 4 measurements an year) on saltmarsh shoreline change through community engagement. The scientific rationale and methodology for TASMARC are well established, and the ongoing engagement of several community groups in monitoring is proof of both community interest and usability. TASMARC data from saltmarsh shores can be useful to compare with similar data for shoreline changes in beach environments to better understand what coastal change processes are involved and how they are spatially distributed across Tasmania. High resolution data obtained through TASMARC can also be useful in comparison with longer term (inter-annual) trends in shoreline change observable from aerial photo interpretation (API) for better understanding the relationship between short-term and longer-term average erosion rates for coastal management (Schwimmer, 2001). The use of historic aerial photography, or aerial photography ‘time series’, to analyse shoreline changes through API involving geographical information systems (GIS) has been in practise for more than three decades now (e.g. Dolan et al., 1978; Phillips, 1986). Only three studies are known of in Tasmania to use API in measuring and reporting long term changes in saltmarsh shorelines, via accretion and erosion (Morrison, 2006; Prahalad, 2009; Mount et al., 2010). Morrison (2006) studied two highly enclosed saltmarshes on the east coast reporting relatively stable shorelines with a cyclical process of erosion and accretion. Prahalad (2009) examined several sites in the south-east reporting rates of erosion ranging from 6-20 cm a year, with greater rates in more exposed shorelines (subject to wind-waves of higher erosive power) than the fetch-limited inner estuarine shores. Overall, this accounts for a 5% net loss between 1966 and 2006. Mount et al. (2010) studied several sites in the north- east reporting about 75% of the saltmarshes to be eroding at an average rate of 22.7 cm a year. Again, higher rates of erosion were linked to the more exposed shorelines.

24 | P a g e

In the case of northern Tasmania, there is a good case to undertake long term API studies in examining shoreline change, especially in Georges Bay given the extensive saltmarshes (with the largest extent of T. arbuscula shrubs in the northern Tasmanian mainland catchments of NRM North, see Figure 9) and the relative size of the Bay (meaning it is likely to be more exposed to wind-wave driven erosion). Georges Bay may therefore also offer a suitable location for a TASMARC monitoring site.

Edaphic factors Edaphic (soil) factors involved in saltmarsh development and function include physical, chemical and biological aspects such as in Table 2 (also see Aalders, 2014). Almost all of these measurements (except micro-topography which can be obtained through a differential GPS) require soil samples collected using different techniques, from coring to surface scraping. These soil samples in most cases would involve laboratory techniques that are either inaccessible or too complicated for the purposes of community-based monitoring. On the other hand, these soil factors are reasonably well reflected in plant composition (Aalders, 2014) and hence plants can be used as more easily recorded proxies for these underlying environmental drivers. In some cases however, edaphic factors can be particularly useful to measure and monitor as with the case of saltmarsh restoration (e.g., Portnoy, 1999). Table 2. Edaphic factors relevant to Tasmanian saltmarshes (written by John Aalders) Factor Methodology Pros and cons

Micro-topography: Real time GPS as accuracy Specialised equipment, elevation plays an important is an important aspect experienced operator, role in saltmarshes, it is the software ArcGIS. Should key factor that controls what form part of the initial survey is inundated by tides which in to provide a baseline, future turn impacts soil moisture, requirements ~ 10-15 years salinity and pH.

Drainage: Field samples weighed, air Easy to do, can be done at soil moisture, an important and oven dried in laboratory “home” with accurate scales aspect as this determines and fan forced oven and be vegetation community make prepared to have a dirty up, high levels of moisture kitchen to clean up can make soil anaerobic, slows decomposition of plant matter; saltmarsh soils can range from less than 10% to over 80% moisture.

Soil composition: Only needs to be done once determines paleo origins of the saltmarsh, useful if a number of saltmarshes were being investigated so as to compare origins and ages.

25 | P a g e

Factor Methodology Pros and cons

Soil texture: Bouyoucous Hydrometer Only needs to be done once determines the make-up of the Method (Particle Size soil – sand, slit and clay; Analysis) in laboratory, generally, shoreline will be readings taken at 40 sec, 5 high in sand, low in clay, minutes and 2 hours however can be reversed in (minimum requirements) very quiet environments.

Organic content: Loss on Ignition (LOI) in Requires laboratory a measure of the soil organic laboratory in high equipment, highly accurate matter (SOM) of the soils, an temperature furnace (550C) scales, non-combustible indication plant matter in crucibles. Should form part soils, very worthwhile to do. of the initial survey to provide a baseline, future requirements ~ 10-15 years

Carbon content: Following preparation of Cost, generally $10 to $12 a measure of total carbon (TC) material to <63um, dry per sample just for C; component of soil; inorganic combustion in laboratory, specialised equipment and organic carbon. highly specialised equipment; consideration should be made on use of a multi analysis determinator; e.g., carbon, sulphur, nitrogen

Salinity: Dried soil (<2mm fraction) Simple laboratory technique an important component as it mixed with DI water (1:5), completed in combination determines vegetation shaken for one hour, then with pH measurements; can community composition measured using an electrical be done with relatively cheap (along with other variables conductivity (EC) probe; EC instruments eg combined e.g., pH, moisture); this is a proxy for salinity (see handheld pH/EC meter variable can be a “moving Rayment and Lyons, 2011) feast” as it is dependent on periods and frequency of inundation, evapotranspiration, and precipitation. pH (acidity or basicity): See above See above similar to salinity (above)

Nutrient levels: X-ray fluorescence – see Requires well equipped Rayment and Lyons (2011) laboratory

26 | P a g e

Level 2: Invertebrates Crustaceans and molluscs Crustaceans and molluscs are an abundant and relatively inconspicuous invertebrate component of saltmarshes. They have been studied and documented much better than other dominant invertebrate groups such as insects and spiders. A detailed study by Richardson et al. (1997, based on Wong et al., 1993) documented the crustaceans and molluscs of 65 saltmarshes across Tasmania. The study collected over 50 species including: twenty species of amphipods (including marsh-hoppers, beachfleas and landhoppers, three of these entirely restricted to saltmarsh); eight species of isopods (all of which occur in other habitat types as well as saltmarsh); nine species of crabs (one crab species, Helograpsus haswellianus, entirely restricted to saltmarsh, Figure 11); and twenty one species of snails and slugs, one species of bivalve (four of these gastropod molluscs entirely restricted to saltmarsh).

The most common crustaceans and molluscs were noted to be: the marsh-hopper Eorchestia palustris and the beachflea Orchestia australis; the snails Salinator solida (Figure 11), Ophicardelus ornata, Hydrococcus brazieri and Tatea rufilabris; the isopods Ligia australiensis, Deto marina and Porcellio scaber; and the crabs Helograpsus haswellianus and Paragrapsus gaimardii.

Figure 11. Left: Helograpsus haswellianus, most common Tasmanian saltmarsh crab; Right: Salinator solida, one of the most common saltmarsh snails.

In another related study, Richardson et al. (1998) compared the composition of 55 species of crustaceans and molluscs to saltmarsh vegetation community types across the three basic tidal zones: the low marsh, inundated by every tide; the mid marsh, inundated by most tides; and the high marsh, very rarely inundated (as defined by Adam, 1990). They found that faunal composition could not be predicted by vegetation and instead was more strongly related to tidal inundation or the flooding regime (i.e., the degree of emergence or submergence). The study was further able to relate selected saltmarsh invertebrates to a range of soil conditions including water content, organic content and salinity. The gastropods for example were either infrequent or absent in areas which were not regularly inundated. Other studies that pertain to crustaceans and molluscs in Tasmania include Richardson and Mulcahy (1996) and Richardson et al. (1997). Both focus on amphipods in Lutregala Marsh, Bruny Island, and particularly outline the need for preserving a native vegetation buffer of up to 100 m to promote amphipod diversity (also highlighted by Wong et al., 1993). These studies provide a rich background to understand the nature, distribution and conservation needs of these invertebrates.

27 | P a g e

Sampling of these invertebrates by the public requires the development of appropriate sampling methods and protocols, they are yet to be developed (Ross et al., 2009). Simple presence-absence surveys can still be undertaken in saltmarsh habitats. This effort can be supported by the development of A Guide to the Crustaceans and Molluscs of Tasmanian Saltmarsh Wetlands (with a species list, identification keys, distribution data, and known environmental affinities). The guide can focus on the decapods and molluscs. The smaller crustaceans can be difficult to identify without a microscope and better taxonomic descriptions (A. Richardson, pers. comm.). In the case of freshwater macro-invertebrates The Waterbug Book (Gooderham and Tsyrlin, 2002) provides an authoritative and popular guide used in community-based monitoring of freshwater systems including rivers, streams, ponds and wetlands.

Insects and spiders (written by P. McQuillan) Compared to coastal heathlands, Tasmanian coastal saltmarshes support a relatively modest variety of insects and spiders. However the invertebrate community is distinctive for some unusual species which occur nowhere else. In addition, some cosmopolitan groups are represented in the local fauna and are related to species found in similar saline habitats on other continents. The dominant arachnid group in the warmer months is the wolf spiders (family Lycosidae) and at least 6 species representing the genera Lycosa, Venatrix and Artoria are known so far. Jumping spiders (Salticidae) are common on the more erect vegetation such as Tecticornia and Gahnia while cigar-shaped ground dwelling gnaphosid spiders are active at night. At least one species of conspicuous red and black spider (family Nicodamidae) is active on sunny days, along with several species of colourful zodariid spiders which hunt ants. Large silken retreats constructed at the base of tussocks harbour the impressive night prowling spider Miturga agelenina. The larger wolf spiders are suspected to be predators of amphipods and lycosids in turn are hunted by black and orange pompilid wasps which drag the paralysed spiders into holes excavated into the clay-rich soil which they provision for their larvae. On warm evenings, various orb-weaving spiders (family Araneidae and Tetragnathidae) can be seen constructing their webs in the evening, anchoring them to erect shrubs and sedges. Activity in winter is dominated by small money spiders of the family Linyphiidae, some of which appear to be introduced species.

The poorly drained saltmarsh soils harbour few species of ants but two common species are a Nylanderia and a species of Pheidole. On the drier saltmarsh margins Rhytidoponera and seed harvesting Monomorium ants also occur.

Herbivous insects on the foliage include sap suckers such as pentatomid bugs (Figure 12) and various leafhoppers. Chewers include larvae (caterpillars) of a variety of moths and a handful of butterflies. The autumn flying Saltbush Blue butterfly, Theclinesthes serpentata (Figure 12) feeds externally on Rhagodia as a larva, while the larva of the Chrysotricha Skipper butterfly, Hesperilla chrysotricha, constructs a tubular shelter by webbing together several adjacent of Gahnia filum on which it feeds. Among the saltmarsh moths, the Chevron Looper Amelora acontistica flies just after dusk whereas the Saltmarsh Looper Moth Scopula achroa flies in sunshine. The Heliotrope moth, Utethesia pulchelloides (Figure 12), is sometimes seen along the coast but may be a vagrant from mainland Australia, carried on northerly winds across Bass Strait. Although various grasshoppers and crickets inhabit the grassy and

28 | P a g e herb-rich fringes of saltmarshes, only small black flightless crickets of the genus Bobilla are common among the Sarcocornia sward.

Clusters of small holes surrounded by scattered soil in bare patches near the upper reach of the tide betray the presence of small rove beetles of the cosmopolitan genus Bledius. These small cylindrical beetles are somewhat gregarious and are thought to feed on diatoms. Larger beetles in the ecosystem include various predatory ground beetles (family Carabidae) such as Rhytisternus. At least two small species of burrowing Clivina are also present. Saltmarsh weevils include Steriphus whose legless larva feeds on roots in the soil.

A variety of small flies are common in saltmarshes, but little is known of their biology. Among the most conspicuous are march flies (family Tabanidae) whose larvae feed in damp soil on organic matter. A few midges (family Chironomidae) are documented and several mosquitoes including the saltmarsh mosquito Aedes camptorhynchus which breed in temporary pools of water stranded by the tide or created by rainfall. Saltmarsh mosquitoes can transmit the fatigue-inducing Ross River virus to humans (Lyth et al., 2013).

Renewed interest in the invertebrates of coastal habitats should see a welcome increase in our knowledge of this important part of the saltmarsh fauna. Specific user guidelines can be developed through a Saltmarsh Spiders and Beetles Monitoring - Guide Sheet to outline monitoring techniques such as pit-fall trapping and direct observation to record invertebrate species (an example is provided in Appendix 3: Spiders and beetles of a Tasmanian saltmarsh).

Figure 12. Clockwise from top: Orb web spider (family Araneidae); Native pentatomid bug, Anaxilaus vesiculosus; Saltbush Blue butterfly, Theclinesthes serpentata subsp. lavara (listed as rare under State legislation); Heliotrope moth, Utethesia pulchelloides.

29 | P a g e

Level 3: Vertebrates (ex: humans) Native mammals and introduced rabbits Several native mammal species use saltmarshes. Larger marsupials include macropods such as Bennetts wallaby (Macropus rufogriseus subsp. rufogriseus), which use saltmarshes occasionally in areas with a contiguous landward native vegetation cover (Figure 13). Smaller macropods can be found within saltmarshes taking advantage of the structural cover provided by the large T. arbuscula shrubs and forming a network of animal tracks within the saltmarsh. These smaller animals can be elusive to spot and their presence can be observed through animal tracks and scats (Figure 13). Wombats (Vombatus ursinus) also use saltmarshes. Wombats and other marsupials (sometimes including the introduced rabbits), can graze heavily on saltmarshes, especially areas dominated by plants subject to (and indicative of) less saline conditions. Such areas have been termed to be ‘marsupial lawns’ where continuous grazing maintains the grasses, herbs and soft sedges short, less than 4 cm, and excludes woody plants (Roberts et al., 2011).

Figure 13. Left: Bennetts wallaby (Macropus rufogriseus rufogriseus) using saltmarsh adjacent to native bushland area; Right: Animal scats found under Tecticornia arbuscula shrubs.

Of the smaller native mammals, the native water rat (Hydromys chrysogaster) and swamp rats (Rattus lutreolus) are likely to use saltmarshes (Parks and Wildlife Service, 2009). However, the use of saltmarshes by rodents is not well documented in Tasmania and their cryptic and nocturnal nature does not make them easy candidates for community-based monitoring.

Bats are the other type of mammals that have been documented to use saltmarsh habitats in mainland Australia (Spencer et al., 2009). There are no known studies of the use of Tasmanian saltmarshes by the eight native species of bats found in the State. Bats may use saltmarsh habitat as part of their feeding range and can be monitored through bat detectors. Monitoring the relative distribution and abundance of bats in saltmarsh habitats can guide management of adjacent habitats and human impacts (e.g., Gonsalves et al., 2012).

Of the introduced animals, feral pigs and rabbits are of particular importance due to their effect on saltmarsh ecology by digging, grazing and burrowing. Feral pigs are currently only known from Flinders Island and their impacts due to digging and considerable soil disturbance requires further investigation and management intervention (Figure 14). Rabbits are more widespread and have been recognised as an

30 | P a g e impediment to saltmarsh regeneration after human disturbance through their grazing, especially of the structurally important T. arbuscula shrubs (Parks and Wildlife Service, 2013). Feral pigs can be monitored by the presence of digging (as in Figure 14), while rabbits can be monitored though presence of scats and burrows.

Figure 14. Digging and soil disturbance by feral pigs in Flinders Island saltmarshes.

Birds Birds are generally recognised as excellent indicators of the state of health of ecosystems (e.g., ‘canary in a coalmine’). Birds also command a high degree of interest among conservation groups and sections of the general public. The oldest conservation organisation in Australasia, Birds Tasmania (now BirdLife Tasmania, regional body of BirdLife Australia), began with a focus on Tasmanian birdlife. The organisation continues to be active with an ongoing focus towards conservation of native birds and their habitat through data collection and dissemination of information (Prahalad and Kriwoken, 2010). BirdLife Tasmania has been recording observational data on birds for over 40 years now and their data are available as the Atlas of Australian Birds. Public participation in building and refining this Atlas has been encouraged and facilitated through an online interface called Birddata (www.birddata.com.au). This interface provides a platform for entering new data and seeking feedback on the surveys and data (BirdLife Australia, n.d.). Birddata thus has high potential to be used by community groups to monitor and record the use of saltmarsh habitats by birds. This process can be facilitated further through specific user guidelines provided through a Monitoring Bird Use of Saltmarsh Wetlands - Guide Sheet.

Apart from Birddata, there are other online repositories of observational data on birds: Eremaea (www.eremaea.com, Birdline Tasmania); a bird blog by Alan Fletcher (www.tassiebirds.blogspot.com.au); and a bird blog by Donald Knowler (www.donaldknowler.com/blog). There are also the government managed databases that record bird observations, including Natural Values Atlas of Tasmania and the Atlas of Living Australia – an Australian government initiative. The level of congruence between records stored in these databases is not well known, while there is also the issue of the different data quality management protocols. These databases are likely to continue to grow in their own niches driven by the interests and agenda of the organisations and people who manage them. Further direction is necessary to develop guidelines for using these databases to better understand and monitor birds in relation to saltmarsh habitats.

31 | P a g e

The general state of understanding of use of saltmarshes by birds in Australia is poor. In the only available recent summary of the use of Australian saltmarshes by birds, Spencer et al. (2009) listed and grouped the following birds to be of direct importance with respect to saltmarsh habitats (excludes non-native birds):  Waterfowl: Black Swans (Cygnus atratus), Chestnut Teal (Anas castanea), Australian Shelduck (Tadorna tadornoides), Cattle Egret (Ardea ibis).

 Shorebirds: Black-fronted Dotterel (Elseyornis melanops), Black-winged Stilt (Himantopus himantopus), Masked Lapwing (Vanellus miles), Red-capped Plover (Charadrius ruficapillus).

 Migratory shorebirds: Pacific Golden Plover (Pluvialis fulva), Sharp-tailed Sandpiper (Calidris acuminata), Curlew Sandpiper (Calidris ferruginea), Red- necked Stint (Calidris ruficollis), Latham’s Snipe (Gallinago hardwickii), Bar- tailed Godwit (Limosa lapponica), Black-tailed Godwit (Limosa limosa), Eastern Curlew (Numenius madagascariensis), Common Greenshank (Tringa nebularia), Marsh Sandpiper (Tringa stagnatilis).

 Birds of prey: Whistling Kite (Haliastur sphenurus), Swamp Harrier (Haliastur sphenurus).

 Small passerines: Golden-headed Cisticola (Cisticola exilis), Little Grassbird (Megalurus gramineus), Richard’s Pipit (Anthus novaeseelandiae), White- fronted Chat (Epthianura albifrons).

 Other threatened species: Orange-bellied Parrot (Neophema chrysogaster).

This summary is based on limited number of studies from mainland Australia and none from Tasmania. Hence the understanding of bird use of Tasmanian saltmarsh habitat is rudimentary and largely anecdotal with implications on how saltmarshes are related to and hence managed for birds. An instance of this can be observed in a popular field guide to Tasmanian birds by Dave Watts (2002), which mentions saltmarsh only twice as a bird habitat (for Black-fronted Dotterel and Orange-bellied Parrot) and often confuses ‘swamps’ with ‘marshes’, the former being vegetated by trees and woody shrubs (and hence unsuitable for many species listed in the guide to be using swamps) and the later marked by the lack of trees and vegetated by herbs, succulent shrubs and graminoids.

Hence, a necessary initial step for better understanding the relevance of bird records to saltmarsh management would be to conduct a review of both the habitat requirements and usage of Tasmanian birds and document the known links between the life cycle of birds and saltmarsh habitat and ecosystem services. To initiate this process, all Tasmanian birds that are likely to use saltmarshes have been listed under their respective orders and classified as either waterbirds, shorebirds, seabirds, birds of prey, and landbirds (Appendix 4: Birds of Tasmanian saltmarshes). Seabirds have been considered not to be relevant to saltmarshes and excluded for further analysis. Habitat requirements of birds can be traced from published accounts including bird guides. Three well known bird guides (Watts, 2011; Thomas et al., 2011; Simpson and Day, 2010) were therefore used to extract records of habitat usage of these birds.

32 | P a g e

Following this, a rating of 1-3 has been assigned to all birds on the principle that, 1 = habitat that involves saltmarsh, swamps, intertidal, mudflats; 2 = habitat that involves coastal, waterways, beaches, less saline; 3 = least associated with saltmarsh-like habitats, e.g., closed forests, gardens, ponds, rocky islands etc. The preliminary results from this work would have to be adapted to suit Tasmanian birds more closely based on relevant statistical data. Such data on usage of saltmarsh habitats by Tasmanian birds can be derived from Birddata and augmented with expert feedback (cf. Koch and Woehler, 2007). This process can assist in more fully understanding the linkages between conservation management of saltmarshes and dependant birdlife, and therefore provide necessary authority and direction for community-based monitoring of birds in saltmarshes.

Fish In Tasmania the use of saltmarshes by fish species is not well documented with no published account known of expect for a few surveys targeting particular species (P. Davies, pers. comm.). Although anecdotal evidence from observing low marshes (inundated by the high tide on a daily basis) and tidal creeks (during high tides and also at low tides in water filled depressions) suggests extensive use by smaller fish (Prahalad, pers. obs., Figure 15). In comparison, evidence from mainland studies reporting on the use of temperate saltmarshes by Australian fish species suggest that up to 35 species have been recorded with densities of up to 56 fish found within an area of 100 m2 (reviewed by Connolly, 2009). This confirms with the general expectation that saltmarshes and the associated tidal creeks and pools provide secure habitat for smaller fish to evade predation risk in the open sea (Deegan et al., 2000, though this has been highlighted as a future research need for Australian saltmarshes by Connolly, 2009). Saltmarshes are also known to produce organic materials (plant and animal matter) that are exported to coastal waters through tides, thus improving coastal productivity (Merrill and Cornwell, 2000; Valiela et al., 2000). There is evidence for this from mainland studies indicating that saltmarshes drive fish productivity through exporting high concentrations of crab and gastropod larvae from the saltmarsh providing food for fish species (Mazumder et al., 2009). Gut content analysis of the extremely abundant Port Jackson glassfish (Ambassis jacksoniensis) indicated that crab larvae in the saltmarsh provided a predominant food source (Mazumder et al., 2006). When the glassfish retreat back to the deeper waters at low tide they in turn form an important food source of larger fish, thereby driving coastal fish productivity. Another study by Crinal and Hindell (2004) documented 10 species of juvenile and sub-adult fish in temperate Australian saltmarshes feeding primarily on amphipods and hemipteran insects. These studies suggest that temperate Australian saltmarshes as a general principle can support a considerable diversity and abundance of fish species supporting coastal food webs.

There is an important need for generating baseline data on fish use of Tasmanian saltmarshes and alongside trialling fish sampling techniques that are suitable for specific local conditions (e.g., flooding regime, landscape structure, fish size; Connolly, 1999; Mazumder et al., 2005; Connolly, 2009). This would be necessary to guide any development of appropriate monitoring techniques and guidelines for community groups willing to engage in surveying fish in saltmarshes and associated tidal creeks and pools.

33 | P a g e

Figure 15. Left: Typical fish habitat in a saltmarsh submerged during high tide. Right: School of glassfish found in a saltmarsh during high tide.

Level 4: Human interactions Detrimental human impacts Human interactions with saltmarshes have had significant detrimental impacts through a range of direct and indirect threats (summarised by Bromberg Gedan et al., 2009 in the global context; and Laegdsgaard et al., 2009 in the Australian context). The types of direct human impacts and their contribution to saltmarsh loss and degradation vary widely and can be more significant than those associated with global change involving climate and sea level (e.g., Chust et al., 2009). In the case of Tasmania, land-based human impacts on the saltmarshes have had a significant impact on both their extent and quality (Prahalad, 2009; Mount et al., 2010; Prahalad, in press). These impacts are (Figure 16):  Inappropriate development: through landfill, tidal restriction (building levees and other tidal barriers), and any form of tidal manipulation that significantly affects the natural flows of tide on to the saltmarsh (excluding non-detrimental structures such as an assigned walking track, bird hide or boat access area);

 Grazing and trampling: livestock (including cattle, sheep and horses) grazing and trampling on the saltmarsh removing plant biomass, disturbing the soil and clogging up the tidal channels;

 Off-road vehicles: use of off-road vehicles that cause plant die-back and soil compression (which also affects the local hydrology);

 Invasive species: introduction and spread of invasive species such as rabbits and a suite of weeds that displace native species;

 Dumping rubbish: any dumping of rubbish (other than as landfill), both in-situ and ex-situ, including unmanaged waste drift from oyster farms;

 Removal of fringing vegetation: any land clearing of upland fringing vegetation along the saltmarsh boundary up to a buffer distance of about 100 m (buffer distance can range from 50 – 200 m depending on the size of the saltmarsh and the upland land use activities);

34 | P a g e

 Eutrophication: through nutrient additions from human activities such as farming or industrial effluents causing nuisance algal blooms and ‘rotten spots’ (also see Figure 8);

 Catchment modification: though damming and land clearing activities that affect the hydrology and sedimentology of the saltmarsh;

 Provision of sea level rise adaptation measures: allocation of landward areas (and facilitating natural tidal flooding regimes) to accommodate saltmarsh response to sea level rise as they move upland and inland where suitable sheltered (from wind-waves) low lying areas exist;

 Land management provisions and adequate monitoring: securing the tenure of the land containing saltmarsh through voluntary engagements or legislative listing, attendant land management provisions (e.g., fencing) and monitoring to determine how land management is influencing saltmarsh conservation.

All of these impacts can be recorded qualitatively along with supporting photographs (coupled with monitoring one or more biotic and abiotic factors, e.g., photo-point monitoring of saltmarsh plants) for individual saltmarshes. Guidelines can be made available through a Monitoring Human Use of Saltmarsh Wetlands - Guide Sheet, for querying and recording these data in a format suitable for cross-site comparisons (e.g., answering questions such as ‘how many saltmarshes are known to have grazing impacts within the Dorset local government area?’).

Figure 16. Examples of human impacts on saltmarshes, clockwise from the top: levees restricting tidal movement and displacing saltmarsh; vegetation removal and soil disturbance with cattle grazing behind the fence in contrast to the fenced marsh; recreational off-road vehicles use; uncertain future for a saltmarsh with insecure land tenure.

35 | P a g e

Wise use of saltmarshes Saltmarsh processes support human use of coastal areas for a range of recreational and commercial reasons including fishing and tourism (as depicted in Figure 2). They are also live classrooms for connecting with and learning about nature and provide a rich laboratory for scientific research and development. Wise use (term used by the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands to represent ecologically sustainable use, Prahalad and Kriwoken, 2010) of saltmarshes can be encouraged and documented as ‘wise-use stories’ (as part of monitoring). An example of wise use by a business involves Inverawe Native Gardens in southern Tasmania, who integrate saltmarshes as part of their native gardens and market their natural values. Guidelines can be provided for recording aspects of wise use of saltmarshes including: names of the community groups involved in on-ground works (Figure 17), educational and promotional activities related to the saltmarsh; research activities (and publications) that are linked to a saltmarsh; businesses that benefit form particular saltmarshes (e.g., as with the Inverawe Native Gardens noted above).

Figure 17. Educational signage (left) along with fencing (right) and revegetation of the buffer zone being done by the local community group in the Clarence Plains Rivulet Saltmarsh.

Level 5: Global change factors Flooding regime and sea level rise Tidal inundation (or tidal flooding regime) is considered to the most important factor in the development of saltmarsh vegetation (Chapman, 1974). The general expectation is that saltmarshes will follow the ‘flooding footprint’ in moving upland in response to sea level rise where suitable low-lying areas exist. Hence it is important to monitor and map the flooding footprints, particularly the landward extent of flooding, in and around saltmarshes. Preliminary GIS-based mapping of flooding footprints can be done using digital elevation models and tide gauge records (e.g., Prahalad, 2009; Prahalad et al., 2009; Mount et al., 2010; Prahalad and Pearson, 2013). The accuracy of such mapping, however, depends on the quality of the digital elevation models and of the tidal records.

GIS-based flooding maps can be used in conjunction with on-ground data collected during king tides (highest high tides of the year) and storm tides (tides associated with storm surges, can co-occur with king tides). Monitoring king tides is already part of a country-wide community led activity in which people are encouraged to witness king tides at specific times and take a photograph for entry into a national GIS-based database (www.witnesskingtides.org). Specific guidelines can be provided for using this existing project to include key saltmarsh areas along with guidance of how to take photographs (similar to photo-point monitoring).

36 | P a g e

Climate, rainfall, wind conditions Climate, rainfall and wind conditions are all experiencing change with global warming and are already causing marked changes in Tasmanian saltmarshes (Prahalad et al., 2011). These factors are monitored regularly by the Bureau of Meteorology through several weather observation stations spread across the State (http://www.bom.gov.au/tas/tas-observations-map.shtml). These stations are in several cases removed from saltmarshes of interest and in places a geological barrier in the form of mountain ranges separates the weather station and saltmarsh (e.g., Aalders, 2014). For detailed high resolution measurement of temperature, rainfall and wind speed and direction, temperature data loggers, rain gauges and anemometers can respectively be installed in or nearby saltmarshes of interest.

Concluding recommendations

This review endeavoured to address two key questions in relation to community-based monitoring of Tasmanian coastal saltmarsh wetlands: Where: What can be measured (and monitored) to help improve our understanding and management of saltmarshes? (see Figure 3) How: How can individuals and community groups be involved in this process? What resources and guidelines would they require? (see Table 1) The review acknowledges that there are several aspects (bio-physical indicators) of saltmarsh wetlands that can be monitored though engaging community-groups, though the use of many of these indicators are limited due to the lack of a reliable and easily applied methodology for collecting and evaluating data. There are a few areas where the provision of guide sheets can assist in engaging community-groups in collecting valuable data that support the scientific exploration, conservation and monitoring of saltmarsh wetlands. These are:

1. Photopoint Monitoring of Saltmarsh Wetlands - Guide Sheet 2. Saltmarsh Geomorphic Facies Monitoring - Guide Sheet 3. Saltmarsh Spiders and Beetles Monitoring - Guide Sheet 4. Monitoring Bird Use of Saltmarsh Wetlands - Guide Sheet 5. Monitoring Human Use of Saltmarsh Wetlands - Guide Sheet The selection of these aspects for monitoring is mainly due to the availability of relevant scientific knowledge and expertise to help prepare the guide sheets. Other aspects of saltmarshes can be integrated into monitoring when suitable scientific knowledge and expertise becomes available.

37 | P a g e

Background Resources

Aalders, J.G., 2014. Living on the edge: Saltmarsh spiders and beetles. Bachelor of Science (Honours) thesis, School of Land and Food, Discipline of Geography and Spatial Sciences, University of Tasmania.

Adam, P., 1990. Saltmarsh Ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Adam, P., 2009. Australian saltmarshes in global context. Pp. 1-21 in Australian Saltmarsh Ecology ed by N. Saintilan. CSIRO Publishing.

Allen, J.R.L., 2000. Morphodynamics of Holocene salt marshes: a review sketch from the Atlantic and Southern North Sea coasts of Europe. Quaternary Science Reviews 19: 1155-1231.

Allen, J.R.L. and Pye, K., 1992. Coastal saltmarshes: their nature and importance. In: Allen, J.R.L. and Pye, K. (Eds.) Saltmarshes: Morphodynamics, Conservation and Engineering Significance. Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-18.

Baker, M.L. and de Salas, M.F., 2012. A Census of the Vascular Plants of Tasmania and Index to The Student’s Flora of Tasmania and Flora of Tasmania Online. Tasmanian Herbarium, Hobart.

Bonney, R., Cooper, C.B., Dickinson, J., Kelling, S., Phillips, T., Rosenberg, K.V., and Shirk, J., 2009. Citizen science: a developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. BioScience 59: 977-984.

Boon, P., 2012. Coastal wetlands of temperate eastern Australia: will Cinderella ever go to the ball? Marine and Freshwater Research 63: 845-855.

Bridgewater, P.B., Rosser, C., and de Corona, A., 1981. The Saltmarsh Plants of Southern Australia. Botany Department, Monash University: Melbourne.

Bromberg Gedan, K., Silliman, B.R. and Bertness, M.D., 2009. Centuries of Human-Driven Change in Salt Marsh Ecosystems. Annual Review of Marine Science 1: 117-141.

Cahoon, D.R., Lynch, J.C. and Powell, A.N. 1996. Marsh Vertical Accretion in a Southern California Estuary, U.S.A. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 43: 19–32.

Chapman, V. J. 1974. Salt marshes and Salt deserts of the World. London.

Choi, Y., Wang, Y., Hsieh, Y. P. and Robinson, L. 2001. Vegetation succession and carbon sequestration in a coastal wetland in northwest Florida: Evidence from carbon isotopes. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 15: 311-319.

Chust, G., Borja, Á., Liria, P., Galparsoro, I., Marcos, M., Caballero, A. and Castro, R., 2009. Human impacts overwhelm the effects of sea-level rise on Basque coastal habitats (N Spain) between 1954 and 2004. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 84: 453-462.

Clarke, L.D. and Hannon, N.J., 1971. The mangrove swamp and salt marsh communities of the Sydney district IV The significance of species interaction. Journal of Ecology 59: 535-553.

Cohn, J.P., 2008. Citizen science: Can volunteers do real research? BioScience 58: 192-197.

Connolly, R., 2009. Fish on Australian saltmarshes. Pp. 131-148 in Australian Saltmarsh Ecology ed by N. Saintilan. CSIRO Publishing.

Deegan, L.A.; Hughes, J.E.; Rountree, R.A. 2000. Salt marsh ecosystem support of marine transient species, in: Weinstein, M.P. et al. (Ed.). Concepts and Controversies in Tidal Marsh Ecology. pp. 333-365.

38 | P a g e

Deegan, L.A., Johnson, D.S., Warren, R.S., Peterson, B.J., Fleeger, J.W., Fagherazzi, S. and Wollheim, W.M., 2012. Coastal eutrophication as a driver of salt marsh loss. Nature 490, 388-392.

Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment. TASVEG 3.0, Released November 2013. Tasmanian Vegetation Monitoring and Mapping Program, Resource Management and Conservation Division.

Dolan, R., Haden, B. and Haywood, J., 1978. A New Method for Determining Shoreline Erosion. Coastal Engineering 2: 21 - 39.

Doody, P.J., 2008. Saltmarsh Conservation, Management and Restoration. Springer.

Dunn, H., 2005. Assessing the Condition and Status of Tasmania’s Wetlands and Riparian Vegetation: Summary of Processes and Outcomes of a Component of the National Land and Water Audit. Nature Conservation Report 02/09. Nature Conservation Branch, Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment, Tasmania.

Fazackerley, P., 2002. Vegetation and Condition of Coastal Sites on the Tasman & Forestier Peninsulas & Blackman Bay, South-East Tasmania, Tasmania.

FitzGerald, D. M., Fenster, M.S., Argow, B.A. & Buynevich, I.V., 2008. Coastal Impacts Due to Sea- Level Rise. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 36: 601–647.

Gonsalves, L., Law, B., Webb, C., and Monamy, V., 2012. Are vegetation interfaces important to foraging insectivorous bats in endangered coastal saltmarsh on the Central Coast of New South Wales? Pacific Conservation Biology 18: 282-292.

Gooderham, J. and Tsyrlin, E., 2002. The Waterbug Book. CSIRO, Melbourne.

Gouldthorpe, J.J., 2000. The effects of drainage and grazing on saltmarsh environments in south-east Tasmania. Honours Thesis, School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart.

Hartig, E. K., Gornitz, V., Kolker, A., Mushacke, F. and Fallon, D., 2002. Anthropogenic and Climate- Change Impacts on Salt Marshes of Jamaica Bay, New York City. Wetlands 22: 71-89.

Howells, C., Ed. 2012. Tasmania's Natural Flora, Second Edition: Australian Plants Society Tasmania, Hobart Group.

Huiskes, A.H.L., Ed. 1990. Possible effects of sea level changes on saltmarsh vegetation. Expected Effects of Climatic Change on Marine Coastal Ecosystems. Dordrecht, Kluwer.

Jordan, G. and others, 2010. Key to Tasmanian vascular plants, available online at http://www.utas.edu.au/dicotkey

Kitchener, A. and Harris, S., 2013. From Forest to Fjaeldmark: Descriptions of Tasmania’s Vegetation. Edition 2. Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, Tasmania.

Kelcey, J. and Lucieer, A., 2012. Sensor Correction of a 6-Band Multispectral Imaging Sensor for UAV Remote Sensing. Remote Sensing (UAV special issue) 4: 1462-1493.

Kelcey, J. and Lucieer, A., 2013. An adaptive texture selection framework for ultra-high resolution UAV imagery, Proceedings of 2013 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), 21-26 July 2013, Melbourne, Australia, pp. 3883-3886.

Kennish, J., 2001. Coastal Salt Marsh Systems in the U.S.: A Review of Anthropogenic Impacts. Journal of Coastal Research 17: 731-748.

Kirkpatrick, J. B. and Glasby, J., 1981. Salt Marshes in Tasmania: Distribution, Community Composition and Conservation. Hobart, Department of Geography, University of Tasmania.

39 | P a g e

Kirwan, M.L., Murray, A.B. and Boyd, W.S., 2008. Temporary vegetation disturbance as an explanation for permanent loss of tidal wetlands. Geophysical Research Letters 35: L05403.

Kitchener, A. and Harris, S., 2013. From Forest to Fjaeldmark: Descriptions of Tasmania’s Vegetation. Edition 2. Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, Tasmania

Koch, A. and Woehler, E., 2007. Results of a Survey to Gather Information on the Use of Tree Hollows by Birds in Tasmania. The Tasmanian Naturalist 129: 37-64.

Laegdsgaard, P., 2006. Ecology, disturbance and restoration of coastal saltmarsh in Australia: a review. Wetlands Ecology and Management 14: 379-399.

Laegdsgaard, P., Kelleway, J., Williams, R.J. and Harty, C., 2009. Protection and management of coastal Saltmarshes. Pp. 179-210 in Australian Saltmarsh Ecology ed by N. Saintilan. CSIRO Publishing.

Lawrence, D.S.L., Allen, J.R.L. and Havelock, G.M., 2004. Salt Marsh Morphodynamics: An Investigation of Tidal Flows and Marsh Channel Equilibrium. Journal of Coastal Research 20: 301-316.

Long, S.P. and Mason, C.F., 1983. Saltmarsh Ecology. Glasgow, Blackie.

Lyth, A., Allchin, R., Bell, E. and Holbrook, N.J., 2013. Ross River Virus in Tasmania in a Changing Climate: a vulnerability assessment, University of Tasmania, Hobart.

Mazumder, D., Saintilan, N. and Williams, R. 2005. Temporal variation in fish catch using pop nets in mangrove and saltmarsh flats at Towra Point, NSW, Australia. Wetlands Ecology and Management 13: 457-467

Mazumder, D., Saintilan, N. and Williams, R., 2006. Trophic relationships between itinerant fish and crab larvae in a temperate Australian saltmarsh. Marine and Freshwater Research 57: 193-199.

Mazumder, D., Saintilan, N. and Williams, R., 2009. Zooplankton inputs and outputs in the saltmarsh at Towra Point, Australia. Wetlands Ecological Management 17: 225–230.

Michel, P., Mathieu, R., and Mark, A.F., 2010. Spatial analysis of oblique photo-point images for quantifying spatio-temporal changes in plant communities. Applied Vegetation Science 13: 173- 182.

Morrison, B., 2006. The relationship between vegetation and foraminiferal zonation and elevation on two Tasmanian salt marshes. School of Geography and Environmental Studies. Hobart, University of Tasmania. Honours Thesis.

Mount, R.E., Prahalad, V., Sharples, C., Tilden, J., Morrison, B., Lacey, M., Ellison, J., Helman, M., Newton, J., 2010. Circular Head Coastal Foreshore Habitats: Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment: Final Project Report to Cradle Coast NRM. School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania.

Mure, J. and Bennett, R., 2012. Bruny Island-food from the edge of the world. Self-published.

Murray-Wallace, C. V. and Goede, A., 1991. Aminostratigraphy and electron spin resonance studies of Late Quaternary sea level change and coastal neotectonics in Tasmania, Australia. Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie 35: 129-149.

Oliver, T.S., Rogers, K., Chafer, C.J., and Woodroffe, C.D., 2012. Measuring, mapping and modelling: an integrated approach to the management of mangrove and saltmarsh in the Minnamurra River estuary, southeast Australia. Wetlands Ecology and Management 20: 353-371.

40 | P a g e

Orson, R.A., Panageotou, W., and Leatherman, S.P., 1985. Response of tidal salt marshes of the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf Coasts to rising sea levels. Journal of Coastal Research 1: 29–38.

Parks and Wildlife Service, 2009. Mammals of Tasmania, available online at: http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/indeX.aspX?base=427

Parks and Wildlife Service, 2013. Pitt Water Nature Reserve Management Plan, Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, Hobart.

Phillips, J.D., 1986. Coastal submergence and marsh fringe erosion. Journal of Coastal Research 2: 427-436.

Portnoy, J.W., 1999. Salt Marsh Diking and Restoration: Biogeochemical Implications of Altered Wetland Hydrology. Environmental Management 24: 111–20.

Prahalad, V., 2009. Long term temporal changes in south east Tasmanian saltmarshes; Thesis, Master of Applied Science in Environmental Studies, School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart.

Prahalad, V.N., Lacey, M.J. and Mount, R.E., 2009. The Future of the Derwent Estuary Saltmarshes and Tidal Freshwater Wetlands in Response to Sea Level Rise. Technical report for the Derwent Estuary Program and NRM South, School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania.

Prahalad, V.N. and Kriwoken, L.K., 2010. Implementation of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands in Tasmania, Australia. Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy 13: 205-239.

Prahalad, V.N. and Mount, R.E., 2011. Preliminary Vegetation Mapping of the Dromedary Marshes, Derwent Estuary, a technical report for the Derwent Estuary Program. School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania.

Prahalad, V., Kirkpatrick, J. and Mount, R., 2011. Tasmanian coastal salt marsh community transitions associated with climate change and relative sea level rise 1975-2009. Australian Journal of Botany 59: 741-748.

Prahalad, V.N., 2012a. Vegetation Community Mapping and Baseline Condition Assessment of Lauderdale Race Course Flats Saltmarsh, Derwent Estuary. NRM South, Tasmania.

Prahalad, V.N., 2012b. Richmond Park Saltmarsh Site: Preliminary Baseline Condition Assessment and Interim Management Recommendations. NRM South. Tasmania.

Prahalad, V. and Pearson, J., 2013. Southern Tasmanian Saltmarsh Futures: A Preliminary Strategic Assessment. NRM South, Hobart, Tasmania.

Rayment, G.E. and Lyons, D.J., 2011. Soil Chemical Methods - Australasia, CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood.

Richardson, A.M.M., Swain, R. and Wong, V., 1997. The crustacean and molluscan fauna of Tasmanian saltmarshes. Papers and Proceedings of the Royal Society of Tasmania 131: 21–30.

Richardson, A.M.M. and Swain, R., and Wong, V., 1998. The relationship between the crustacean and molluscan assemblages of Tasmanian saltmarshes, the vegetation and soil conditions. Marine and Freshwater Research 49: 785–799.

Richardson, A.M.M. and Mulcahy, M.E., 1996. The distribution of talitrid amphipods (Crustacea) on a saltmarsh in southern Tasmania, in relation to vegetation and substrate. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 43: 801–817.

41 | P a g e

Richardson, A.M.M., Swain, R. and Wong, V., 1997. Translittoral Talitridae (Crustacea: Amphipoda) and the need to reserve transitional habitats: examples from Tasmanian saltmarshes and other coastal sites. Memoirs of the Museum of Victoria 56: 521–529.

Roberts, C., Kirkpatrick, J.B. and McQuillan, P.B., 2011. Tasmanian lentic wetland lawns are maintained by grazing rather than inundation. Austral Ecology 36: 303-309.

Rogers, K., Wilton, K. M., and Saintilan, N., 2006. Vegetation change and surface elevation dynamics in estuarine wetlands of southeast Australia. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 66: 559-569.

Rogers, K., Saintilan, N. and Copeland, C., 2012. Modelling wetland surface elevation dynamics and its application to forecasting the effects of sea-level rise on estuarine wetlands. Ecological Modelling 244, 148-157.

Saintilan, N., 2009a. Distribution of Australian saltmarsh plants. Pp. 23-50 in Australian Saltmarsh Ecology ed by N. Saintilan. CSIRO Publishing.

Saintilan, N., Ed. 2009b. Australian Saltmarsh Ecology. CSIRO Publishing.

Saintilan, N. and Rogers, K., 2013. The significance and vulnerability of Australian saltmarshes: implications for management in a changing climate. Marine and Freshwater Research 64: 66- 79.

Schramm, W., and Nienhuis, P. Ed. 1996. Marine benthic vegetation: recent changes and the effects of eutrophication (No. 123). Springer.

Schwimmer, R.A., 2001: Rates and Processes of Marsh Shoreline Erosion in Rehoboth Bay, Delaware, U.S.A. Journal of Coastal Research 17: 672-683.

Schwimmer, R.A. and Pizzuto, J.E., 2000: A model for the evolution of marsh shorelines. Journal of Sedimentary Research 70: 1026-1035.

Simpson, K., and Day, N., 2010. Field guide to the birds of Australia. CSIRO Publishing, Australia.

Spencer, J., Monamy, V. and Breitfuss, M. 2009. Saltmarsh as habitat for birds and other vertebrates. Pp 149-165 Australian Saltmarsh Ecology ed by N. Saintilan. CSIRO Publishing.

Sullivan, M. J. and Currin, C. A., 2000. Community Structure and Functional Dynamics of Benthic Microalgae in Salt Marshes. Concepts and Controversies in Tidal Marsh Ecology. New York, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

TASVEG Version 1.0. Benchmark for Vegetation Condition Assessment, available online at http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/Documents/All-Saltmarsh-and-Wetlands-Benchmarks.pdf

Thomas, R., Thomas, S., Andrew, D. and McBridge, I. 2011. The complete guide to finding the birds of Australia 2nd Ed. CSIRO Publishing, Australia.

Threatened Species Scientific Committee, 2013. Subtropical and Temperate Coastal Saltmarsh Conservation Advice. Report to the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Canberra.

Valiela, I., Cole, M.I., McClelland, J., Hauxwell, J., Cebrian, J. and Joye, S.B., 2000. Role of salt marshes as part of coastal landscapes. Pp. 23-38 in Concepts and Controversies in Tidal Marsh Ecology ed by M.P. Weinstein and D.A. Kreeger. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.

Valiela, I. and Cole, M.L., 2002. Comparative evidence that salt marshes and mangroves may protect seagrass meadows from land-derived nitrogen loads. Ecosystems 5: 92-102.

Wapstra, H., Wapstra, A., Wapstra, M. and Gilfedder, L., 2005. The Little Book of Common Names for Tasmanian Plants. Department of Primary Industries, Water & Environment, Hobart.

42 | P a g e

Wapstra, M., Wapstra, A. and Wapstra, H. 2010. Tasmanian Plant Names Unravelled. Fullers Publishing with the Wapstra Family, Hobart.

Watts, D., 2002. Field Guide to Tasmanian Birds. New Holland Publishers, Australia.

Wong, V., Richardson, A.M.M. and Swain, R., 1993. The Crustaceans and Molluscs of Tasmanian Saltmarshes. Zoology Department, University of Tasmania, Hobart.

43 | P a g e

Appendix 1: Vascular plants of Tasmanian saltmarshes (database by Violet Harrison-Day)

Scientific names as per Baker and de Bridgewater, Dicot Key by Salas, 2013 Kirkpatrick and Rosser and de Jordan et al., (* - introduced; Common names as per Glasby, 1981 Corona, 1981 Saintilan, 2009 TASVEG Version 1.0 2005 ** - absent in Tas) Wapstra et al., 2005 Monocotyledoneae Centrolepidaceae Bristlewort Family Centrolepis Centrolepis Centrolepis polygyna polygyna Centrolepis spp. polygyna wiry bristlewort Sedge Family Baumea acuta Baumea acuta pale twigsedge Baumea Baumea arthrophylla arthrophylla fine twigsedge Baumea juncea Baumea juncea Baumea juncea Baumea juncea Baumea juncea bare twigsedge Either: shortleaf tall sedge OR longleaf tall sedge (depending on Carex appressa Carex appressa var.) Eleocharis acuta Eleocharis acuta common spikesedge Gahnia filum Gahnia filum Gahnia filum Gahnia filum Gahnia filum chaffy sawsedge Gahnia trifida Gahnia trifida Gahnia trifida coast sawsedge Schoenus spp. ** ** Schoenus Schoenus nitens nitens Schoenus nitens Schoenus nitens Schoenus nitens shiny bogsedge Schoenoplectus Scirpus pungens pungens sharp clubsedge

44 | P a g e

Scirpus cernuus Isolepis cernua Isolepis cernua Isolepis cernua nodding clubsedge Scirpus inundatus Isolepis inundata swamp clubsedge Isolepis nodosa Scirpus and Scirpus Scirpus nodosus nodosus nodosus (?) Isolepis nodosa Ficinia nodosa knobby clubsedge Scirpus marginatus ** ** Scirpus Bolboschoenus maritimus caldwellii sea clubsedge Isolepis platycarpa Isolepis platycarpa flatfruit clubsedge Rush Family Juncus acutus sharp rush Juncus bufonius Juncus bufonius toad rush Juncus kraussii Juncus kraussii Juncus kraussii Juncus kraussii Juncus kraussii sea rush Juncus pallidus Juncus pallidus pale rush Juncus planifolius Juncus planifolius broadleaf rush Juncus Juncus revolutus revolutus Juncus revolutus creeping rush Waterribbon Family Triglochin centrocarpa Triglochin nana dwarf arrowgrass Triglochin mucronata prickly arrowgrass Triglochin Triglochin Triglochin minutissima minutissima minutissima tiny arrowgrass Triglochin striata Triglochin striata Triglochin striatum Triglochin striata streaked arrowgrass

45 | P a g e

Poaceae Grass Family Lachnagrostis Agrostis aemula aemula tumbling blowngrass Lachnagrostis Agrostis avenacea filiformis common blowngrass Lachnagrostis Agrostis Lachnagrostis billardierei subsp. Agrostis billardieri billardieri billardieri billardierei coast blowngrass Agrostis stolonifera Agrostis stolonifera creeping bent wallaby grass (common Austrodanthonia name depends on Austrodanthonia spp. spp. subspecies) Cynodon dactylon Cynodon dactylon couchgrass Distichlis Distichlis Distichlis Distichlis Distichlis distichophylla distichophylla distichophylla distichophylla distichophylla australian saltgrass Festuca Festuca arundinacea arundinacea tall fescue Hordeum geniculatum ** ** Monerma Hainardia Hainardia cylindrica cylindrical (?) cylindrica thintail barbgrass Parapholis Parapholis incurva incurva Parapholis sp. Parapholis incurva coast barbgrass Phragmites Phragmites australis Phragmites australis australis southern reed Poa annua Poa annua winter grass Poa labillardieri Poa labillardieri var. labillardieri silver tussockgrass

46 | P a g e

Poa poiformis var. Poa poiformis Poa poiformis poiformis coastal tussockgrass Polypogon Polypogon Polypogon Polypogon monspeliensis monspeliensis monspeliensis monspeliensis annual beardgrass Either: australian saltmarshgrass OR Puccinellia spreading saltmarshgrass Puccinellia stricta stricta Puccinelliia stricta Puccinellia stricta Puccinellia stricta (depending on var.) Spartina Spartina townsendii townsendii Spartina anglica Spartina anglica Spartina anglica* common cordgrass Sporobolus Sporobolus Sporobolus virginicus virginicus virginicus salt couch Austrostipa Austrostipa Stipa stipoides Stipa stipoides stipoides Austrostipa stipoides stipoides coast speargrass Either: foxtail fescue or Vulpia myuros ratstail fescue Vulpia megalura (?subspecies?) (depending on forma) Zoysia macrantha Zoysia macrantha Zoysia macrantha prickly couch Zoysia matrella (?) Zoysia matrella ** ** Deschampsia cespitosa tufted hairgrass Restionaceae Cordrush Family Leptocarpus Leptocarpus Leptocarpus brownii brownii brownii Apodasmia brownii Apodasmia brownii coarse twinerush Leptocarpus tenax Leptocarpus tenax slender twinerush Ruppiaceae Seatassel Family Ruppia maritima Ruppia polycarpa manyfruit seatassel

47 | P a g e

Dicotyledoneae Aizoaceae Pigface Family Carpobrotus Carpobrotus edulis edulis* yellow pigface Carpobrotus Carpobrotus rossii rossii Carpobrotus rossii Carpobrotus rossii Carpobrotus rossii native pigface Disphyma blackii Disphyma and Disphyma Disphyma Disphyma crassifolium australe (?) clavellatum crassifolium Disphyma crassifolium (?subspecies?) roundleaf pigface Tetragonia Tetragonia implexicoma implexicoma bower spinach Tetragonia tetragonioides new zealand spinach Apiaceae Celery Family Either: slender sea-celery Apium Apium Apium Apium prostratum OR creeping sea-celery Apium prostratum prostratum prostratum Apium prostratum prostratum subsp. prostratum (depending on var.) Apium annuum Apium annuum annual sea-celery Centella cordifolia Centella cordifolia swampwort Eryngium Eryngium Eryngium vesiculosum vesiculosum vesiculosum prickfoot Hydrocotyle Hydrocotyle capillaris capillaris thread pennywort Lilaeopsis Lilaeopsis Lilaeopsis brownii Lilaeopsis brownii polyantha polyantha jointed swampstalks Asteraceae Daisy Family Angianthus preissianus and A. Angianthus Angianthus Angianthus Angianthus eriocephalus (?) preissianus preissianus preissianus preissianus salt cupflower

48 | P a g e

Aster australasica ** ** Symphyotrichum Aster subulatus subulatum asterweed Brachycome Brachyscome Brachyscome graminea graminea graminea grass daisy Centipeda Centipeda minima elatinoides spreading sneezeweed Cotula Cotula Cotula Cotula Cotula coronopifolia coronopifolia coronopifolia coronopifolia coronopifolia* water buttons Cotula vulgaris var. australasica slender buttons Leptinella Cotula longipes longipes Leptinella longipes coast buttons Leptinella Cotula reptans Cotula reptans reptans Leptinella reptans creeping buttons Cotula spicatum ** ** Gnaphalium Gnaphalium indutum indutum tiny cottonleaf Gnaphalium Vellereophyton candidissimum dealbatum* white cudweed Senecio Senecio coast groundsel Senecio lautus Senecio lautus pinnatifolius pinnatifolius (depending on var.) Caryophyllaceae Starwort Family Spergularia bocconei lesser sandspurrey Spergularia marina lesser seaspurrey Spergularia rubra greater sandspurrey Spergularia Spergularia Spergularia Spergularia Spergularia media media media tasmanica tasmanica greater seaspurrey

49 | P a g e

Chenopodiaceae Goosefoot Family Arthrocnemum Arthrocnemum Tecticornia Tecticornia Tecticornia arbuscula arbusculum (?) arbuscula Sclerostegia arbuscula arbuscula arbuscula shrubby glasswort Threlkeldia diffusa coast bonefruit Arthrocnemum bidens ** ** Arthrocnemum Tecticornia halocnemoides halocnemoides ** ** Atriplex Atriplex australasica australasica southern saltbush Atriplex Atriplex cinerea cinerea Atriplex cinerea Atriplex cinerea Atriplex cinerea Atriplex cinerea grey saltbush Atriplex Atriplex hastata hastata Atriplex prostrata Atriplex prostrata creeping orache Atriplex Atriplex paludosa paludosa Atriplex padulosa Atriplex paludosa Atriplex paludosa marsh saltbush Atriplex Atriplex semibaccata semibaccata berry saltbush Atriplex suberecta sprawling saltbush Chenopodium glaucum ssp. Chenopodium Chenopodium Chenopodium ambiguum glaucum glaucum glaucum pail goosefoot Hemichroa Hemichroa Hemichroa pentandra pentandra pentandra Hemichroa pentandra ** ** Maireana oppositifolia ** ** Rhagodia Rhagodia Rhagodia Rhagodia baccata baccata Rhagodia baccata Rhagodia candolleana candolleana candolleana coastal saltbush Salsola kali Salsola tragus Salsola australis saltwort

50 | P a g e

Salicornia Salicornia Sarcocornia Sarcocornia Sarcocornia blackiana blackiana blackiana Sarcocornia blackiana blackiana blackiana thickhead glasswort Sarcocornia quinqueflora Salicornia Salicornia Sarcocornia Sarcocornia Sarcocornia subsp. quinqueflora quinqueflora quinqueflora quinqueflora quinqueflora quinqueflora beaded glasswort Suaeda australis Suaeda australis Suaeda australis Suaeda australis Suaeda australis southern seablite Convulvulaceae Bindweed Family Wilsonia Wilsonia Wilsonia Wilsonia backhousei backhousei Wilsonia backhousei backhousei backhousei narrowleaf wilsonia Wilsonia humilis Wilsonia humilis Wilsonia humilis Wilsonia humilis Wilsonia humilis silky wilsonia Wilsonia Wilsonia Wilsonia Wilsonia rotundifolia rotundifolia Wilsonia rotundifolia rotundifolia rotundifolia roundleaf wilsonia Cuscutaceae Dodder Family Cuscuta tasmanica Cuscuta tasmanica golden dodder Fabaceae Pea Family Lotus australis Lotus australis australian trefoil Frankeniaceae Seaheath Family Frankenia Frankenia Frankenia Frankenia pauciflora pauciflora pauciflora pauciflora southern seaheath Gentianaceae Gentian Family Centaurium Centaurium pulchellum tenuiflorum slender centaury Centaurium spicatum Schenkia australis spike centaury Sebaea Sebaea Sebaea albidiflora albidiflora albidiflora Sebaea albidiflora white sebaea

51 | P a g e

Goodeniaceae Native-primrose Family Scaevola hookeri creeping fanflower Selliera Selliera radicans radicans Selliera radicans Selliera radicans Selliera radicans Selliera radicans shiny swampmat Campanulaceae Lobeliaceae (Dicot Key) Bellflower Family Lobelia alata Lobelia alata Lobelia anceps Lobelia anceps angled lobelia Pratia platycalyx Lobelia irrigua Lobelia irrigua salt pratia Mallow Family Lawrencia Lawrencia spicata spicata Lawrencia spicata spicata Lawrencia spicata candle saltmallow Lawrencia Lawrencia squamata squamata thorny saltmallow Myoporaceae Boobialla Family Myoporum insulare Myoporum insulare common boobialla Onagraceae Willowherb Family Epilobium billardiereanum subsp. billardiereanum robust willowherb Plantaginaceae Plantain Family Plantago Plantago Plantago Plantago coronopus subsp. slender buckshorn coronopus coronopus coronopus coronopus plantain Leadwort Family Limonium Limonium Limonium Limonium australe Limonium australe australe australe Limonium australe australe (?variety?) yellow sea-lavender

52 | P a g e

Limonium Limonium australe baudinii (?variety?) tasmanian sea-lavender Portulacaceae Purslane Family Portulaca oleracea Portulaca oleracea common purslane Polygonacea Dock Family Rumex brownii Rumex brownii slender dock Rumex crispus curled dock Primulaceae Primrose Family Samolus junceus ** ** Samolus Samolus repens repens Samolus repens Samolus repens Samolus repens Samolus repens creeping brookweed Rubiaceae Madder Family Nertera Nertera depressa granadensis orange cushionbeads Scrophulariaceae Snapdragon Family Mimulus repens Mimulus repens Mimulus repens Mimulus repens Mimulus repens creeping monkeyflower

References Baker, M. L. and de Salas, M. F., 2013. A Census of the Vascular Plants of Tasmania and Index to The Student’s Flora of Tasmania and Flora of Tasmania Online. Tasmanian Herbarium, Hobart.

Bridgewater, P. B., Rosser, C., and de Corona, A., 1981. The Saltmarsh Plants of Southern Australia. Botany Department, Monash University: Melbourne.

Howells, C., Ed. 2012. 'Tasmania's Natural Flora', Second Edition: Australian Plants Society Tasmania, Hobart Group.

Jordan, G. and others, 2010. Key to Tasmanian vascular plants, available online at http://www.utas.edu.au/dicotkey

53 | P a g e

Kirkpatrick, J. B. and Glasby, J., 1981. Salt Marshes in Tasmania: Distribution, Community Composition and Conservation. Hobart, Department of Geography, University of Tasmania.

Saintilan, N., 2009. Distribution of Australian saltmarsh plants. Pp. 23-50 in Australian Saltmarsh Ecology ed by N. Saintilan. CSIRO Publishing.

TASVEG Version 1.0. Benchmark for Vegetation Condition Assessment, available online at http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/Documents/All-Saltmarsh-and-Wetlands- Benchmarks.pdf

Wapstra, H., Wapstra, A., Wapstra, M. and Gilfedder, L., 2005. The Little Book of Common Names for Tasmanian Plants. Department of Primary Industries, Water & Environment, Hobart.

54 | P a g e

Appendix 2: Shoreline Geomorphology – Identifying and Mapping of Geomorphic Facies for Saltmarsh Monitoring (authored by Chris Sharples)

In this section, some of the typical ‘geomorphic facies’ that can be encountered in Tasmanian saltmarshes are presented and discussed (the term ‘facies’ refers to a distinctive type or class of thing, in this case the small-scale landforms associated with saltmarsh). These facies have been developed from detailed field mapping of saltmarsh geomorphic facies in far north-west Tasmania by Mount et al. (2010), but are generalised to apply to all Tasmanian saltmarshes (thus, certain facies observed in far north-west Tasmania, such as saltmarsh on semi-indurated peaty Pleistocene-age sands, are rare elsewhere in Tasmania but can be considered as sub-classes of the broad facies defined here). The saltmarsh geomorphic facies described here are defined by two geomorphic criteria, namely their underlying substrate (soft sediment versus hard bedrock) and their stability status (eroding versus accreting). Whilst the underlying substrate classes generally will not change over short time scales, their stability status may do so in response to changing conditions such as sea-level or dominant wind-wave climates. Thus long-term monitoring of saltmarsh facies, particularly in regard to their shoreline stability status classes, should allow detection of long term changes in saltmarsh shoreline behaviour such as increasing trends towards either accretion (and seawards progradation) or erosion (and landwards recession). The saltmarsh geomorphic facies described here are summarised in the following Table 3, and are described and illustrated in more detail following the table (Figure 18). Using this table (and referring to the more detailed descriptions and photo examples following), each section of shoreline can be classified into geomorphic facies by determining both its substrate class and stability status class, and combining these into a facies code as indicated on Table 3. For field-mapping purposes, the geomorphic facies described here are defined as the dominant facies over sections of shoreline approximately 50 metres long, or longer as appropriate. This mapping convention is necessary since some of the facies described involve intermittent sections of accreting or eroding shores, which in principle could each be mapped as very short sections of either eroding (Class 1) or accreting (Class 5) shores; however in some cases this would involve mapping individual shoreline sections of 5 or 10 metres or less in length, which would generally require impractical levels of detailed mapping.

55 | P a g e

Table 3: Summary table of saltmarsh geomorphic facies for Tasmania. Note that no “stable” saltmarsh stability class is defined, because saltmarsh is assumed to be actively accreting (vertically and laterally) if it is not eroding. Saltmarsh substrate classes Class S: Saltmarsh and Class B: Saltmarsh and Saltmarsh stability status saltmarsh soils over soft saltmarsh soils over hard classes sediment (extending in depth bedrock (above present to below present mean sea- mean sea-level) level) Class 1: Continuous actively Facies S1 Facies B1 eroding saltmarsh shores (no Continuous actively eroding Continuous actively eroding evidence of significant saltmarsh soils and plants at saltmarsh soils and plants at accretion). seawards edge, no saltmarsh seawards edge, no saltmarsh accretion, over soft sediment accretion, over hard bedrock base to below mean sea- base above mean sea-level. level.

Class 2: Dominantly Facies S2 Facies B2 actively eroding saltmarsh Dominantly actively eroding Dominantly actively eroding shores (with evidence of sub- saltmarsh soils and plants at saltmarsh soils and plants at ordinate spatially or seawards edge, with sub- seawards edge, with sub- temporally intermittent ordinate saltmarsh accretion, ordinate saltmarsh accretion, saltmarsh accretion). over soft sediment base to over hard bedrock base below mean sea-level. above mean sea-level. Class 3: Intermittently Facies S3 Facies B3 eroding and accreting Intermittently and roughly Intermittently and roughly saltmarsh shores (with equally eroding and accreting equally eroding and accreting approximately equal saltmarsh plants and soil at saltmarsh plants and soil at evidence of temporally or seawards edge, over soft seawards edge, over hard spatially intermittent sediment base to below mean bedrock base above mean saltmarsh erosion and sea-level. sea-level. accretion). Class 4: Dominantly Facies S4 Facies B4 accreting saltmarsh shores Dominantly accreting Dominantly accreting (with evidence of sub- saltmarsh soils and plants at saltmarsh soils and plants at ordinate spatially or seawards edge, with sub- seawards edge, with sub- temporally intermittent ordinate saltmarsh erosion, ordinate saltmarsh erosion, saltmarsh erosion). over soft sediment base to over hard bedrock base below mean sea-level. above mean sea-level. Class 5: Continuous Facies S5 Facies B5 accreting saltmarsh shores Continuous accretion of Continuous accretion of (no evidence of significant saltmarsh plants and soils at saltmarsh plants and soils at erosion). seawards edge, no erosion, seawards edge, no erosion, over soft sediment base to over hard bedrock base below mean sea-level. above mean sea-level.

56 | P a g e

Figure 18: Line drawings explaining the saltmarsh shoreline classes (in Table 3) that makes up the geomorphic facies.

57 | P a g e

Saltmarsh shoreline substrate classes Two very broad substrate classes are defined, namely saltmarsh developed over a soft-sediment base, and saltmarsh developed over a hard bedrock base. Although the latter are less common than the former, saltmarsh communities do develop on hard bedrock substrates, and these warrant being distinguished from saltmarsh on soft-sediment substrates because the two types have very different geomorphic responses to coastal erosion and sea-level rise. Brief descriptions of the two substrate types and their differing exposure to erosion processes are provided below along with photo examples.

Class S: Saltmarsh and saltmarsh soils over soft sediment Saltmarsh may develop over a variety of soft sediment substrates (or bases), which are generally exposed in the intertidal zone to seawards of and below of the saltmarsh margin. Typical soft sediment substrates beneath saltmarsh in Tasmania may include clean unconsolidated marine sands, silty sands or clayey sands, semi-lithified (‘indurated’) peaty or ‘coffee rock’ sands, and muddy (usually estuarine) sediments (Figure 19 & Figure 20). Such basal substrates generally existed prior to establishment of saltmarsh at the present shoreline. However saltmarsh established over such soft-sediment substrates will commonly also develop a clayey-sand or silty- clay soil of varying thicknesses (a few cm to metres) over the basal substrates. This soil comprises sand, silt, clays and organic detritus trapped by saltmarsh plants themselves. These saltmarsh soils can accrete (accumulate) over time, allowing a saltmarsh shore to grow both vertically and laterally, and to recover from erosion events (as described in below section). Where saltmarsh is developed over a soft sediment base or substrate in the intertidal zone, the soft sediment base nearly always extends in depth below present sea-level, and is usually indicative of a soft sediment infill that may underlie backshore areas to varying but commonly large distances landwards of the present shoreline. Such saltmarsh on soft sediment shores are potentially highly susceptible to shoreline erosion, which may cause the shoreline to recede landwards for significant distances. On the other hand, however, where the soft sediment substrates extend significant distances inland, they usually form low-profile backshore plains with some potential for saltmarsh communities to be able to persist as sea-level rises by migrating landwards provided there are no artificial barriers to this migration.

58 | P a g e

Figure 19: Saltmarsh on an unconsolidated sand substrate (Class S; Facies S1), showing the soft brown clayey-sand saltmarsh soils that have accumulated over the sand as saltmarsh plants have trapped sand, silt and organic debris (example exposed in an actively receding erosion scarp near Montagu Island, far northwest Tasmania).

Figure 20: Saltmarsh with a thin pale saltmarsh soil developed over a soft sediment substrate of peaty Pleistocene-age semi-indurated sand (Class S; Facies S1). Exposure on an eroding saltmarsh shoreline in western Duck Bay, far northwest Tasmania.

59 | P a g e

Class B: Saltmarsh and saltmarsh soils over hard bedrock Where hard rocky swell-sheltered shores slope up at only a gentle gradient to landwards in the upper intertidal zone, saltmarsh communities may colonise the rocky surfaces, allowing thin saltmarsh soils to accumulate over bedrock (Figure 21 and Figure 22). These saltmarsh veneers including their thin soils have the potential to erode significantly – even though their underlying bedrock substrates may not – and may be more frequently exposed to erosion as sea-level continues to rise in future. Where saltmarsh is developed on bedrock that is exposed above mean sea-level in the intertidal zone, the bedrock is generally part of a gently or moderately rising landwards slope which is resistant to wave erosion so that landwards recession of the shoreline is restricted by the resilience of the substrate. However since the saltmarsh itself with its soft soil veneer is readily erodible, saltmarsh developed on a rising hard bedrock slope can be expected to be eroded back and eventually ‘squeezed out’ against the hard rising bedrock slope as rising sea-levels reduce the width of the shoreline zone suitable for saltmarsh.

Figure 21: Saltmarsh with only a thin saltmarsh soil, developed over a hard bedrock substrate (Class B; Facies B3) forming a shore platform at Stony Point (far northwest Tasmania).

60 | P a g e

Figure 22: Saltmarsh with about 20 cm of saltmarsh soil, which has accumulated directly over a low- profile hard bedrock substrate (Class B; Facies B2) which repeatedly protrudes above sea-level along this shoreline, for example in the middle distance shown here (near of Robbins Island Crossing, far northwest Tasmania). Although this saltmarsh (including its soft soil horizon) shows spatially and temporally intermittent active erosion, the presence of protruding bedrock substrate suggests that shoreline erosion and recession (and potential for landwards saltmarsh migration) will be limited by the bedrock slope which rises to landwards behind this shoreline.

Current saltmarsh shoreline stability status classes Shoreline stability status refers to the physical stability of a shoreline, and in this context is an indicator of the degree to which saltmarsh communities (including their soils) are either eroding or accreting at their seawards edge. Because saltmarsh shores are the product of living and growing plants, they are never static; if they are not eroding then the plants will be actively growing and actively trapping sediment which will be causing the shore to accrete (or grow). Thus, whereas some other shoreline types (e.g., hard rocky shores) can be considered ‘stable’, there is no saltmarsh shoreline stability status class defined as simply ‘stable’. The saltmarsh shoreline stability status classes described here are applicable to saltmarsh developed on either soft sediment or hard bedrock substrates. In either case, the stability status classes are defined by the status of the saltmarsh plants and their soils, rather than by the status of the underlying substrate. Thus for example the saltmarsh and saltmarsh soils shown in Figure 19 would be classified as ‘continuous actively eroding saltmarsh shores’, even though there is no obvious evidence that the underlying sand substrate is also eroding (albeit it may be). Similarly, while some saltmarsh may develop on a hard bedrock substrate which may not be itself eroding and may be considered stable, the saltmarsh stability status class depends on whether the saltmarsh and saltmarsh soils developed over the bedrock substrate are eroding or not.

61 | P a g e

Saltmarsh stability status may vary spatially (from place to place along a shore) and over time. Spatial variability in erosion status may result from different degrees of exposure to erosive wind waves in more and less sheltered parts of the shore, or from a variety of other factors including proximity to river and tidal currents, presence of artificial disturbances, or other causes. Changes in stability status over time may result from episodes of storm surges and storm erosion interspersed with quiet periods, from sea-level rise resulting in progressively stronger shoreline wave attack over time, from periods of increasing or decreasing average wind speeds or changing wind directions, or from other temporal variations in the processes that drive shoreline erosion. The saltmarsh shoreline stability status classes used here were defined following detailed examination and mapping of approximately 100 kilometres of saltmarsh shoreline in far northwest Tasmania (Mount et al. 2010). The five classes defined represent a gradation between the most actively eroding saltmarsh shores (Class 1) and the most actively accreting saltmarsh shores (Class 5). Repeated monitoring of saltmarsh shores to detect changing stability status over time will be an important tool for monitoring saltmarsh shoreline changes into the future.

Class 1: Continuous actively eroding saltmarsh shores Substantial stretches of shoreline (approximately 50 metres length or more) with spatially continuous active erosion scarps and no notable intermittent accreting sections (see Figure 19 & Figure 23). This class is indicative of essentially continuous exposure to erosion processes causing ongoing progressive shoreline retreat without intermittent accretion.

Figure 23: A continuous actively eroding scarp in soft clayey-sand saltmarsh soil (Class 1; Facies S1). A vertical scarp face and recently collapsed soil blocks not yet broken up by wave action are indicators of actively ongoing erosion. When photographed at close to high tide, near-shore turbidity at this site near Pelican Point in far northwest Tasmania was indicating that the relatively small wind-waves seen in this photo were actively eroding the exposed saltmarsh soil under normal high tide conditions without any storm surge or high energy wave activity being necessary to maintain the erosion process.

62 | P a g e

Active erosion scarps are indicated by fresh vertical scarp faces in saltmarsh soils, under-cut scarp faces which are likely to collapse in the near future, recently collapsed scarp blocks and debris which are likely be broken up and removed by wave action at each high tide, and by a lack of any signs of accretion or shoreface rebuilding (e.g., accreting secondary saltmarsh in front of older erosion scarps).

Class 2: Dominantly actively eroding saltmarsh shores This class describes substantial stretches of shoreline (approximately 50 metres length or more) dominated by actively eroding shores (as described for Class 1), but with minor sub-ordinate accretion exhibited either in a spatially intermittent distribution along the shore (e.g., Figure 24), or in a temporally intermittent fashion indicated by short sections of minor saltmarsh growth and accretion in front of recently active erosion scarps (see example in Figure 22 above). The spatially intermittent type may be indicative of predominantly ongoing progressive shoreline retreat but with less consistently strong exposure to drivers of erosion at some points along the shore than is the case with continuous actively eroding shores. The temporally intermittent type may be indicative of episodic but in the long term progressive shoreline retreat owing to slightly less continuous exposure to erosion processes than is the case for Class 1 shores.

Figure 24: An example of dominant but spatially-intermittent active saltmarsh shoreline erosion (Class 2, Facies S2). This shore on the southern side of Perkins Island (far northwest Tasmania) has a low but mostly continuous active erosion scarp in soft saltmarsh soils, however a few short shoreline stretches – for example in the middle of this photo – are exhibiting current accretion.

63 | P a g e

Class 3: Intermittently eroding and accreting saltmarsh shores This group of shoreline status classes is characterised by substantial shoreline lengths (approximately 50 metres length or more) having roughly equal indications of intermittent shoreline erosion and accretion, implying that these shores may be holding a roughly stable or equilibrium shoreline position with neither progressive recession nor accretion being dominant. In contrast to “dominantly actively eroding saltmarsh shores” with sub-ordinate accretion (Class 2) and “dominantly accreting saltmarsh shores” with sub-ordinate erosion (Class 4), Class 3 stability status is generally indicative of roughly comparable exposure to both erosion-driving and accretion-allowing conditions, interspersed either spatially (with some shoreline stretches slightly more exposed to erosion processes) and/or temporally (with erosion processes affecting the shore often enough to prevent long term progressive accretion, but not often enough to drive long term progressive shoreline recession). Two main sub-classes are lumped into this broad category: Spatially intermittent eroding and accreting saltmarsh shores are those exhibiting erosion scarps interspersed alongshore with similar lengths of accreting shoreline sections. An example is illustrated in Figure 25. Temporally intermittent eroding shores are those exhibiting evidence of being subject to periods of active erosion interspersed with periods of saltmarsh accretion. Swell- sheltered saltmarshes can rebuild following periods of erosion, since the saltmarsh plants both trap sediment and accumulate organic debris; this shoreline behaviour is indicated by the presence of old inactive erosion scarps fronted by accreting secondary saltmarsh (Figure 26).

Figure 25: An example of Class 3 (Facies S3) spatially intermittent saltmarsh erosion on the western shore of Acton Bay in far northwest Tasmania, showing roughly equal lengths of low active erosion scarps in soft saltmarsh soil interspersed along-shore with actively accreting saltmarsh sections.

64 | P a g e

Figure 26: In this example of temporally intermittent saltmarsh erosion (Class 3; Facies S3) in Duck Bay (far northwest Tasmania), an inactive erosion scarp in soft clayey-sand saltmarsh soil (over semi- indurated peaty sand) is fronted by currently – accreting secondary saltmarsh. With a stretch of erosion scarp fronted by secondary accreting saltmarsh extending some tens of metres alongshore, neither erosion nor accretion appears dominant; hence this shore is assigned to stability status Class 3 (rather than Classes 2 or 4).

Some shores may show a complex interplay of spatially and temporally intermittent erosion and accretion, however the defining characteristic of Class 3 shores is an approximate equivalence between evidence of erosion and accretion, with neither strongly dominating over the other.

Class 4: Dominantly accreting saltmarsh shores This class describes substantial stretches of shoreline (approximately 50 metres length or more) currently dominated by active saltmarsh accretion, but with minor sub- ordinate erosion exhibited either by short stretches of active erosion scarps distributed in a spatially intermittent fashion along the shore (Figure 27), or in a temporally intermittent fashion indicated by older inactive erosion scarps behind the currently dominantly accreting shores (Figure 28).

65 | P a g e

Figure 27: This shore in Acton Bay, far northwest Tasmania, has sub-ordinate stretches of spatially intermittent active erosion, but saltmarsh accretion is dominant along the shore (Class 4, Facies S4).

Figure 28: A low inactive erosion scarp (barely visible in this photo) is present at the rear of the Sarcicornia zone on this dominantly accreting saltmarsh shore in Acton Bay (far northwest Tasmania), indicating minor temporally intermittent erosion with accretion dominant (Class 4, Facies S4). The spatially intermittent type may be indicative of predominantly ongoing progressive shoreline accretion but with some ongoing exposure to drivers of erosion at the most exposed points along the shore. The temporally intermittent type may be indicative of episodic minor erosion events which are not however frequent enough or of sufficient magnitude to halt longer term progressive shoreline accretion.

66 | P a g e

Class 5: Continuous accreting saltmarsh shores Continuous accreting saltmarsh shores are characterised by substantial stretches of shoreline (approximately 50 metres length or more) with spatially continuous saltmarsh growth and accretion of sediment, and no evident spatially or temporally intermittent eroding sections such as minor active or inactive scarps (see Figure 29). This stability class is indicative of insufficient exposure to erosion processes (either at the most exposed points alongshore, or through episodic storm wave events) as to initiate breaks in the saltmarsh plant cover and cause development of erosion scarps in the saltmarsh soils. Continuously accreting saltmarsh shores may occur over soft sediment substrates (e.g., sandy tidal flats) or may be found colonising low-profile rocky shore platforms (in which case the accreting saltmarsh defines the shoreline stability status rather than the stable rocky substrate beneath). Historic air photo interpretation of some saltmarsh areas in far northwest Tasmania (Mount et al., 2010) indicates that some areas now classified as “continuously accreting” saltmarsh shores have in fact been subject to some intermittent erosion at times during the last 60 years; however accretion in these areas has been sufficiently vigorous as to have now entirely covered any old inactive erosion scarps. Thus some continuously accreting saltmarsh shores may be places where erosion has occurred in the past but subsequent conditions have not involved a recurrence of erosive conditions sufficient to prevent ongoing accretion.

Figure 29: A spatially- and temporally-continuous accreting saltmarsh shore with no apparent signs of previous erosion, on the south-west side of Perkins Island (Class 5, Facies S5).

References Mount, R.E., Prahalad, V., Sharples, C., Tilden, J., Morrison, B., Lacey, M., Ellison, J., Helman, M., Newton, J., 2010. Circular Head Coastal Foreshore Habitats: Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment: Final Project Report to Cradle Coast NRM. School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania.

67 | P a g e

Appendix 3: Spiders and beetles of a Tasmanian saltmarsh (database by John Aalders)

Coastal saltmarsh community reference state documented for Long Point saltmarsh, in Moulting Lagoon by Aalders (2014).

Feature Zone Description

Vegetation Low Prostrate saline succulent herbs – Sarcocornia quinqueflora and or S blackiana, often present as dense mats or “lawns”, bright green (spring) to deep red in colour (autumn).

Middle Shrub form succulents with prostrate succulent understory, occasional intrusion of saline grasses – Tecticornia arbuscula, S quinqueflora, S blackiana, Disphyma crassifolium, bare areas. Often present on the extreme coastal fringe (for example levee banks), Tecticornia can be up to 1.5m in height, very verdant; inshore of the low marsh, degraded areas, up to 1.0m in height, where Tecticornia appears to be under stress (not verdant), sometimes dead, bare areas can be significant.

Upper Saline grasslands – Juncus spp., Gahnia spp., Austrostipa spp. and some Poa spp., bare areas. Clusters of individual species are not uncommon, however generally mixed. Ground cover by S quinqueflora, S blackiana, D crassifolium and bare areas can occur.

Spiders (information Low Lycosidae (wolf spider) – Venatrix, agile hunters, ground dwellers, from: in litter or burrows, presence all year www.arachne.org.au) Zodariidae (ant spider)*, abundant, ground dwellers, day time hunters, often living among and mimicking ants, presence all year Zoridae (wandering ghost spider)*, superficially resemble wolf spiders, however build webs with a silken retreat, presence all year

Middle Lycosidae – Venatrix, presence all year Nicodamidae (red-black spider)*, distinctive by their colouring, small to medium, often in sheet webs, presence spring to autumn Miturgidae (prowling spider)* – Miturga agelenina, large, females up to 20mm, males 18mm, presence winter to summer

Upper Lycosidae – Venatrix, presence all year Gnaphosidae (ground spider), night hunters, run down prey on surface, spend day in silken retreat, presence spring Zodariidae*, presence intermittent Zoridae*, presence spring to autumn Nicodamidae*, presence spring to autumn

Beetles (information Low Carabidae (carabid beetle) – Bembidion, presence spring and from: A Guide to summer Beetles of Australia Staphylinidae (rove beetle)* – Quedius, presence summer by Hangay and Carabidae – Clivina*, presence spring through autumn Zborowski, 2010) Elateridae (click beetle)* – Agrypnus , presence summer Curculionidae (weevils)* – Steriphus, presence winter

Middle Carabidae – Bembidion, presence spring , summer, autumn* and winter* Carabidae – Clivina, presence all year*

68 | P a g e

Feature Zone Description Anthicidae (ant-like flower beetle)* – Anthicus, mimic ants, scavenger(?), presence spring to autumn

Upper Pselaphidae (water-penny beetle), presence intermittent Scarabaeidae (scarab beetle) – Heteronyx aphodioides*, presence all year Staphylinidae – Bledius*, presence spring to autumn Carabidae – Mecyclothorax*, presence summer to winter

* = not significant (p < 0.05)

References Aalders, J.G., 2014. Living on the edge: Saltmarsh spiders and beetles. Bachelor of Science (Honours) thesis, School of Land and Food, Discipline of Geography and Spatial Sciences, University of Tasmania.

Hangay, G. and Zborowski, P., 2010. A Guide to the Beetles of Australia. CSIRO Publishing.

69 | P a g e

Appendix 4: Birds of Tasmanian saltmarshes (database by Adelina Latinovic)

Field Guide (TAS - Dave Watts, Field Guide 2 (AUS - Thomas et Prelim. No./Order WATERBIRDS 2011) al., 2011) Field Guide 3 (Simpson and Day, 2010) Ranking WATERFOWL: DUCKS, GEESE, SWANS (Order: Anseriformes) Freshwater swamps dense Freshwater lakes with plenty of Deep freshwater marshes with dense veg; 1 Blue-billed Duck vegetation, rare in Tasmania tree cover, Northern Tas more open waters in non-breeding season 2 Any large body of freshwater, Deepwater swamps dense shallow bays, harbours; present Permanent swamps with dense veg, large 2 Musk Duck vegetation, lakes, estuaries where blue-billed duck present open lakes, tidal inlets, bays 1 Large open brackish or fresh lakes, dams, Shallow wetlands, lagoons, pastures, tall forest margins, open Australian farm dams, pasture, sea Large shallow open wetlands, woodland, coastal areas including tidal 3 Shelduck (occasionally) including bays; common in Tas flats, saltmarsh 1 Australian Wood Dams, lakes, wetlands, pasture Short grassy woodland near water; around 4 Duck with scattered woodland Farms dams, urban lakes dams 2 Mallard Often about picnic grounds with lakes in 5 [introduced] urban parks; also farm dams, larger lakes - Saline wetlands, freshwater wetlands, farm dams, urban 6 Pacific Black Duck Wetlands, farm dams, swamps lakes, canals Rarer in saline, brackish, water 2 "Seen at all major wetland Heavily vegetated swamps, floodwaters; Australian Most wetlands, prefers large sites" but prefers well- ornamental lakes, farm dams; estuaries, 7 Shoveler vegetated swamps vegetated lakes tidal flats 1

70 | P a g e

Any available water: floods, lakes, tanks Any wetlands, lagoons, Any stretch of water, "could and dams. Coastal estuaries, tidal flats, 8 Grey Teal estuaries, farm dams turn up anywhere" during inland dry periods 2 "Virtually anybody of water in Breeds in brackish to fresh coastal swamps; "Brackish swamps", lagoons, Tas", subcoastal wetlands, disperses to freshwater, tidal mudflats, 9 Chestnut Teal farm dams, estuaries shallow bays inlets 1 Lakes and swamps with emergent vegetation, irregular Deep freshwater ponds, urban 10 Hardhead visitor to Tas lakes Deep vegetated swamps, open water 3 Plumed Whistling Tropics: subcoastal lagoons, Wetlands of tropical to temperate 11 Duck N/A dams grassland 3 Breeds in densely vegetated permanent freshwater swamps; moves to fresh or salty permanent open lakes, esp. in 12 Freckled Duck N/A SE and SW Aus, excluding Tas drought 3 Subcoastal wetlands, shallow Breeds on inland floodwaters; disperses to 13 Pink-eared Duck N/A temporary wetlands, Nth Tas open water, coastal sewage farms 2 Large expanses of fresh to marine open Wetlands, lagoons, farm dams, Any sizable waterway, urban water with abundant aquatic veg, exposed 14 Black Swan abundant in Tas lakes, estuarine bays mudflats, pasture, crops 1 Mostly breeds on small offshore islands; Offshore islands, farm after breeding disperse to improves Cape Barren pastures, wetlands, NE Tas: "Common nowhere" (mostly on pasture and other islands adjacent to 15 Goose Cape Portland, Flinders Island Bass Strait islands, SA) mainland 2

GREBES (Order: Podicipediformes) Australasian Small sheltered wetlands, farm Generally on freshwater; rarely on brackish 1 Grebe Still water, farm dams, lakes dams, lakes or saline water 3

71 | P a g e

Hoary-headed Farm dams, lakes, coastal Stretches of open fresh/saline Lakes, swamps, settling ponds; frequently 2 Grebe inlets, bays water, nomadic on brackish water or estuaries 1 Pairs in breeding season on freshwater lakes; gregarious at other times on fresh or Great-crested Lakes, reservoirs, bays, deeper saline waters - lakes, lagoons, reservoirs, 3 Grebe water Large open bodies of water estuaries, open water of bays 2

PELICAN, HERONS, EGRETS, CORMORANTS (Order: Pelecaniformes) Large lagoons, lakes, estuaries, Any large fresh/saline wetland, 1 Australian Pelican inland and coastal coastal, inland, urban Open fresh and saltwater 2 Most shallow water, swamps, Pasture, farm dams, parkland, most White-faced lagoons, farm dams, All types of wetland, farm wetlands including intertidal flats; adapts 2 Heron inland/coastal, paddocks/lawn dams/fields, lakes, urban parks to most urban areas 2 Rivers, estuaries, swamps - Nankeen Night forested or vegetated margins, Wetter parts of Aus, tropics, Swamps, intertidal flats, estuaries, rivers, 3 Heron Rare visitor to Tas urban parks (nocturnal) creeks, large ornamental ponds 1 Swamps, estuaries, lagoons, farm dams, rare but regular Subcoastal and inland (eastern Shallows of wetlands, flooded pasture, 4 Little Egret visitor to Tas (Autumn-Winter) states), major wetlands intertidal mudflats 1 Swamps, estuaries, lagoons, farm dams, rare but regular All types of wetland, urban Floodwaters, rivers, shallows of wetlands, 5 Great Egret visitor to Tas (Autumn-Winter) lakes, shallow bays intertidal mudflats 1 Major wetlands, especially (but not necessarily) among 6 Cattle Egret Pastures, paddocks, farm dams livestock, coastal Tas Pasture, shallows of freshwater wetlands 2

72 | P a g e

Australasian Most wetlands with dense reed 7 Bittern beds, rushes Reedbeds Reedbeds, swamps, streams, estuaries 1 Little Pied Freshwater lakes, rivers etc, Ornamental ponds, farm dams, 8 Cormorant Coastal lagoons and estuaries rivers, estuaries, urban parks Most aquatic 3 Black-faced Largely marine, coastal seas, Marine, offshore rock stacks, islets, outer 9 Cormorant islands, inlets Rocky coasts, reefs, headlands harbour beacons 3 Little Black Coastal seas, estuaries, inlets, Large inland waterways and 10 Cormorant inland lagoons, rivers rivers, marine habitats also Most estuarine and inland aquatic habitats 2 Inland lakes, rivers, farm dams, Freshwater wetlands, estuaries 11 Great Cormorant coastal bays, Tamar River and bays All coastal and inland aquatic habitats 2

RAILS, CRAKES, HENS, COOT (Order: Gruiformes) Freshwater/brackish Prefers coastal regions; grassy, reedy or marshlands with dense reeds, Late summer at drying swamps, thickly vegetated areas usually close to 1 Lewin's Rail rushes, cutting-grass overgrown ditches water, offshore islands 1 Prefers stillwater swamps, Well-vegetated freshwater swamps; Australian Spotted fresh or brackish with dense estuary margins and brackish lagoons with 2 Crake margins of rushes etc Late summer at drying swamps saltmarsh 1 Well-vegetated freshwater to brackish 3 Baillon's Crake N/A Late summer at drying swamps swamps 1 Freshwater/brackish marshlands with dense reeds, 4 Spotless Crake rushes, other vegetation Swamps Reedy and grassy freshwater swamps 1 Vegetated margins of lakes, 5 Purple Swamphen swamps, rivers Common at all wetland sites Swamps, marshy paddocks, urban lakes 1

73 | P a g e

Freshwater lakes, swamps, farm dams with dense reeds, Freshwater, usually near reeds or dense 6 Dusky Moorhen rushes, other vegetation Freshwater wetlands cover 2 Tasmanian Native- Grassy paddocks near swamps, 7 hen lakes, river flats Inland, wet pastures, ponds Grassy areas, farmland, usually near water 2 Fresh/brackish lakes, swamps, All freshwater wetlands, Swamps, reservoirs, fresh or brackish lakes, 8 Eurasian Coot reservoirs, farm dams shallow bays, saline lagoons estuaries, large garden ponds 1

SHOREBIRDS WADERS, GULLS, TERNS (Order: Charadriiformes) Estuarine, found at sandpits Coastal wader during summer 1 Bar-tailed Godwit and reservoirs months Intertidal flats, sandbanks 1 Coastal estuaries, mudflats, Coastal wader across north and 2 Whimbrel islands east Aus (mangroves/mudflats) Coastal estuaries, mudflats, mangroves 1 Coastal estuaries, mudflats, Coastal estuaries, mudflats, mangroves, 3 Eastern Curlew islands Coastal wader sandspits 1 Common Coastal and inland estuaries, Coastal wetlands, mudflats, 4 Greenshank mudflats, islands inland Estuaries, inland lakes, open swamps 1 Coastal, mudflats, beaches 5 Grey-tailed Tattler (rocky), north coast of Tas Major coastal wader sites Estuaries, mangroves, rocky coasts, reefs 1 Rocky/stony beaches with seaweed and other debris, Coasts with suitable habitat 6 Ruddy Turnstone north coast of Tas (suitable habitat unspecified) Rocky shores with seaweed 3 7 Sanderling N/A Coastal, sandy beaches Sandy coastal beaches; rare inland 3 All major wader sites, Coastal and estuarine inland shores; 8 Red-necked Stint Estuaries, mudflats sometimes inland saltworks 1 9 Curlew Sandpiper Estuaries, mudflats Coastal sites Coastal, inland, mudflats; saltworks 1

74 | P a g e

Sharp-tailed Coastal and inland wader sites, 10 Sandpiper N/A including Tas Widespread; coastal, interior wetlands 1 Common Coastal but also inland, north 11 Sandpiper N/A and east Aus Banks, rocks, sandy beaches 2 Seen in southern states, but most common on northern Aus 12 Terek Sandpiper N/A mudflats Mudflats, beaches, rare inland 1 13 Red Knot N/A Common coastal wader Tidal sands, mudflats, rare inland 1 Scarce visitor to south of Aus, 14 Great Knot N/A more common in north Tidal sands, mudflats, rare inland 2 Coastal wader sites, forages on Sandy beaches, estuaries, beaches, roosts on rocky Coastal; prefers sandy beaches, tidal flats 15 Pied Oystercatcher mudflats, coastal Tas headlands and reefs and estuaries 1 Rocky shores, reefs, headlands, Sooty Rocky islands, headlands, reefs, "any headland or reef in SE Aus Coastal; prefers rocky coastline, 16 Oystercatcher coastal Tas and in Tas" occasionally estuaries 3 Freshwater and brackish swamps, lagoons, rare in Tas (map suggests Derwent Estuary Marshes, shallow wetlands, rare Freshwater and saltwater marshes, flooded 17 Black-winged Stilt area) in Tas paddocks 1 Freshwater, saltwater marshes, tidal flats; Shallow, subcoastal saline ephemeral inland lakes where salinity is 18 Banded Stilt N/A lagoons of SE and SW Aus increasing 1 Estuaries, mudflats, reefs, Pacific Golden islands, NE Tas: Cape Portland Beaches, rocky shores, coastal and inland 19 Plover (S Tas: Orielton Lagoon) Coastal, wader sites, coastal Tas mudflats 1 Beaches, rocky shores, coastal and inland 20 Grey Plover N/A With other waders, coastal Tas mudflats 1 21 Mongolian Plover N/A N/A Coastal, rarely inland 3

75 | P a g e

Sandy coasts, mudflats, inland Sandy beaches, estuaries, wetlands, throughout Aus 22 Red-capped Plover saltmarshes, inlands lakes including Tas Estuaries, beaches; coastal and inland lakes 1 Estuaries, mudflats, beaches, Double-banded inland lakes and grasslands 23 Plover (winter visitor Tas) Coastal, (Bruny Island) Beaches, mudflats, grassland, bare ground 2 Ocean beaches and nearby dune systems, NE Tas: Coastal, beaches, dunes, Scamander, Mt William NP, stronghold in Tas (Bruny Island, 24 Hooded Plover eastern beaches Maria Island) Ocean beaches, rarely coastal lakes 2 Margins of shallow lakes, farm Inland, farm dams, salt pans, Black-fronted dams, sometimes tidal floodways, rarely seen at Freshwater lake margins, farm dams; rarely 25 Dotterel saltmarsh coastal sites tidal areas 2 Freshwater wetlands with dense rushes, grass tussocks, margins of swamps, rivers, 26 Latham's Snipe lakes Subcoastal wetlands Fresh wetlands, saltmarsh 1 Plains, open grasslands, paddocks, airfields, NE Tas: Mt William NP, Asbestos Range NP (now known as Narawntapu Inland, dry open plains, grassy 27 Banded Lapwing NP) areas (Hobart airport) Open grassland, bare plain and arable land 3 Paddocks, urban parks, lawns, 28 Masked Lapwing lagoon margins, estuaries Grasslands, wetlands, city parks Grassland, mudflats, urban park 2 Coastal, beaches, offshore islands, rubbish tips close to 29 Pacific Gull coast Southern coast of Aus and Tas Coastal, nearby rubbish tips 3 Coastal, islands, beaches, 30 Kelp Gull paddocks, refuse tips Coastal, SW Tas Coastal; often rocky shores 3

76 | P a g e

Inland, breed on ephemeral lakes, found throughout Aus 31 Silver Gull Coastal or inland waters including Tas Coastal, inland waters; farmland, urban 3 Coastal environments, rare Coastal and large inland inland found throughout Aus Coastal; also inland watercourses; saline, 32 Caspian Tern waters, lakes, rivers including Tas brackish lakes 2 Coastal, estuaries, tidal rivers, Coastal, urban beaches, coastal 33 Crested Tern islands, sometimes inland Tas Coastal seas, continental shelf 2 Oceanic, islands, Flinders White-fronted Island, uncommon winter Winter visitor to SE Aus, Oceanic; rocky reefs, sandspits and bars; 34 Tern visitor including Tas jetties, groynes 3 Coasts, inlets, coastal lagoons, Tas: NE and E coast lagoons, Coastal sites across E Aus, Coasts, estuaries; Aus birds breed on sandy 35 Little Tern inlets including Tas beaches and sandspits 3 Coastal lagoons, estuaries, inlets, sand spits, Tas: NE coast Coastal sites across S and W Coasts, estuaries; breed on sandy beaches 36 Fairy Tern beaches, inlets, lagoons Australia, including Tas and sandspits 3

SEABIRDS PENGUINS (Order: Sphenisciformes) PETRELS, PRIONS, SHEARWATERS, ALBATROSS (Order: Procellariiformes) GANNETS (Order: Suliformes)

77 | P a g e

BIRDS OF PREY KITES, EAGLES, HAWKS, HARRIERS (Order: Accipitriformes) Open woodlands, near lakes, Soars over open woodlands, plains, 1 Whistling Kite rivers, wetlands, (Tamar River) Found near water, rarer in Tas streams, swamps, seashores 2 White-bellied Sea- Coasts and islands, inland Coastal and subcoastal, inland Large rivers, fresh and saline lakes, 2 Eagle lakes, rivers, (Tamar River) along major river, lakes reservoirs, coastal seas, islands 2 Open country, coastal wetlands, reedbeds, pastures, Vegetated wetlands, damp Tall grass, reeds, rushes, crops and open 3 Swamp Harrier crops (Tamar River) paddocks, E and SW Aus water surfaces 2 Woodland, forest, well-treed Forest, woodlands, farmland city parks, throughout Aus 4 Brown Goshawk with trees, urban parks including Tas Most timbered areas 3 Wet forests, rainforests, other Rainforest, wet sclerophyll more open habitats, N and E 5 Grey Goshawk forests, NW Tas Aus including Tas Various forests, esp. coastal closed forest 3 Forest, woodland, gorges, Collared waterholes (N Aus), throughout 6 Sparrowhawk Forest, woodland, scrub Aus including Tas Most terrestrial habitats with trees 3 Open plains, forest, mountains, Wedge-tailed NE Tas: Asbestos Range NP, Mt Natural habitat, outback 7 Eagle William NP highways, Common in Tas Most habitats except closed forest 3 FALCONS, HOBBIES, KRESTELS (Order: Falconiformes)

78 | P a g e

Open country, grassy Roadside posts, small trees in woodland, paddocks, coastal open areas, throughout Aus Most land surface types except closed 1 Brown Falcon dunes including Tas forest 3 Open country with trees, towns, cities, NE Tas: Asbestos Most open forest, woodland and scrub 2 Australian Hobby Range NP, (Tamar River) Habitat unspecified types, also urban areas 3 Inland/coastal cliffs, gorges, estuaries and wetlands, NE Tas: Cliffs, escarpments, continental Most land types, especially cliffs and rocky 3 Peregrine Falcon Flinders Island Aus including Tas outcrops, rocky coastal islands 3 Open country, plains, farmland, Open areas, roadside verges, Most land surface types except dense 4 Nankeen Kestrel dunes, NE Tas: Flinders Island paddocks, southern half of Aus forest 3 OWLS, FROGMOUTHS (Order: Strigiformes; Caprimulgiformes) Wherever there are trees, Forest, woodland, parks, wooded suburbs to near-desert; 1 Southern boobook gardens and scrub throughout Aus including Tas Woodland, forest, scrub 3 Forest, woodland; caves, mature trees with Forest, woodland, parks and Tall wet forests; coastal Aus and hollows for roosting, nesting: by open, 2 Masked owl nearby open country Tas foraging areas 3 All wooded/forested areas (apart from rainforest); parks, Forest, woodland, parks and gardens; throughout Aus 3 Tawny frogmouth gardens with trees including Tas Open woodland 3 Any sizeable patch of native Australian owlet- Forest, woodland and scrub veg, inland areas; throughout 4 nightjar with mature old trees Aus including Tas Trees with hollows 3

79 | P a g e

LANDBIRDS KINGFISHERS (Order: Coraciiformes) Rivers and creeks with tree- 1 Azure Kingfisher lined banks Rivers, N and E Aus and Tas Rivers, creeks, mangroves 3 Laughing Kookaburra 2 [introduced] - PARROTS (Order: Psittaciformes) Coastal button-grass plains in SW Tas (wintering habitat on Coastal saltmarsh habitat, Breeds SW Tas in open forest copses in Orange-bellied mainland consists of low shrub breeds in W Tas (near heath; winters in SE mainland coastal 1 Parrot and saltmarsh habitats) Melaleuca) saltmarsh, dunes, damp grasslands 2 Blue-winged Grassy woodland, heathland, Coastal heath, inland, S Aus and Open forest, woodland, grassland, coastal 2 Parrot grassy paddocks Tas heath, saltmarsh 2 PASSERINES (Order: Passeriformes) Open areas with low ground Coastal sites, ponds, lakes, salt- White-fronted cover - wet or saline, coastal works, waste land, S Aus and Low veg in salty coastal and inland areas; 1 Chat Tas Tas crops 1 Grasslands, open plains, coastal Open country, native dunes, agricultural areas, 2 Richard's Pipit grasslands, wet heath, pastures throughout Aus including Tas Open country 3 Many habitats, wet forest edges Open forest, woodland, scrub, to urban parks, gardens, SE Aus Open forest, swamps, coastal areas, 3 Superb Fairywren gardens including Tas rainforest; gardens 2

80 | P a g e

Broader habitat preferences in Open areas with low ground Tas: coastal heath, alpine scrub, cover, coastal heathland, mountain road between Cradle 4 Striated Fieldwren button-grass plains, SE Tas Mtn and Strahan Damp coastal, alpine heaths; saltmarsh 1 Southern Emu- Swampy heathland, bogs, Coastal heaths, swamps, coastal 5 wren button-grass plains, SE Tas S Aus including Tas Coastal heath, swamps, dense cover 2 Open country near man-made structures, frequents swamps, Inland, city parks, airports, S 6 Welcome Swallow lagoons, rivers Aus including Tas All habitats near water 2 Reedbeds, other dense Clamorous Reed- vegetation near freshwater, N 7 warbler Tas N/A N/A 3 Reedbeds, verges of dense Reedbeds, other dense swamps, verges of other still vegetation near waterways, E and SW Aus and in 8 Little Grassbird freshwater/tidal marshes Tas Reeds, tussocks, swamp veg 2 Tall grass, swampy grassland, Grasslands, reedbeds, swamp Golden-headed usually near water, Tas: King edges, rank grass by roadsides, 9 Cisticola Island coastal/subcoastal Long grasses 2 Forest, woodland, parks and Breeds in closed and tall open forest; some Dry woodlands, gardens, open gardens during winter, SE and autumn-winter altitudinal dispersal to 10 Scarlet Robin country SW Aus including Tas more open locations 3 Wide range, forests, scrub, All forest types, parks, gardens, 11 Silvereye gardens, orchards subspecies found across Tas All types of habitat; orchards, gardens 3 Wide range, forests, woodland, coastal scrub, beaches, Forests, common throughout 12 Forest Raven roadsides, gardens Tas Prefers dense eucalypt forest 3 PHEASANTS (Order: Galliformes)

81 | P a g e

Wet rank grassland, swamps, Grasslands, crops, heath, stubble, thick pastures, NE Tas: roadsides and trails, coastal and Dense grassland, near or at edge of open 1 Brown Quail Flinders Island, Frecinet NP subcoastal Aus including Tas forest 2

Note: a rating of 1-3 has been assigned to all birds on the principle that, 1 = habitat that involves saltmarsh, swamps, intertidal, mudflats; 2 = habitat that involves coastal, waterways, beaches, less saline; 3 = least associated with saltmarsh-like habitats, e.g., closed forests, gardens, ponds, rocky islands etc.

References Simpson, K., and Day, N., 2010. Field guide to the birds of Australia. CSIRO Publishing, Australia.

Thomas, R., Thomas, S., Andrew, D. and McBridge, I. 2011. The complete guide to finding the birds of Australia 2nd Ed. CSIRO Publishing, Australia.

Watts, D., 2002. Field Guide to Tasmanian Birds. New Holland Publishers, Australia.

82 | P a g e