Vegetation 4.5 Identifying Regions of Related Wetlands 4.5.1 Consanguineous Wetlands 4.5.2 Domains 5

ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE OF WETLANDS IN THE PERTH TO BUNBURY REGION

Volume 1: Main Report Volume 2: Appendices This volume contributes to the State Water Planning series of documents published by the Western Australian Water Resources Council.

Other titles in this series are: 1. Surface Water Resources Assessment in Western Australia A Strategy for the Future 2. Surface Water Resources Assessment in Western Australia Background Report by the Working Party 3. Promoting the Efficient Use of Water Resources Through Management of Demand 4. A Strategy for Water Allocation in the Perth-Bunbury Region Discussion Paper 5. A Strategy for Water Allocation in the Perth-Bunbury Region Working Paper 6. Recreational Opportunities of River Reaches and Wetlands in the Perth-Bunbury Region

Lnquiries concerning these documents should be directed to the Executive Officer, Western Australian Water Resources Council. State Water Planning

ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE OF WETLANDS IN THE PERTH TO BUNBURY REGION

Volume 1: Main Report

Report to: Western Australian Water Resources Council John Tonkin Water Centre, 629 Newcastle Street, LEEDERVILLE WA 6000

by: LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalmer Environmental Consultants, 181 York Street, SUBIACO WA 6008.

7th December 1987 LSC Ref: 31 15 Report No. R164 O Western Australian Water Resources Council 1987 Published by the Western Australian Water Resources Council John Tonkin Water Centre 629 Newcastle Street LEEDERVILLE WESTERN AUSTRALIA 6007 Telephone (09) 420 2928

Publication No. WRC 4/87 ISBN for complete set of 2 volumes: 0 7244 6895 1 ISBN for this volume: 0 7244 6903 6

STREAMLINE ABSTRACT ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE OF WETLANDS IN THE PERTH TO BUNBURY REGION Reviews wetland classitication schemes developed internationally, nationally and for Western Australia and selects a scheme for classifying wetlands on the basis of landform and water characteristics, and for identifying regions of related wetlands. Reviews evaluation systems for wetland assessment and develops criteria and a procedure for assessing conservation values of wetlands. Describes the application of the classification and assessment procedures in a pilot study and assesses their applicability. Provides a preliminary identificationof environmentally significant wetlands in the Perth to Bunbury region based on the current knowledge of selected wetland experts.

Keywords: Wetlands, Classification, Appraisal, Conservation, Ecosystems, Water Resources Planning, Western Australia.

WAWRC, Perth, 1987, ISBN 07244 6895 1, Western Australian Water Resources Council Publication No. 4/87: Vol 1, ISBN 0 7244 6903 6, viii 74 p, 15 Tables, 14 Figures. Vol2, ISBN 0 7244 691 1 7, vi 210 p, 15 Tables, 16 Figures. 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background and Rationale of Approach 1.2 Structure of Repon 1.3 Acknowledgements 2. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 3. THE APPROACH TO ASSESSING WETLANDS IN THE DARLING SYSTEM 3.1 Global and Regional Perspective of Wetlands 3.2 Definition of Wetland 3.3 The Requirements for Wetland Evaluation 4. CLASSIFICATION OF WETLANDS 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Wetlands Classification Schemes-A Review 4.3 The Wetland Classification Scheme Adopted in This Study 4.4 Classification of Wetland Vegetation 4.5 Identifying Regions of Related Wetlands 4.5.1 Consanguineous Wetlands 4.5.2 Domains 5. CRITERIA FOR WETLAND EVALUATION 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Wetland Evaluation Systems-A Review 5.3 Criteria Adoptedin this Study 5.4 Evaluating the Criteria 6. THE ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE 6.1 Introduction 6.2 Assessing Wetland Conservation Values 6.3 Considerations in Implementing Wetland Assessment 7. APPLICATION OF THE PROCEDURE FOR WETLAND ASSESSMENT- A PILOT STUDY 7.1 Introduction 7.2 Classification of Wetlands in the Lake Joondalup-Walyunga Transect 7.3 Status of Vegetation of Wetlands in the Lake Joondalup-Walyunga Transect 7.4 Conservation Value of Wetlands in the Lake JoondalupWalyunga Transect 7.5 Applicability of the Assessment Procedure 8. PRELIMINARY IDENTIFICATION OF SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS IN THE DARLING SYSTEM 8.1 Introduction 8.1.1 Background 8.1.2 Approach 8.2 Identification of Related Wetlands in the Darling System 8.2.1 Regional Setting 8.2.2 Consanguineous Wetlands in the Darling System 8.2.3 Wetland Domains in the Darling System 8.3 Assessment of Selected Wetlands REFERENCES GLOSSARY I- I- -

List of Tables

Page Table 1 Major Wetland Types Based on Water Longevity and Landform (after C. A. Semeniuk, 1987b) 22 Table 2 Wetland Types-Definition and Origin of Terms 23 Table 3 Comparison of Wetland Terms used in this Report with Established Classifications 25 Table 4 Classification of Water Salinity Based on Total Dissolved Solids (after C. A. Semeniuk, 1987b) 26 Table 5 Classification of the Consistency of Water Quality- Definition and Origin of Terms 27 Table 6 Wetland Categories According to Scale (after C. A. Semeniuk, 1987b) 28 Table 7 Categories of Wetland Vegetation Based on Extent of Cover and Internal Organisation (after C. A. Semeniuk etal., 1987) 29 Table 8 Scalar Terms used to Describe Vegetation (after C. A. Semeniuk et al., 1987) 30 Table 9 Examples of Wetland Vegetation Types Classified by the Scheme of Semeniuk et al., 1987 3 1 Table 10 Criteria for Assessing Conservation Value of a Wetland 32 Table 11 Summary of Classification and Assessment of the Wetlands along the Lake JwndalupWalyunga Transect 34 Table 12 Description of Geomorphic Units in the Darling System (after C. A. Semeniuk, 1987a) 40 Table 13 List of Consanguineous Wetland Suites Correlated with Main Geomorphic Units of the Darling System (after C. A. Semeniuk, 1987a) 41 Table 14 List of Selected Wetlands in the Darling System with Assessment of Significance 43 Table 15 Preliminary List of Wetlands of Regional to International Significancein the Darling System 49 List of Figures

Page Figure 1 Location map (after C. A. Semeniuk. 1987b) 5 1 Figure 2 Conceptual summary of the suggested (and partly implemented) components of this study 52 Figure 3 Conceptual summary of the approach to wetland evaluation 53 Figure 4 Broad categories of wetland systems (after C. A. Semeniuk, 198%) 54 Figure 5 Wetland components for use in classification (after C. A. Semeniuk, 1987b) 55 Figure 6 Plan geometry of wetlands (after C. A. Semeniuk, 1987b) 56 Figure 7 Histograms illustrating techniques for assessing the conservation value of wetlands utilising 15 criteria, each scored on a scale of 1-5 (afterLSC, 1985) 57 Figure 8 Location of the Lake Joondalup to Walyunga wetland transect 58 Figure 9 Lake Jwndalup to Wdyunga wetland transect A. Categories of wetlands B. Status of vegetation 59 Figure 10 A. Histograms illustrating the technique for 'first tier' assessment of the conservation value of selected wetlands in the Lake JoondaluvWalyun~a- transect 60 B. Notes on interpretation of histograms 61 Figure 11 Regional setring 62 Figure 12 Selected examples of some consanguineous suites of wetlands (after C. A. Semeniuk, 1987a) 63 Figure 13 Distribution of the consanguineous wetland suites in domains throughout the Darling System (after C. A. &meNuk, 1987a) 64 Figure 14 Location of selected significant wetlands in the Darling System 65

vii 1. Introduction

1.1 Background and Rationale of of a wetland. The pilot study also highlighted the Approach need for more information on wetland vegetation types and fauna usage of wetlands. The Western Australian Water Resources Council (WAWRC), in conjunction with the Water The study was therefore redirected to: Authority of Western Australia (WAWA), has (a) provide information on the regional distribu- initiated a study of wetlands to facilitate the tion of wetland types (based on the selected responsible planning and allocation of water classification system) as input to the evalu- resources in the Perth to Bunbury Region. The ation of regional significance of wetlands; objective of the study was to assess the (b) produce a preliminary wetland vegetation environmental and recreational significance of classification system to provide more infor- the rivers and wetlands to provide a foundation mation to augment the wetland classification. and methodology for systematically introducing environmental and recreational demands into A need was also identified for further investiga- future strategic water planning. LeProvost, tion on fauna use of wetlands, but this was not Semeniuk & Chalmer, Environmental Con- undertaken as part of the present study. sultants (LSC), were invited to participate in the The results of these studies, together with Tasks study by providing input on environmental/ 1.2 and 3 above, led to development of an overall conservation aspects in order to identify wetlands approach to wetland assessment. This approach of significant conservation values in the Perth to involves developing an information base on wet- Bunbury region (alternatively referred to in this lands in the Darling System and an evaluation of report as the Darling System) (Figure 1). wetland conservation values by applying assess- LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalmer identified the ment criteria. The components of this approach following aspects needing investigation to allow are conceptually summarised in Figure 2. identification of wetlands of environmental significance: The studies show the complexity of wetland types in the region, the current paucity of information (1) development of a classification system for on many of the wetlands, and the high level of wetlands of the Darling System; technical expertise required to make a valid (2) development of a procedure (evaluation sys- assessment of conservation significance. These tem) for assessment of the conservation value factors, together with cost and time constraints, of wetlands; meant that it was not possible to rigorously apply (3) application of the classification and assess- the approach developed during the study to all ment procedures in a pilot study of selected wetlands in the Darling System for Task 4 - wetlands to determine their applicability and identification of environmentally significant practicality; wetlands. (4) preliminary identification of environmentally A preliminary exercise was therefore undertaken significant wetlands in the Darling System. to identify significant wetlands on the basis of A Steering Committee on Water Resources Plan- currently available information. A number of ning for the Environment and Recreation was experienced workers on wetlands in the State established to monitor the progress of these were invited to identify the most environmentally studies. significant wetlands in the Darling System on the basis of their knowledge and existing inform- Tasks 1,2and 3 were initially undertaken and the ation, using the assessment criteria developed in results and conclusions reviewed in order to refine this study as a guideline or a framework. the approach to the identification of significant wetlands in the Darling System. Application of the classification and evaluation 1.2 Structure of Report systems to selected wetlands in a pilot study The report structure is based on the conceptual showed that both were practical and workable and approach to wetland evaluation shown in Figure could be used to identify significant wetlands. 2. However, the Steering Committee believed rhar there were some difficulties in scoring assessment Section 1 outlines the background, objectives, criteria which related to the regional significance and approach to the study. Section 2 presents a

LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalmer 1 summary of the results, conclusions and recom- 1.3 Acknowledgements mendations. The following groups and individuals contributed Section 3presents a perspective on wetlands and to the assessment of significant wetlands in the details the approach to undertaking an assess- Darling System: ment of wetlands in the Darling System. Section 4 reviews wetland classification Dr J. Davis (Murdoch University) schemes developed overseas, nationally and Dr D. Edward (University of Western locally, and proposes a system for classifying Australia) wetlands in the Darling System and for Mr R. Jaensch (Royal Australasian identifying regions of related wetlands. Ornithologists Union) Section 5 reviews wetland evaluation systems Mr J. Lane (Depamnent of developed overseas and in Australia and proposes Conservation and Land criteria for assessing the values of wetland Management) resources in the Darling System. Dr N. Marchant (WA Herbarium) Section 6 outlines a procedure for applying these criteria in order to assess wetland conservation Dr T. Riggert (Wetland Consultant) values and identify wetlands of outstanding sig- Chris Semeniuk (VCSRG Pty Ltd) nificance in the Dading System. Dr V. Semeniuk (LSC) Section 7 gives the results of the application of Dr A. Tingay (Wetland Consultant) these classification and assessment procedures in Botany Depament University of Western a pilot study of wetlands in a transect from Lake Group Australia Joondalup to Walyunga, and assesses the practical applicability of the methods. Ken Youngson (Ninox Wildlife Consulting) Section 8 uses the classification system adopted for the study to identify regions of related wet- The following contributed to the Reference Panel lands in the Darling System and identifies, in a on Water Resources Planning for the Environ- preliminary fashion, the wetlands in these regions ment and Recreation: which are considered on the basis of available Dr J. Arnold (Environmental Protection information to be of outstanding (international or Authority) national) conservation significance. Mr J. Blyth (Depamnent of The studies which formed the basis of this report Conservation and Land are presented in detail in appendices, and pub- Management) lished collectively in Volume 2, copies of which are available from the Western Australian Water Mr D. Everall (State Planning Resources Council. Commission) Appendix 1: Classification of Wetlands; Mr R. Harvey (Water Authority of Western Australia) Appendix 2: Regions of Related Wetlands in the Darling System, Southwestern Prof. A. J. McComb (University of Western Australia; Australia) Appendix 3: The Classification of Wetland Mr R. Polglaze (Conservation Council) Vegetation; Mr B. Sadler (Water Authority of Appendix 4: Guidelines for the Assessment of Western Australia) Wetland Conservation Values; Mr P. Sharp (Department of Sport and AppendixS: Application of the Procedure for Recreation) Assessment of the Conservation Value of Wetlands in the Darling Much of this report, particularly on the classifica- System. tion of wetlands and on the regions of related wetlands, is based on research undertaken and The report necessarily contains some technical funded by Chris Semeniuk of VCSRG Pty Ltd. and specialised vocabulary used to describe wetland features. These are defined wherever The report was produced by Dr. V. Semeniuk possible, and a Glossary has been included to with editorial assistance from Ian LeProvost and assist readers. Karen Majer.

2 LeProvos~Semeniuk & Chalmer 2. Summary and Conclusions

This study has achieved the following objectives: related wetlands. The vegetation classification system developed by Semeniuk et al. (1987). was (1) developed, and tested in a pilot study, a clas- considered to provide useful additional sification of wetland types in the Darling description to augment the wetland classification. System; The evaluation system was based on the approach (2) produced a map of wetlands in the Darling of Semeniuk (1985) and LeProvost, Semeniuk & System to show the distribution of related Chalmer (1981, 1984, 1985). The assessment is wetlands in domains as a basis for based on sixteen criteria which identify the major determining the regional significance of resources and values of a wetland. The wetland is particular wetlands; scored on a scale of one to five for each criterion. (3) developed a procedure (evaluation system) A high score for a criterion indicates that the for assessing wetland conservation values wetland has a high value for that resource or use. and identifying significant wetlands, and Assessment of the conservation value of the wet- tested this procedure in a pilot study; land is based on these scores - a high score on several criteria clearly indicates that the wetland (4) provided a preliminary listing and map of is of outstanding value but a high score on a single wetlands in the Darling System which are criterion also highlights that the wetland has a known to a group of wetland experts to be of component that is of significance. significant conservation value on the basis of currently available information. The wetland classification and evaluation systems adopted in this study have been developed The study has not identified all wetlands in the specifically for wetlands of southwest Western Darling System with values for conservation, but Australia. Application of the assessment has developed the methodology to achieve this. procedure in a pilot study on a range of wetland The recommended approach to identifying types along a transect between Lake Joondalup wetlands of significant conservation value is and Walyunga showed that it is workable, can be based on a two-tier or filter system. The first tier rapidly applied and can highlight significant assessment identifies wetlands of outstanding wetlands in a selected region. Specifically: significance, and the second tier further evaluates (a) the wetland classification system results in those wetlands not identified as outstanding in the the production of useful working maps that first tier to determine management priorities. identify wetland categories in terms of type, Based on a review of overseas, national and local size and shape; scientific literature on wetland classification and (b) the vegetation classification system provides environmental assessment, the evaluation system site-specific descriptions which can add to the which is conceptually summarised in Figure 3 is wetland classification and assist in evaluating recommended as the most appropriate method for the status of a wetland; the first tier evaluation. The approach involves: (c) identification of related wetland types in (i) establishing an information base on: domains provides a regional perspective of types of wetlands (classification), the distribution of wetlands as a basis for regional distribution of the wetland types, evaluation of their regional significance; wetland vegetation, and (d) assessment of a wetland based on criteria use of wetlands by fauna; which identify: (ii) using these data as a basis for an evaluation regional significance, system which uses a range of criteria to assess unique landforms, biota or other natural the values of the wetland resources and features, and identify significant wetlands. important social, recreational, educational, The wetland classification scheme of C.A. scientific1 research or wildlife habitad Scmeniuk (1987a. b), based on the primary sanctuary resources, criteria of landform and water characteristics, was allows evaluation of the wetland resources selected as the basis for classifying wetlands of and identification of important resources or the Darling System and identifying regions of values: (e) significant wetlands can be recognised on the also affect the value of that wetland as a represen- basis of one or more criteria by assigning a tative of its type. score (or rating) to a wetland for each crite- Because of this complexity, it is clear that assess- rion; ment of a wetland must be based on a range of (0 identification of the criteria which interdisciplinary information provided by work- contributed to the assessment of the wetland ers with experience in the particular fields such as as significant (e.g. socialhecreational values, geomorphology, flora and fauna. naturflscientific values, education/research At present, inadequate data are available to values) could provide input for determining permit rigorous assessment of all wetlands in appropriate future management priorities. the Darling System using the recommended The study has highlighted the complexity of any approach. For many wetlands, vimdy no information is available. Further research is approach to wetland assessment, and the paucity of information available. needed, especially in the areas of wetland vegetation classification and fauna use of The wetlands of the Darling System encompass a wetlands. wide variety of types which differ in geomorphic This study has provided a preliminary setting, origin and maintenance, and therefore in identification of significant wetlands. Rigorous ecologic function. Many of the wetlands are na- and reliable assessment will require: tionally unique. The variety of types means that: establishment of an expert multidisciplinary wetlands in a given locality cannot ne- team; cessarily be considered as representative of regional field survey of the wetlands; the region; application of the assessment criteria and ap- even wetlands of the same geomorphic type proach described in this report to assess each vary in terms of habitat and therefore the wetland; flora, fauna and human uses they support. identification of the significant or outstand- The current status of a wetland in terms of the ing wetlands, known to date, on maps to be nature and degree of impact of human use will used by planners.

LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalrner 3. The Approach to Assessing Wetlands in the Darling System

3.1 Global and Regional 3.2 Definition of Wetland Perspective of Wetlands The term wetland encompasses a range of types of wetland systems (Figure 4). Definitions adopted Wetlands, as inundated, wet or waterlogged areas in the international literature cover a wide range of the earth's surface, are common features when of concepts (see Appendix 1). Many of these defi- viewed globally. However, examination on nitions are not directly applicable to the types of subcontinental, regional and parochial scales wetlands which occur in Western Australia. The shows that wetlands vaty from area to area in defmition adopted for the purposes of this report terns of physiography (physical geography), is: origin, vegetation and a multitude of soil, water quality and other environmental features. It is 'Areas of seasonally, intermittently or permanently important to recognise that a wide variety of waterlogged soils or inundated land, whether natural or otherwise, fresh or saline, e.g. waterlogged wetland types occur, and that wetlands in soils, ponds, billabongs, lakes, swamps, tidal flats, different areas cannot necessarily be compared. estuaries, rivers and their hibulaties'. Even on a local scale, different wetlands and (Wetlands Adviso~yCommittee, 1977) wetland systems often fulfil very different functions, and any attempt to assess the However, artificial wetlands were not included in conservation significance of wetlands must take the scope of the study. this variety of types and functions into account. The wetlands of the Darling System in south- 3.3 The Requirements for western Australia (Figure 1) are dominated by a Wetland Evaluation variety of types which include lakes, swamps, marshes, fens, meadows, rivers/streams and estu- The approach to assessment of the conservation aries. These wetlands occur in thtee main settings: value of wetlands in a region should be carried out in three stages (LSC, 1985): on a dissected plateau; (i) wetlands should be classified to identify the on a sandy coastal plain; types of wetlands and provide a basis for assessment of the wetland resources; within an estuarine framework. (ii) criteria should be developed to assess the The main similarity between the wetlands of conservation significance of these re- southwestern Australia and elsewhere in sources; and Australia is the presence of river/stream wetlands on the dissected plateau. Many of the wetlands (iii) a procedure should be developed to imple- that occur on the sandy coastal plain and ment the assessment of the conservation associated with estuaries tend to be nationally value of the wetlands. unique, because of the geomorphic setting, This approach allows identification of wetlands stratigraphy (geological strata) and origin of units with a high value for one or more reasons (crite- on the Swan Coastal Plain, and consequent ria). A wetland which is assessed as significant on differences in their soils, vegetation and fauna. the basis of several criteria is clearly of outstanding conservation value. However, a wetland In consequence, much of the research on wetlands which is assessed as beiig significant for even elsewhere in Ausualia and the world is not strictly one criterion may have an important role, and this applicable in detail to wetlands of southwestem must be considered in future management. Australia, although the philosophies of approach to wetland assessment and conservation may be The stages of the approach identified above are relevant. discussed in detail in the following sections.

LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalmer ~ -~

4. Classification of Wetlands

4.1 Introduction vegetation, water pcrmanence, water quality and occurrence of peat. Classification of rivers1 A classification scheme provides the necessary streams has often been based on geomorphology basis for assessing individual wetlands or wetland and water quality. systems within the context of the overall wetland resources of the region. An appropriate classifica- Classifications have been developed specifically tion scheme can provide: for wetlands of southwestern Australia, including the Darling System, notably by Riggert (1966) (i) a framework and nomenclature for describ- who identified wetland types used by avifauna, ing the wetland and its resources; Tingay & Tingay (1976) and the Wetlands (ii) a basis for assessing the regional Advisory Committee (1977) who developed significance of a wetland according to limnological systems, and C.A. Semeniuk whether the type is regionally widespread or (1987b) who used landform and water restricted in distribution and whether a characteristics.These classification schemes were wetland type is representative of a region; developed for specific purposes and all serve to illustrate the variety and complexity of wetland (iii) a basis for making preliminary assessments types in the region. of a wetland's likely ecological functions and value for particular human uses; and Review of both overseas and Australian wetland classification schemes (Appendix 1) has shown (iv) a basis for defining regions of related wet- that, to date, most have not enabIed adequate lands ('consanguineous wetland suites') to categorisation of the variety of wetlands in the give a regional perspective to assessment. Darling System from a geomorphic (landform) or In order to develop a classification scheme for habitat perspective. The preferred system for wetlands of the Darling System, a desk study was classification of wetlands in this area is the undertaken to: approach of C.A. Semeniuk (1987b) which is described below. review wetland classification systems developed overseas, nationally and locally to determine which, if any, are applicable to this study; and 4.3 The Wetland Classification Scheme Adopted in This Study select and describe a wetland classification system to be used in this study. C.A. Semeniuk (1987b) proposed a wetland classification scheme based on the primary criteria of The results and conclusions of C.A. Semeniuk water permanence and the shape of the "water (1987a), which were based on extensive field container", i.e. cross-sectional landform geome- surveys and analysis of aerial photographs, were try (basin, channel or flat). This system is de- reviewed to define regions of related wetlands in scribed in detail in Appendix 1. the Darling System. The classification allows recognition of seven main wetland types flable I), which appear to 4.2 Wetland CIassification parallel habitat delineation and ecologic function. Schemes - A Review The terms proposed for these basic wetland types are: A number of wetland classification schemes have been developed by workers overseas and . permanently inundated basin LAKE nationally (e.g. Martin er al., 1953; Rutmer, . Seasonally inundated basin SUMPLAND 1953; Hutchinson, 1957; Goodrick, 1970; Bayly . Seasonally waterlogged basin DAMPLAND & Williams, 1973; Cowling, 1977; Cowardin er . permanently inundated channel RIVER al., 1979; Briggs, 1981; Ivanov, 1981; Jacobs, . Seasonally inundaled channel CREEK 1983; Wetzel, 1983; Paijmans ef al., 1985). . seasonally inundated flat FLOODPLAIN Classification schemes have used a number of Seasonally waterlogged flat PALUSPLAIN different approaches, e.g. biological, chemical, physical, geological, genetic (based on origins) Table 2 gives the definition and origin of these terms. Table 3 compares these terms with those and geomorphic. The features most often used in previously established in the literature. classification of "basin" wetiands have been

6 LeProvos~Semeniuk & Chalmer BY the use of "descriptors" which are adjectives categories of wetland vegetation based on the that describe water characteristics (salinity and primary criteria of cover (full, patchy or consistency or variability) and landform (shape peripheral) and internal organisation (homo- and size of the wetland) (Fig. 5), the classification geneous, zoned or heterogeneous). These types encompasses most of the wetland types in the were informally named Type A. Type B, etc. Darling System. Descriptive terms for categories (Table 7). shown in Figure 5 are defined in Table 4 Additional descriptors add information about the (salinity), Table 5 (consistency), and Table 6 scale of the vegetation (terns used to describe sc- (scale). Terms for describing wetland shapes ale are defined in Table 8), and the predominant (plan geometry) are illustrated in Figure 6. structural form or structural floristic component Vegetation is not used as a primary wetland (e.g. forest, scrub, heath) (according to Specht, characteristic in the classification, but it can be. 1970). For example, the vegetation in Herdsman readily incorporated as an additional modifier to Lake can be. classified as macmscale Type A allow more detailed description of a wetland (see sedgeland. Other examples of the application of Section 4.4). the classification system are given in Table 9. This classification system has the advantages that This approach provides a descriptive it: classification of wetland vegetation that conveys is based on the two major features (water and size, structure, extent of cover, and organisation landform) which determine the existence of of the vegetation complex. wetlands; provides a framework for understanding the 4.5 Identifying Regions of various types of wetlands in the region, their Related Wetlands distribution and ecological function; . distinguishes a practicable number of wetland 4.5.1 ConsanguineousWetlands types with a minimum of field suweys; The wetland classification system (Section 4.3) . allows increasing description and des- pmvides a basis for identifying and mapping crimination of individual wetlands by adding related suites of wetlands to allow regional descriptors as more information becomes assessments of wetlands. The Darling System available; encompasses a wide range of wetland types, provides auseful basis for mapping, since the which vary in attributes of size, shape, water characteristics, stratigraphy (geological strata) various wetland types may be readily and vegetation. When the factors of geomorphic identified and mapped as categories; setting, origin and maintenance are common to a allows classification of the wetland even if it group of wetlands, a marked similarity is evident has been substantially altered by clearing of and wetland types can be seen to be related or vegetation or soil disturbance. consanguineous. For example, a system of closely The application of this classification system to related wetlands of similar size, shape, water selected wetlands in a pilot study of wetlands in a characteristics and soils, such as a chain of lakes, transect from Lake Joondalup to Walyunga in the may constitute a consanguineous suite. Darling System is described in Section 7.2. Other consanguineous wetlands may incorporate a variety of wetland types, such as a river and 4.4 Classification of Wetland associated creeks and floodplains, which are Vegetation related by causative factors. Characteristics of the vegetation of a wetland are The criteria used by C.A. Semeniuk (1987a) for important in establishing the ecological functions identifying con-sanguineous wetlands are: of the wetland and ecological linkages between (1) Wetlands occur in reasonable proximity to chains or series of wetlands. Semeniuk (1987b) each other, although proximity alone may proposed that wetland vegetation characteristics be no indication of wetland relationship as should be used as descriptors to elaborate the other factors such as geomorphic processes basic wetland classification. and hydrologic regime may become The most comprehensive classification of significant. wetland vegetation in the Darling System to date Similarity in wetland size and shape. is that of Semeniuk er al. (1987) (Appendix 3). (2) Semeniuk er al. (1987) recognised nine basic (3a) Recurring pattern of similar wetland form,

LeProvos~Semeniuk & Chalmer 7 i.e. a single wetland type predominates, or Vegetation is not used as a criterion to identify an assemblage of wetland types predomi- consanguineous wetlands. Vegetation responds to nate. physical and chemical factors, and may not be a primary causative factor of many wetland features. (3b) Heterogeneous pattern representing a spec- tral range of interrelated wetland forms, or 4.5.2 Domains an association of dissimilar, but genetically The term domain is used to convey the concept of related wetlands. the occurrence, in discrete areas, of consanguineous wetlands (C.A. Semeniuk, 1987a). (4) Similarity of hydrological dynamics (e.g. whether wetlands are recharged and main- Wetlands that occur in these discrete areas are tained by ponding, seepage, surface runoff, influenced by similar causative factors acting on groundwater rise). the areas to produce consanguineous wetlands. The recognition of domains rests on identifying (5) Similarity of water salinity. localities of consanguineous wetlands. The first (6) Similar stratigraphy and hence similar step in this procedure is to identify wetlands in the developmental history. same geomorphic setting. Thereafter it is necessary to isolate those tracts of landform that have (7) Similar origin, e.g. karstification (cave for- wetlands with similar geometry, size, spacing, mation). and disposition and appearance (phototones) on (8) Similar underlying causative factors, e.g. aerial photography. A domain boundary is drawn fluvial processes. around a set of consanguineous wetlands. Most of the features listed in the criteria result in The distribution of consanguineous wetlands in consanguineous wetlands because they are domains throughout the Darling System is interrelated factors that, when acting in concert, described in Appendix 2 and surnmarised in result in specific and similar wetland features. Section 8.2.

LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalmer 5. Criteria For Wetland Evaluation

5.1 Introduction purposes, or are not sufficiently rigorous in identifying criteria for assessing wetland In order to assess the conservation value or conservation values. potential of a wetland (or wetland system), it is necessary to determine the resources that the In Western Australia, procedures have been wetland contains, and which of these resources developed for assessing the environmental impact of proposed roads in wetland areas [Main Roads may be at risk due to alternate use, disturbance, or destruction of the wetland. The resources of a Department (MRD), 1982; Department of wetland include (but are not limited to): Conservation and Environment (DCE), 19841. In March 1985, the DCE, in conjunction with the . water, MRD, released guidelines for environmental landform; assessment of roadworks with the aim of creating vegetation; an awareness of the effects that road projects may fauna; have on the environment, and to enable assessment of the effects of individual projects. . human or social uses (including education Measures to minimise negative effects were and research). suggested, and there was a classification of Each of these resources needs to be characterised projects into categories based on degree of and described in such a way that its value can be environmental effects. However, the published assessed and compared between wetlands. guidelines by the MRD (1982) and the DCE (1984) do not provide criteria for assessing the The assessment of the social and scientific value vdue of a wetland. This is an important omission of any resourceis based onmany criteria, themost since the conservation value of a wetland is a significant of which include: major factor in impact assessment. regional significance is it regionally wide- (i) - The Western Australian Environmental spread and commonor is it restricted to local Protection Authority @PA) has recently released areas? draft guidelines for an environmental assessment (ii) are there unique landforms, biota or other procedure for wetlands based on scoring avariety natural features that are of statewide, na- of natural and human use attributes @PA, 1986). tional or international importance? These guidelines are a positive step towards raising awareness of wetland values and the need (iii) are there important social, recreational, edu- to rake these values into account in determining cational, scientific/research, or wildlife future management. However, the method of habitar/sanctuary resources? assigning scores to various wetland attributes In order to identify specific criteria upon which to implies that there is a standard 'ideal' wetland and base an assessment of the wetland resources of the appears to be oriented towards waterbird usage. Darling System, wetland evaluation schemes For example, scoring the percentage of emergent developed overseas, nationally and locally were vegetation cover, with the highest score for 40- reviewed. Assessment criteria were then devel- 60%. does not recognise the variety of wetland oped specifically for the local situation. types which exist. This is especially the case for comparing wetlands that occur in different geomolphic settings, and for comparing wetlands 5.2 Wetland Evaluation Systems with different vegetation formations even within - the same geomorphic setting. Ideally, a separate A Review question sheet and score sheet must be devised for Wetland assessment or evaluation systems have wetlands in each of the different physiographic been developed in various parts of the world (e.g. settings to address the wide variability in wetland Larson, 1976; Ratcliffe, 1977; Rabe & Savage, categories. The scoring also fails to highlight as 1979; Morgan, 1982; MacMiUan, 1983; Gilligan, significant, wetlands which may be partly 1984 Pressey. 1984. A review of these degraded but have an outstanding feature which is approaches, and the criteria on which they were sufficiently important to determine future based (Appendix 4). shows that none have been management of the wetland. As a result, certain universally accepted to date. Most approaches wetlands which receive a low (Category 4 and 5) have been developed for specific localities or score by this method have been identified as

LcProvost, Semeniuk & Chalmcr 9 significant by other workers (e.g. Roe Swamp, land and the criteria whichscored highly indi- Bollard Bullrush, Wright Lake, Careniup, cate the environmental/scientific/social as- Yangedi, Balanup). pects which are considered to be significant. Any assessment system which is to be used as a The disadvantages of the scheme are that it does basis for determining appropriate future uses and not include the criterion of "representativeness", management of a wetland must be rigorous and it does not specifically identify the importance of recognise the different values of a variety of wet- diversity of habitats in wetlands, and it does not land types, otherwise there is a risk of assi-ging explicitly identify degraded wetlands as areas of low status to important wetlands. The EPA guide- low priority (i.e. although "pristine" is a tern lines are a useful input towards developing such a used in the criteria, the explicit definition and system, but are not considered to be suitable in identification of "pristine" wetlands are not pro- their present form for the purposes of this study. vided). Semeniuk (1985) developed an evaluation system A proposed wetland evaluation system based on for Western Australian wetlands which was that of Semeniuk (1985), with modifications to applied to mangrove swamp systems (Semeniuk, accommodate the disadvantages of the scheme, is 1985), inland wetlands (LSC, 1985). estuarine outlined below. wetlands (LSC, 1981) and general ecosystems (LSC, 1984). The scheme was originally based on 15 criteria that included aspects such as regional 5.3 Criteria Adopted in This significance, use by resident or migrating fauna, Study socio-economic factors, heritage factors, use as a Criteria which can be used to evaluate a wetland, researchleducation resource, recreational values taking into account both natural values and cur- and wildlife sanctuary or habitatvalues. A scoring rent and potential uses, are listed in Table 10. The system was applied to assess the value of the criteria adopted in this study are based on those wetland for each of the criteria. Various experts in developed previously by LSC (1981,1984,1985) a given field can devise their own system of check and Semeniuk (1985). but have been modified to points appropriate to a given wetland to achieve a address the concepts of "representativeness" and score for the criterion that they are assessing. In its "diversity" of wetlands. philosophy of approach and use of varied criteria, the scheme is not too dissimilar to that of Larson The criteria listed in Table 10 allow preliminary (1976). Ten criteria are common to the evaluation identification of the range of potential values of systems of Larson (1976) and Semeniuk (1985). the wetland resources. The significance of a wetland can be assessed by allocating a score or The approach of Semeniuk (1985) and LSC rating to each criterion. The approach to evaluat- (1985) is considered to be the most appropriate ing the criteria is described below. basis for identifying wetlands of outstanding value in the Darling System. 5.4 Evaluating the Criteria The main advantages of the scheme of Semeniuk (1985) are: For a particular wetland, the criteria are scored by assessing the value of the wetland for each pur- it was developed on a local data base and is pose on a scale of 1-5 (Semeniuk, 1985). A rating directly applicable to the southwestern Aus- of: tralian region, particularly in its identification of the importance of wetlands to migrating 1 = not si,dficant fauna and use as a wildlife sanctuary; 2-4 = graded scale of moderate significance it can be applied to all types of wetlands 5 = high significance (rivers, basins and flats); For some criteria, these parallel a significance the scheme is fairly comprehensive and flex- ranking of: ible in its use of important, internationally recognised conservation criteria and allows I = local individual workers, expert in a particular 2 = parochial field, to construct a scoring system appmpri- 3 = regional ate for a given wetland; 4 = national the scoring system provides an overall assessment of the conservation value of a wet- 5 = international ,,: ..,,: ,. . , $>

LeProvosr, Semeniuk & Chalmer The 16 criteria presented in Table 10 are It is important to note that some criteria may be described in Appendix 4 in terms of some of the assessed on the basis of available information or aspects that need to be addressed in order to arrive field inspection of the wetland, but other aspects at a rating or score for the value of a wetland for will require advice from experts in particular each criterion. subject areas who have a regional knowledge and perspective.

LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalrner 6. The Assessment Procedure

6.1 Introduction (4) Construct a histograph of ratings values ver- sus criterion (see Fig.7). It is proposed that the evaluation system for this study should follow a two-tier approach or "filter (5) Assess the wetland on a preliminary basis system". The first tier identifies wetlands that are using the histograph. This is amplified be- outstanding or highly significant because of one low. or more outstandig natural or cultural values, The assessment of a wetland on the basis of the and the second tier is used to further evaluate the histograph rests on the premise that if one or more natural resource values of wetlands which did not criteria has a significance score of greater than 2 score outstandingly in the first assessment. then that wetland is moderately to highly signifi- The criteria listed inTable 10 have identified, in a cant to some component of the community. A preliminary fashion, the range of potential conser- wetland which ranks highly on several criteria vation values of the resources of a given wetland. would clearly be of high conse~ationvalue,but a The significance of a wetland may be determined high rating on a single criterion would also assign by giving a score or rating to each of these criteria a degree of significance to the wetland (seeFig.7). as outlined in Section 5.4. A wetland which The scoring procedure highlights that a given scores highly on several criteria would clearly be wetland has some component that is of signifi- of high conservation value, but a high rating on a cance and this should be critically examined. single criterion would also assign a degree of sig- Wetlands that score highly, even in one attribute, nificance because the wetland is important for at essentially have been "snared" by the first filter. least some purpose or to some sector of the community. Wetlands of outstanding value, based on These wetlands would then undergo a thorough one or more attributes, can therefore be recog- assessment to determine land management priori- nised in this "first tier" assessment. A wetland ties. Analysis of the histograph in terms of which which does not appear to be of outstanding sig- criteria contributed to the assessment of the wet- nificance on the basis of these criteria can be land as si,gificant (social/recreational values, further assessed in the "second tier" assessment. natural or scientific values, educational/research Such a wetland may still have important values values) could provide a basis for determining which warrant preservation, rehabilitation or appropriate future management priorities. management for particular purposes (e.g. recrea- If all criteria are assigned a score of less than2 and tion or education). the wetland does not appear to be of outstanding A method for "first tier" assessment of wetland significance on the basis of the first tier criteria conservation values is outlined here, and de- (see Fig. 7). then it can be assessed on the second scribed in more detail in Appendix 4. tier evaluation system. As a result of the second evaluation, a wetland might still be considered for 6.2 Assessing Wetland conservation, rehabilitation or management for a Conservation Values specific purpose. It is suggested that the following procedure for wetland assessment be adopted: 6.3 Considerations in (1) Identify wetland. Implementing Wetland (2) Assess the value(s) of the wetland by at- tempting to answer each of the questions Assessment listed as assessment criteria (see Section 5). Any attempt to implement the approachdescribed (Some criteria may be assessed on the basis above to wetland assessment must incorporate of available information or field inspection several factors: of the wetland. Other aspects will require are advice from experts in particular areas.) (i) For many wetlands insufficient data available for assessment. (3) Apply a rating to each criterion. A rating of 1 = not significant; 24 = graded scale of (ii) Many wetlands are already destroyed or moderate significance; 5 = high signifi- severely altered such that those remaining cance. (For some of the criteria, these paral- must in general be viewed as significant. In lel a ranking of local, parochial, regional, 1966 it was estimated that nearly half of the national and international signilicance.) wetlands of the Swan Coastal Plain had been

LeProvost, Scmeniuk & Chalmer destroyed through drainage and filling It should also be noted that all of the wetland clas- (Riggert, 1966). Development over the last sifications cited in Section 4.2 illustrate the com- 20 years has undoubtedly destroyed further plexity of wetland types. For example, since substantial areas of wetland. Thus the re- vegetation responds to variations in habitat, wet- maining wetlands acquire a greater lands of the same geomorphic type may contain conservation importance because of the quite different vegetation, in terms of structure depleted amount of wetland resources now and composition, because of locality, variable available. geomorphic history, vegetation historyldynam- ics, subtle variation in stratigraphy, soil and water (iii) There are conflicting demands for use of wetlands by social, government, develop relationships, and degree of human use and disturbance. Consequently, the following conclusions mental, educational and research groups. , are important in any consideration of wetland (iv) The perceived value judgement of a minor- conservation: ity group needs to be appreciated, but has to be integrated and balanced. A scientific (1) wetlands of the Darling System (Swan community, although a minority, may have Coastal Plain and Darling Plateau) are vari- information about a natural system such as able in type, origin and maintenance; to warrant its conservation, even though the (2) a suite of wetlands in a given locality cannot public is not aware of these values and does necessarily be considered as representative not necessarily share the same perspective. of the region; Equally, a minority group may place importance on a wetland in their area that the (3) each geomorphic setting contains its own wider conservation bodies do not necessar- suite of interrelated wetlands; ily agree with. Both value judgements are (4) even wetlands of the same geomorphic type valid, although they may need to be judged vary in terms of habitat and hence the flora, against community standards. fauna and human uses which they can sup- (v) Many of the decisions of today will have port; impact on generations of the future and such (5) the current status of a wetland in terms of decision. should not unduly pre-empt or nature and degree of impact of human use pre-determine the attitudes of and values of will affect the value of that wetland as a the future. representative of its type. (vi) Finally, although all the various criteria or It is therefore evident, both from the descriptions values of wetlands listed inTable 10 are im- of the assessment criteria and from the variability portant, some may be given different priori- in the wetland resources, that a wetland cannot be ties in certain circumstances. For example, adequately or rigorously assessed unless a range if a wetland is one of only a few remaining of interdisciplinary information is available. This as habitats for a rare or endangered species, conclusion should not be surprising since re- then that criterion alone may determine the searchers are now beginning to appreciate just conservation value and future management how complex wetlands systems are, and how of the wetland. Similarly, if there is a dem- wetlands perform a range of multifarious func- onstrated need for more open-water areas for tions. In effect, each of these functions has to be active recreation, thcn that criterion may assessed by an appropriate worker who has expe- rank high in determining a wetland's per- rience in the particular field related to the wetland ceived value. function or the specific wetland attribute. 7. Application of the Procedure for Wetland Assesssment - A Pilot Study

7.1 Introduction Five categories of vegetation cover were recognised: In order to assess the practicality and applicability of the wetland classification and assessment (I) natural vegetation present in wetland and procedures selected for use in this study, field natural vegetation present in surrounding surveys wen: undertaken to apply the procedures upland system; to a selected area of wetlands along a belt transect (11) natural vegetation present in wetland, sur- extending from Lake Joondalup to Walyunga in rounding upland vegetation partly modi- the Darling System (Fig. 8). The belt transect was fied or cleared; 5 km wide and 50 km long, and encompassed an (111) wetland vegetation partly modified or area that contains a wide variety of wetlands partly cleared, or with introduced species; representative of the different geomorphic units in the Darling System (Fig. 9). Selected wetlands (IV) natural vegetation present in wetland but along the transect were classified using the surrounding upland vegetation totally system of C.A. Semeniuk (1987b) (Section 4), the modified or cleared; status of the vegetation was noted, and (V) wetland vegetation totally cleared or de- conservation values were assessed by applying stroyed. the criteria described in Section 5. It should be The status of vegetation in wetlands along the noted that although the assessment procedure Lake Joondalup-Walyunga transect is shown in (scoring of selected criteria) was carried out for Figure 9b and thecategories are listed inTable 11. each wetland, the analysis of conservation significance was undertaken for only ten selected 7.4 wetlands. Time constraints precluded analysis of Conservation Value of conservation values for all wetlands in the Wetlands in the Lake transect and this was beyond the scope of the Joondalup - Walyunga survey, which was to evaluate the practical Transect application of the procedure. The wetlands in the transect were evaluated using The results of these assessments and an evalu- ten of the sixteen assessment criteria listed in ation of the applicability of the assessment proce- TablelO. Criteria not relevant to wetlands in this dure for identifying environmentally significant region and recreational values were not evaluated. wetlands in the Darling System are presented in Criteria 13 (Aboriginal Heritage) was not Appendix 5 and summarised below. developd in this study. It is considered to be an important aspect, however, and its omission 7.2 Classification of Wetlands in reflects time and budget constraints rather than the Lake Joondalup - low priority. Walyunga Transect The results of the assessment are presented in Table 11. Wetlands along the transect were classed as to geomorphic/habitat type. size, shape, water salin- For ten selected wetlands, the scores for the crit- ity and consistency of salinity (if known). The eria were plotted as histograms (Fig. 10) to allow results of the classification are presented in Table assessment of the conservation value of these 11 and Figure 9a. wetlands by themethod outlined in Section 6. The conclusions resulting from this assessment are 7.3 Status of Vegetation of presented in summary form as notes in Figure 10. Wetlands in the Lake Joondalup - Walyunga 7.5 Applicability of the Transect Assessment Procedure The pilot study of wetlands along the Lake Joon- The extent of native vegetation cover was dcter- dalupwalyunga transect indicated that: mined as a basis for evaluating the assessment criteria which depend on a pristine or semi-pristine (1) The classification scheme of C.A. Semeniuk environment [e.g. Criteria 6, 7, 11 (Table lo)]. (1987b) adoptcd in this study is workable

. . 1 ~Prnvoqt.Semcniuk & Chalmer and results in the production of useful also workable. Overall, the personnel in- working maps that show the different volved in the assessment procedure had wetland categories in the region in terms little difficulty in providing assessment in of the type Oake, sumpland, dampland, etc.), their area of expertise; size and shape. (3) The assessment procedure allowed identifi- (2) The application of the evaluation system cation of wetlands of significant conserva- adopted in this study to highlight outstand- tion value and highlighted the values/ ing wetlands indicates that the assessment resources which contributed to this procedure can be rapidly employed and is assessment.

LcProvosl, Scmcniuk & Chalmer 8. Preliminary Identification of Significant Wetlands in the Darling System

8.1 Introduction background information for this assessment but were not rigorously applied to each wetland.] 8.1.1 Background (iv) Identifying siaficant wetlands. A preliminary assessment was carried out to iden- In total, from the collective expen input, some tify those wetlands in the Darling System that are 185 wetlands or wetland systems were assessed. considered to be outstanding or significant on the basis of currently available information. Given the large number of wetlands, their extensive distribution throughout Darling System, Eleven groups or individuals expert in different the and the fact that workers in specific fields would and various maners of wetland ecology or envi- not familiar with aspects of wetlands, nor ronment were invited to undertake this appraisal. be aU would they have worked in or observed all the It must be emuhasised from the outset that the wetlands in the region, it is obvious that no resulting listing is preliminary and it is not worker couId contribute to an assessment of intended to dismiss those wetlands which were every wetland identified in this study. Each not highlighted. In many cases, insufficient wetland worker or group had knowledge or expe- information was available to make an assessment. rience of, on average, some 20 to 40 specific Wetlands which were not identified as significant wetlands, or wetland systems such as drainage in this study may later be found to have high basins. They were invited to assess these wetlands conservation values, or they may, in fact, be using a significance index of: degraded and/or not significant. international It is also important to note that although the assessment was based on the procedures national developed for assessment of wetland state conservation values (Sections 5 and 6), it was not rigorous. Only those wetlands personally known regional by one or more of these gloups or individuals parochial were assessed, and there was insufficient information to apply all the assessment criteria to local each wetland. If two-thirds of the wetland workers concurred on the significance of a wetland being greater than 8.1.2 Approach regional, then that wetland was highlighted as being regionally to internationally significant for The wetlands of the Darling System were as- the purposes of this preliminary listing. This does sessed by: not imply that the other wetlands should be considered unimponant. In some cases, one or two (i) Identifying regions of related wellands (consanguineous wetland suites) in he workers were familiar with a given wetland and Darling System. scored it highly, but the other nine or ten workers were not familiar with that wetland. Accordingly, (ii) Sys~cmaticallyworking through the maps although that wetland might rare as significant if of "domains" of related wellands. Each it were bener known, it was not identified as groupfindividual was asked to idcnrify, if significant in this listing. possible, at least one wetland with which they were familiar in each domain. Where a wetland system was identified as significant, there may be portions of the system known (iii) Assessing the conservation value of the to have high environmental value and other por- selected wctlands by asking each group/ tions which have become degraded. Identification individual to assess the wellmds with of specific significant areas was beyond the scope which they were familiar on the basis of of this study. their panicular area of expenisc and any other available information. [The assess- Thc rcsults of this assessment procedure are pre- ment critcria (TablclO) wcre providcd as scnted. 8.2 Identification of Related (5) Speanvood Dunes - Bassendean Dunes Wetlands in the Darling interface: System (6) Bassendean Dunes; (7) Bassendeanh'injarra Plain &ansitionzone or 8.2.1 Regional Setting Bassendean with fluvial features; A variety of regional physical features are impor- (8) Pinjarra Plain; tant in the development of wetland types and their distribution. These are: (9) Estuaries; geology, geomorphology and geomorphic (10) Coastal Plain rivers; processes; (1 1) Dandaragan Plateau; . climate; (12) Darling PlateauDandaragan Plateau inter- hydrology. face; Regional and local variation in these features can (13) Darling Plateau; produce variability of wetland types. The regional (14) Collie Basin. I setting for wetlands in the Darling System is F described in terms of these factors in Appendix 2, The wetland suites within these categories of geomorphic setting are listed in Table 13 and are 1 drawing on a literature review by C.A. Semeniuk (1987a). Figure 11 shows the major geomorphic described in terms of location, geomorphic setting, variety of wetlands, description of primary C units, geological features and geomorphic e elements of the Darling Region. The major wetlands in suite, stratigraphy and inferred origin imAppendix 2. .S geomorphic units are described in Table 12.

8.2.2 Consanguineous Wetlands in the 8.2.3 Wetland Domains in the Darling Darling System System Based on the criteria listed in Section 4.5.1, C.A The distribution of consanguineous wetlands in Semeniuk (1987a) recognised some 42 types of domains throughout the Darling System is consanguineous wetland suites in the Darling mapped in Figure 13. System. These suites were named according to a geographic locality where the given suite is best 8.3 Assessment of Selected developed. Examples of some consanguineous Wetlands wetlands are illustrated in Figure 12. on The results of the assessment of selected wetlands Ian Many of the suites correlate strongly with the in each of the wetland domains in the Darling as geomorphologic systems described by McArthur System are presented in Table 14. & Bettenay (1960) (Fig.ll), since the geometry for and water characteristics of wetlands in general A list of wetlands considered to be regionally to oes reflect geomorphic setting, geomorphic proc- internationally significant by the majority of the on- esses, hydrology and geomorphic history. The wetland workers who undertook the assessment is iwo wetland suites were therefore described in groups presented in Table 15, and the location of these and representative of the geomorphic elements and wetlands is shown in Figure 14. cers the interfaces between the elements. In all, there It is suggested that Table 14 should be used to gly, are 14 broad-scale categories geomorphic ele- nt if of pinpoint wetlands of significant conservation ments and their interfaces that provide the frame- as value on the basis of the assessment of the indi- work for the consanguineous wetland suites: from vidual wetland experts. Table 15 and Figure 14 west to east these are: should be used to highlight those significant wet- nifi- lands most workers are familiar with. It is worth (own (1) Quindalup Dunes; noting once more that wetlands not included in por- 3 Quindalup Dunes - Speanvood Dunes. or the listings in Table 14 or Table 15 may be found arion Quindalup Dunes - Yoongarillup Plain to be significant when more information becomes cope interface; available. At present, there is insufficient data on which to base a comprehensive assessment of (3) Spearwood Dunes; wetlands of the Darling System using the full : pre- (4) Yoongarillup Plain: range of assessment criteria.

LcProvost, Serncniuk & Chdrncr 17 REFERENCES

BATES. R.L., & JACKSON. J.A.. 1980: Glos- HAMMER. U.T.. 1986: Saline Lake Ecosystems sary of Geology. American Geological Insti- of the World. Dr W.Junk Publishers: 616p. tute. HUTCHINSON. G.E.. 1957: A Treatise on BAYLY. I.A.E., & WILLIAMS, W.D., 1973: Limnology. Vol. 1. Wiley & Sons. Inland Waters and Their Ecology. Loneman IVANOV, K.E., 1981: Water Movement in Mire- Cheshire. lands. Academic Press. BRIGGS, S.V., 1981: Freshwater Wetlands in JACOBS. S.W.L., 1983: Vegetation; in HAIGH, GROVES. R.H., (ed.). Ausualian Vegetation. C. (ed.), Wetlands in N.S.W. Parks and Wild- Cambridge University Press, London: 335- life: 14-19. 360. LARSON. J.S. (ed.), 1976: Models for evaluation COWARDIN, L.M., CARTER, V., GOLET, of freshwater wetlands. Univ. of Massachu- F.C., LAROE E.T., 1979: Classification of setts, Water Resources Research Centre, Publ. Wetlands and Deepwater habitats of the United No. 32. States. US Dept of the Interior. Fish and LePROVOST, SEMENIUK & CHALMER, Wildlife Service. 1981: Waterways Project - Halls Head Mandu- COWLING, S.L., 1977: Classification of the rah. Environmental Considerations. Rept to wetland habitats of waterbirds. Aust Mar. Sci. Feilman Planning Consultants Pty Ltd on be- Bull., 58. half of Panys Esplanade Ltd, Rept No. R015. LePROVOST, SEMENIUK & CHALMER, DAHL, E., 1956: Ecological salinity boundaries 1984: Environmental Management Proposals in poikilohaline waters. Oikos, 7: 1-21. for Land Disposal of Laporte Effluent to 1987, DAVIS, S.N., & DeWIEST, R.J., 1966 Hydmge- Environmental Review. Unpubl. rept to Binnie ology. John Wiley & Sons Inc.: 118. Pariners Pty Ltd on behalf of Public Works De- partment, Western Australia, Rept No. R065. DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND LePROVOST, SEMENIUK & CHALMER, ENVIRONMENT, 1984: Environmental 1985: The Impact of Proposed Roads on Wet- Assessment of Roadworks - Guidelines for lands in thePerth MetropolitanRegion. Rept to Local Authorities. Dept Conserv. Environ., Department of Conservation and Environment, West. Aust, Bull. No. 184: 12p. Western Australia, Rept No. R083. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AU- MacMlLLAN, L.A., 1983: Conservation status THORITY, 1986: Draft Guidelines for Wet- and value of Victorian rivers: Part 1: Method- land Conservation in the Perth Metropolitan ology. Water Studies Centre, Chisholm Insti- Area. Dept Conserv. Environ., Perth, West. tute of Technology (unpubl. draft report). Aust., Bull. No. 227. MAIN ROADS DEPARTMENT, 1982: Envi- FAIRBRIDGE, R.W., (ed.) 1968: The Ency- ronmental Assessment Manual, Urban Plan- clopedia to Geomorphology. Vol. 111. Dowden, ning Section. (Draft), MRD, West. Aust. Huchinson & Ross Inc. MARTIN, A.C., HOTKISS, N., UHLER, F.M., GILLIGAN, B., 1984: A Wetland Habitat & BOURNE, W.S., 1953: Classification of Assessment Scheme. Wetlands (Australia), Wetlands of the United States. US Dept of the 4:49-55. Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Spec. SC~. Rcp. Wildl. No. 20. GOLET, F.C., & LARSON, J.S., 1974: Classifi- McARTHUR, W.M., & BE?TENAY. E., 1960: cation of Freshwater Wetlands in the Glaciated The Development and Distribution of the Soils Northeast Resource Publication 116. US. of the Swan Coastal Plain. Westem Australia. Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C. CSIRO Soil Publication N0.16. GOODRICK, G.M., 1970: A Survey of Wetlands MILL. H.R., 1900-1910: A Glossary of Geo- of Coastal New South Wales. CSIRO Division graphical Terms. Sir Dudley Stamp (ed.). of Wildlife Research. Tech. Memo.. No. 5. 1966.

18 LeProvos~Semeniuk & Chalrner MONKHOUSE. F.J.. 1965: A Dictionary of Ge- SEMENIUK. C.A.. 1987b: Wetlands of the Dar- ography. E. Arnold and Chicago Aldine. ling System - a geomorphic approach to habitat classification. J. Roy. Soc. West. Aust.. 69: 95- MOORE. W.G.L., 1949: A Dictionary of Geo- 112. graphy. Penguin Books. Hmmondswonh. Middlesex. SEMENIUK, C.A., SEMENIUK. V., MORGAN. N.C.. 1982: An ecological survey of MARCHANT, N.G.. & CRESSWELL. LD.. standing waters in northwest Africa: 11: Site 1987: A proposed classification for wetland descriptions in Tunisia and Algeria. Biological vegetation of the Darling System (in prep.). Conservation. 24: pp 5-44. SEMENIUK. V., 1985: Threats to, and Exploita- MORISAWA, M.. 1968: Streams: Their Dynam- tion and Destruction of, Mangrove Systems in ics and Morphology. McGraw Hill Book Co., Western Australia in FIELD. C. (ed.), The New York. Mangrove Ecosystem. AIMS Publication. PAIJMANS, K., GALLOWAY, R.W., FAITH. SHIPLEY. J.T.. 1982: Dictionary of Word Ori- D.P., FLEMING. P.M., HAANTENS, H.A., gins. Littlefield, Adams & Co. HEYLIGERS. P.C., KALMA, J.D., & SPECHT, R.T., 1970: Vegetation; in LEEPER, LOFFLER, E., 1985: Aspects of Australian G.W. (ed.). The Australian Environment. Wetlands. CSIRO Aust. Div. Water Land Re- CSIRO and Melbourne University Press. sources Technical Paper, No. 44: 1-71. SWAYNE. 1956: A Concise Glossary of Geo- PRESSEY, R.L., 1984: A method for description graphic Terms. Sir D. Stamp (ed.) 1966: A ) and evaluation of coastal floodplain wetlands; Glossary of Geographic Terms. in MYERS, K. et al. (eds), Suwey Methods for Nature Conservation. CSIRO Division of Wa- TINGAY, A., & TINGAY, S.R., 1976: The Wet- ter and Land Resources, Canberra. lands of System Six. Dept Conserv. Environ., Bull. 28. S RABE, F.W., & SAVAGE, N.L., 1979: A methodology for the selection of aquatic natural TROWBRIDGE, A.C., (Ed.) 1962: Dictionary of e .- area. Biological Conservation, 15, pp 291-299. Geological Terms. American Geological Insti- RATCLIFFE, D., (ed.), 1977: Anahwe conserva- tute, Washington D.C. tion review. Cambridge University Press. WETLANDS ADVISORY COMMITTEE, ., RIGGERT, T.L., 1966: Wetlands of Western 1977: The Status of Wetlahd Reserves in t- System 6. Report of the Wetlands Advisory :o Australia, 1964-66. Dept of Fisheries and Fauna West. Aust. Committee to the Environmental Protection B, Authority. RUTTNER, F., 1953: Fundamentals of Limnol- ogy. University of Toronto Press. WETZEL, R.G., 1983: Limnology. Saunder Col- 1s lege Publishing. d- SEMENIUK, C.A., 1987a: Consanguineous wet- ri- lands and their distribution in the Darling Sys- WHITTOW, J.B., 1984: Penguin Dictionary of tem, South Western Australia. J. Roy. Soc., Physical Geography. Penguin Books, Ham- ~i- West. Aust. (in press). mondswonh, Middlesex. n-

A., of he ci.

60: ,ils lia.

eo- d.),

LcProvosL Semeniuk & Chdmer GLOSSARY

Avifauna all the birds in a particular region. Consanguineous Wetlands wetlands that are distinctly related because of similarity in size, shape, soils, water, setting and origin. Creek seasonally inundated channel of variable shape and size. Dampland seasonally waterlogged basin of variable size and shape. Domain the occurrence, in discrete areas, of consanguineous wetlands. Estuary the tidal part of a river. Fen waterlogged, spongy ground containing alkaline decaying vegetation. Floodplain seasonally inundated flat. Fluvial of, or pertaining to, a river or rivers. Fresh (water) salinity less than 1000 mgk. Geomorphic the form of the earthor its surface features. Geomorphology form and development of the earth's surface. Groundwater subsurface water in the zone of saturation. Hydrology science of water properties, circulation and distribution. Lake permanently inundated basin of variable size and shape. Leptoscale fine scale (see Table 6 for definitions of wetland categories according to scale). Limnology the study of inland bodies of water with reference to rheir plant and animal life, physical properties, geographical features, etc. Macroscale large scale (see Table 6 for definitions of wetland categories according to scale). Marsh a water-saturated, poorly drained area, intennit- tently or permanently watercovered, having aquatic and grasslike vegetation, essentially with- out L~Cformation of peat. Megascale very large scale (see Table 6 for definitions of wetland categories according to scale). Mesoscale medium scale (see Table 6 for definitions of wetland categories according to scale). Mesosaline salinity 20 W50000 ma. Microscale small scale (see Table 6 for def~tionsof wetland categories according to scale). Mixosaline see brackish. Palusplain seasonally waterlogged flat. Physiography physical geography. Poikilohaline water of variable salinity, fluctuating from one sality field to another. Precipitation water that falls to the surface from the atmosphere as rain, hail or sleet. River permanently inundated channel of variable size

and shape. ' Salinity the total quantity of dissolved salts in water. Sedimentology scientific study of sedimentary rocks and of the processes by which they were formed; the description, classification, origin and interpretation of sediments. Stasohaline water of relatively constant salinity, remaining in a given salinity field. Stratigraphy geological study of strata and their succession Subhaline salinity 1 000-3 000 mgL. Sumpland seasonally inundated basin of variable size and shapc. the general configuration of a land surface or any part of the earth's surface, including its relief. Watcrloggcd area in which water stands near or at the land surface.

LcProvost. Semcniuk & Chdmer MAJOR WLWTYPES BASED 01 MITER LOIWITY UD LARCfOIII

(after LA. Srrrmiuk. 1987b)

1 LANDFDRR I

1 Yater I I I I I Longevity I Basin I Channel 1 Flat I I I I I I I I I Permanent I Pernanently I Permanently [ - 1 I inundation I inundated I inundated I I I I basin I channel I I I I I I I I I 1 Seasonal 1 Seasonally Seasonally 1 Seasonally 1 I (or inter- I inundated I inundated I inundated I I mittent) 1 basin I channel 1 flat I 1 inundation I I I I

I Seasonal I Seasonally I - I Seasonally I I (or inter- I waterlogged I I waterlogged 1 I mittent) I basin 1 I flat I I uaterlogging ( I I I II

Leprovost. Semeniuk & Chalmer -TMLE 2 METLANO TYPES - DEFIUTIOI AID ORIGII W TERllS

DEFINITION DEFINED 6l ORIGIN OF TERM USAGE Ih C.A. SERENIUK, 1987b

Pernanently Mill (1900-1910) Established term. lhe usage in this paper inundated Monkhouse (1965) Fron Latin *, ioes not distinguish basin of Bates E Jackson a hollow ,etueen shallow lakes variable size (1980) and deep lakes and shape Fairbridge (1968) Ruttner (1953)

Seasonally This paper hfter "sump" meaning 4s defined inundated site of water reten- basin of tion or ponding or variable accu~ulation;the tera size and is fortuitously shape similar to "sunpf" the German tera for swaup

Seasonally This paper After "damp1' meaning Rs defined waterlogged moist or wet. Thus it basin of refers to a danpness variable size or waterlogging of and shape soils of some basin wetlands

RIVER Pernanently Swayne (1956) Established term frou This usage conforms with the inundated Trowbridge (1962) Latin -, concept of nost authors that channel of Morisaua (1968) a stream (Shipley, river is defined as channelled variable 1982) water flow but is different to size and nost authors in its necessity shape for pernanence of water. The peraanence of water also generally inplies a channel of large rather than small size

Seasonally Whittow (1984) Established term This usage generally conforas inundated ~onkhouse(1965) with that of Australia and channel of Trowbridge (1962) southwestern U.S.A. variable Bates & Jackson size and (1980) shape

LeProvost, Semcniuk & Chalmer TABLE 2 (conttd)

I I I I I 1 FLOODPLAIR ] Seasonally I Mill (1900-1910) 1 Established term I This differs from other authors ( in that inundation of the plain 1 I inundated I Monkhouse (1965) 1 1 need not be linked to a river; 1 I flat I Moore (1949) 1 I I I I I in general, however, a I I I I I floodplain is associated with I I a river or creek I I I I I I PALUSPLAIh I Seasonally I This paper I After Latin -palus I As defined I meaning "aarshy"; thus! 1 1 waterlogged I I 1 flat I I the term refers to 1 I I I I flats which are 1 I I I I similar to dampland I i i I I basins I I I I I I 1 HATERLOGGED I Area in which1 ( Established term 1 Usage conforns with Golet and I Larson (1974), Rartin G., 1 ( water stands I 1 1 (1953) and most other authors I I near or at 1 I I I the land I I I -TABLE 3

COMPARISON OF WETLAND TERMS USED IN THIS REPORT WITH ESTABLISHED CLASSIFICATIOYS

I C.A. SEHENlUK (1987b GENERAL N.AMER1CAN I AND THIS REPORT I I LAKE Open fresh uater I LACUSTRINE Open water i Lakes i Lake Lake I Deep fresh marshes I Shrub suamp I Suamp I Suamp Suamp Open saline uater I Deep marsh I Coastal uater bodies I I I Wooded suanp i PALUSTRINE Deep marsh Lakes I Harsh Harsh Seasonally flooded basins I Shallou marsh I Suamp I Headou Shallou fresh marshes 1 Shrub suanp I I Deep fresh marshes I Wooded suanp I I Saline marshes I Open uater I I I Open saline uater I I I I DAHPLAND Fresh meadous I PALUSTRINE Meadow I Headou Wooded suamp I I I RIVER I RIVERINE I River and creek I River, Stream, River, Stream I I channels I Creek. Brook Creek, Brook I I I I I CREEK I RlVERINE 1 River and creek i Arroyo I channels I I I I I FLOODPLAIN Shrub suamp 1 Seasonally I Land subject to 1 Floodplain Floodplain I Wooded swamp I flooded flats I inundation 1 Seasonally I flooded flat I I PALUSPLAIN Wooded suaap I PALUSTRINE I Saline flat I I Salt meadou? I -TABLE 4

(after C.A. Seaeniuk. 1987)

SALINITY ng/L HATER CATEGORY

less than 1 000 Fresh

1 000 - 3 000 Subhaline

3 000 - 20 000 Hyposaline

20 000 - 50 000 Wesosaline

50 000 - 100 000 Hypersaline

100 000 and greater Brine

The terns and boundaries for "fresh", "subhaline", "hyposaline", "mesosaline" and "hypersaline" are from Hammer (1986); the ter~"brine" is delineated by Davis and DeWiest (1966). -TAU 5 CLASSIFICATIM OF THE COISISTEICI OF

MATED OUKITl - MIlITIOl AID OR1611 W TERMS

------I 1 yfTLAN0 TERN DEFINITION ORIGIN OF TERN USAGE IN THIS REPORT

Water of C.A. Semeniuk After -staso (Greek) As defined relatively (1967b) meaning constant constant salinity remaining in a given salinity I field I I POIKILOHALINE Water of Originally definec After poikilo (Greek) As defined variable Oahl (1956) meaning variable sal'inity fluctuating from one salinity field to another

LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalrner -TABLE 6

YETLAM CATEGMIES ACCORDIIG TO SCALE (after C.A. Seaeniuk. 1987b)

(A) BASINS AND FLATS

. Megascale: Very large scale uetlands larger than a frame of reference 10 kn x 10 km.

, Macroscale: Large scale wetlands enconpassed by a frame of reference 1000 n x 1000 m to 10 km x 10 km.

. Mesoscale: Medium scale wetlands enco~passed by a frame of reference 500 I x 500 a to LOO0 m x 1000 m.

. Microscale: Snall scale uetlands enconpassed by a frame of

reference 100 I x 100 m to 500 n x 500 n.

(0) CHAIlELS (width to length relationship)

. Hacroscale: Large scale channels 1 km and greater uide, by several to tens of kiloaetres long.

. Resoscale: Rediun scale channels hundreds of netres uide, by thousands of metres long.

. Microscale: Small scale channels tens of metres wide, hundreds of setres long.

. Leotoscale: Fine scale channels several netres uide, tens of eetres long. ~ -

TABLE 7

CAlE60RIES ff YETLA10 VEQTATIO1 BASED 01 EXTElT ff COVER

A10 IlTEPIAL OPGAIISATIOI

(after Se~eniuk-et -al., 1987)

Vegetation Cover on Wetland 1 I II Patchy Cover I Peripheral Cover I -I -I Type 8 I Type C I I Organisation I I I

LeProvost, Semeniuk % Chalmer SCALAR TERMS USE0 TO DESCRIBE VEGETATION

(after Semmiuk -et -11.. 1987)

. Ilegascale - Wetland vegetation complex larger than a frame of reference 10 km x 10 kn.

. Hacroscale - Wetland vegetation complex encompassed by a frame of reference 1000 a x 1000 I to 10 km x 10 kn.

. Ilesoscale - Wetland vegetation complex encompassed by a frame of reference 500 m x 500 m to 1000 a x 1000 s.

Ilicroscale - Wetland vegetation complex encompassed by a frase of reference 100 a x 100 m to 500 m x 500 u.

Leptoscale - Wetland vegetation coaplex smaller than a frame of reference 100 a x 100 n.

LeProvosr, Semcniuk & Chalmer TABLE 9

EXA~ESa vtruw VESETATIOI TVPES CLASSIFIEO 81 THE SCHEME OF SEIYIIUK -rt -rl. (1987) I I CLASSIFICATIOk I VEGETATIOH TYPE I EXAMPLE I I

Hacroscale I Type G marsh-scrub I Vegetation in Lake Pinjar i

I I Hacroscale I Type E forest-sedgeland I Peripheral vegetation in Lake i I I Joondalup I

Hicroscale I Type D heath and forest I Zoned vegetation in Stable Suanp I

Hesoscale I Type E forest-marsh I Zoned peripheral vegetation of I 1 I Lake Coogee I I I I CRITERIA FOR ASSESSIIIG CONSERVATION VALUE Cf A ElLAW ('First Tierm Assessoent)

* (1) Is the wetland type regionally widespread or is it restricted in distribution? If the latter, then it may warrant conservation. (If the former. it may still be significant for conservation purposes - see below). Having identified why a given vetland is regionally significant and thus requires conservation and manageeent, it wuld then be necessary to identify the range of conservation values uhich apply to specific resources within the wetland. To do this, one needs to resolve the various other conservation criteria listed belar. These criteria muld require input frm a range of natural history scientists but wuld mainly draw on the experience of geomorphologists and biologists.

(2) Is the wetland type representative of the region in that it provides an example of typical features of the natural systems. This factor would ensure conservation of scue typical wetlands even though they may be regionally widespread, given that other exanples of similar wetlands elsenhere are degraded.

(3) Is the wetland important as a productive area upon which depend such comnercial endeavours as fisheries 1e.g. in coastal areas mangroves function as nursery areas for fisheries)? For terrestrial wetlands of the Swan Coastal Plain this may not be relevant but may be relevant for the estuarine flats adjoining the river systw.

'(4) Is the wetland important to maintain the quality of human or animal and plant life (e.g. vegetation to arrest soil erosion)? For wetlands on the Swan Coastal Plain and Darling Plateau this aspect muld involve water qualtty relevant for the resident animallplant population, maintenance of habitats for the migratory, nunadic or resident wildlife, and natural recharge/discharge processes. This criterion also incorporates the aspect of 'diversity' of habitat in which there is also a diversity of vegetation floristics and structure, and consequent diversity of fauna.

'(5) Does the wetland have important ecological or geological features of national or international significance [comparable to the significance of the Shark Bay stromatolites, Pinnacles at Cervantes)? For wetlands this includes landforms, vegetation assemblages and other examples of regionally unique ecological and geological features. Sow wetlands in Western Australia have international significance under the Rmar Treaty.

'(6) Is the wetland important in providing relatively pristine or little modified envir0nmen;s or habitats (or system of these units) which are a research resource (comparable to the corals of the Ningaloo Reef; terrestrial vegetation of the Mitchell Plateau; strandplain of the Gascoyne delta)? For wetlands this includes the range of interactions between landforms and habitats, the evolution of landfoms, stratigraphic history of wetlands, ecological relationship between the above and population dynamics of various species of flora, aquatic fauna and other vertebrate fauna such as tortoises, avifauna.

*(71 Could the wetland function as an important pristine to semi-pristine or even altered enviroment for use by primary, secondary or tertiary educationalists because of scientific features and accessibility (e.g. geological localities for illustrating earth science principles, wetland localities for illustrating ecological principles)? For wetlands this would include any of the suite of landfom, their associated biota, interdependence and evolution. [Note: In Yestern Australia, there is inadequate reservation for scientificleducational purposes omevarious types of wetland which %cur within or close to the Metropolitan Area. These areas are under intense pressure for recreational and other development. This trend has been identified by numerous authors and must be expected to continue to grow as population pressures increase.]

LcProvosr. Scmeniuk & Chalmcr TABLE 10 (cont'd)

'(8) Does the wetland function as the habitat of rare and endangered species? For example, Bullsbrook swamps for the Short-necked Tortoise.

'19) Does the wetland function as an important regional wildlife sanctuary, even if the floralfauna are not rare or endangered?

For wetlands this wuld include those areas that provide water, refuge or breeding grounds for a variety of reptiles, avifauna, mamals, etc., and should include the aspect of haitat diversity, or vegetation diversity and interspersion, with its consequential implication of diverse faunal usage.

'(10) Is the wetland important as either a seasonal or temporary habitat or breeding ground of large numbers of migratory or nomadic animals, particularly waterbirds? For wetlands in general this factor is likely to be important.

'(11) Can the wetland function as a semi-pristine to pristine area or wilderness for use by naturalists. bush-walkers, etc. 1e.g. Kakadu National Park in the Northern Territory or Herdsman Lake in the Perth Metropolitan Area)? Uetlands close to the population centre of Perth have special value to naturalists, professional ornithologists, amateur bird observers, outdoor enthusiasts, etc.

112) Does the wetland have importance from the point of view of aesthetics? Yell-vegetated andlor water-filled wetlands provide a contrast to the adjacent, heavily-developed residential areas.

113) Does the wetland have importance as an historic or actively-utilised Aboriginal heritage site? There are some recorded Aboriginal sites at wetlands and therefore this factor has to be assessed for each site.

(141 Does the wetland have value for active water-based recreation? There is increasing pressure for use of wetlands for boating and other water sports, including duck hunting.

*(I51 Does the wetland, regardless of whether it is pristine or degraded, constitute part of a linked natural system, either physical or biological lbiological: in terms of usage by waterbirds, particularly migrating or nomadic species) such that its destruction or alternate use would result in disturbance/alteration to adjoining wetlands or to fauna species using the system?

1161 Does the wetland have social values evidenced by conmunity concern for its conservation, regardless of scientific values?

- indicates criteria used to evaluate the retlands in the Lake Joondalup-Walyunga transect.

LeProvost. Scrneniuk & Chalmcr ,kC Ilk.. t1mg.t*. .ISIO%C.LII md.lvv fresh. poikilohalint

2k< 1.k.. round. .xrosidc, fresh wiginiuv stasohdine

~~.~lmd,irregular. nicrwcai* i ~"Illt I i i .ad fresh, $tarohaline I I I I~II ornrhsnd Ill1 old Ill1 Ill1 .ittI. IIII lundribar IIII !Ill I1 I112 I hdl" I I bad I I Roll iu.plmd, ovoid. hrmalr. street frtrh, rtasohaline

Roll strest

Sydney Road

Stonly da.piand, round, ticrossale, Road fresh. strtohaiinr

Jandabuv lake, wid, mxroxalc, fresh Lake rtrsohaline

Harkins Road North

Pine built on; not slr~rified Forest i Zt I IPine , ovoid. .icrorcaie. I Forest 1 fresh. stasohdine I I I Pi". D I~~.~lmd, ovoid. microsrrie. I F0rr.t 1 frwh. .tamhail". I

natural vegetation )rrxnl in ,*!!and. and natural regrfrfim vre>ent in $urrounding i~landi~:e.f. : t ! - category I1 - natural rtgrtafion vtsant in ..rid. surrounding upland r+g.tati~n vrtiy wdified or cieared. 111 - ~rtlznd~q~t~tim )art17 wdlfird )aptly c1r.r.d. or .ith introduced ivcier vplrnd r.q*tation rotall). modified or :Leared catcqory LY - nturrl regrtrfim presmt in wtiand, but wtgory Y - ..tiand ,rg.t.tion rotally cltarld or destroy*d.

LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalmer

~eg.tarion 7resmc in ~rroundingupland %y%te.. . : cacrgory I - natural rsgetarioo irewnt in ..riand. md cahgory II - narurai rrq.larion )rw.nr in ~ariasd,mrroundinq upland rq.frtion partly adifid or cl-rred cacqory 111 - ..tland rqlration 2artlr sodifid or partly c1ear.d. or with introduod rv*si.l category :Y - natural ~,g.racim 7ramnt in udand. but rurrounding upland r,g.tation toralll mdifitd sr dsare4

36 LeProvosr. Semeniuk & Chalmer MIA : not applicable

LcProvost. Semeniuk & Chalmcr creel t flo0dp:lin. .emscale creek, :Wtosa:~

Vmk. !eptoxa1e creek. 1w:as:a:t flmop:&i", .e,wca!e floodplai", ,esos:a:e palwlai", .i:?as:a:< creek. Ie,rol;al~. nrandering. incited rrcek. leptorcrla. wmdorinq. incised creek. !eptorra!e. stmetring, incised creek, leptlfcail. atandoring. incised vivw, =icmxdt, mean$ering

CICI~. Iep:os:ale. U-shaped rivw, ~iwoxale creek. ltptwsaia, incised srelr. 1tp:orcale. meandering rrtsk. .itro~cait. u-shaped

:r:e<, .i

:reex, aic?os:ale, imi5ed. neandering

:wm. niw$;:ai?, inc:d #/A : not applicable

- : oo zstrssnent sarrird out for thiv crifcrim at this %it!

LcProvosr. Semeniuk & Chalmcr TABLE 12

DESCRIPTION OF GEOIORPHIC UNITS IN THE DARLING SISTER

(after C.A. Semeniuk, 1987a)

GEONORPHIC UNDERLYING I DESCRIPTION YETLAND FEATURES UNIT MATERIALS I I The Oarling broadly undulating surface. laterite fluvial geasarphic 1 Plateau average height of 400 a above overlying processes are dominant sealevel; dissected by steep- Precambrian sided valleys uith incised crystalline channels and by steep-sided rocks valleys with broad, flat ribbon flood plains and small channels

The Collie large topographic depression; underlain by fluvial processes are Basin very low relief. 200 m to laterite-capped dominant 250 m above sealevel Permian qnd younger rocks

Dandaragan 200 m above sealevel, gently Uesozoic rocks fluvial processes are Plateau undulating laterite-capped dominant surface

The Swan low relief, 20-30 ka wide, surficial Pinjarra Plain: dissected Coastal marked zonation of distinct deposits by aany microscale chan- Plain large-scale landforms either Pleistocene to nels uith occasional arranged parallel to the coast Holocene age lakes and suaplands or associated with major rivers of sedimentary dominated by channels, (McArthur E Bettenay. 1960; and pedogenic flats and plains. McArthur E Bartle. 1980a.b).. . , origin Bassendean dunes: alter- From east to west these are: 1 nating hills and basins, the Ridge Hill Shelf, with I channels generally absent. underlying sediments of Pleis- i Spearwood dunes: sheet tocene laterite and sand; the ! wash basin sedimentation, Pinjarra Plain. a Flat :o karstification are gently undulatinq system of important in developaent alluvial Fans; tne Bassendean of wetlands. Cunes, an undulating plain of Quindalup dunes: deflated lor degraded quartz sand hills: areas. Linear depressions. :he Spearwood Dunes and locally lakes Formed by Yoongarillup ?lain, large-sca!? marine influences. linear continuous sara!Lel i Eskuaries Formed 3y riages, predominantly ?!eis:o- i Fluvial orocesses cene aeolianites; :he Ouindalup Ounes. Holocene dune ridges LISl OF COISAJl6UINEWS ME1LAM SUITES CORRELATED WITH llAIN SEDIIORPHIC UIITS OF THE DARLING SISlEII

(aftw C.A. Samniuk. 190a)

GEORORPHIC sEnm j ABmvIATIok OF j COI~A~GUIWOUS i ABBREVIATIO~ I 1 GEOMORPHIC I WETLAND SUITES I USED IN THIS 1 I SETTING USED IN I I REPORT (Fig. 3) I

QUINDALUP DUNES I I Coaloongup I 1 Becher I I Peelhurst I I I I I I I I QUINDALUP- 1 Q/Y I Preston I w.1 I YOONGARILLUP I 1 1 I INTERFACE I 1 1 I I I I I I S.l SPEARWOOD DUkES I S I Yanchep I I S.2 I 1 I Balcatta I S.3 I I Coogee I I S.4 I 1 I Stakehill 1

I Y I Clifton I Y .I ( Kooallup I Y .2 I

SPEARWOOD/ S/B I Bibra I SIB1 BASSENDEAR INTERFACE I Ha~den I SIB2

BASSEROEAN DURES I Pinjar I Gnangara I Jandakot I Riverdale

8lPl BASSERDEAN/ B/P I Beermullah I PINJARRA 1 Rungala 1 B/P3 TRAkSIlION I Ruchea 1 B/P2 I tiennett Brook I B/P4 -OR 6ASSERDEAh lITH I Benger 1 8/P5 FLUVIAL FEATURES I I

..... cont'd

LeProvosr. Scmeniuk & Chalmer iEOMoRPHIc SETTING / ABBREVIATION OF i CONSANGUINEOUS i ABBREVIATION I I GEOMORPHIC I YETLAND SUITES I USED IN THIS I I SETTING USED IN I I REPORT (Fig. 13) 1 I THIS REPORT I I !

P1 I ?INJARRA PLAIN i p i Keysbrook I I I I I I I E1 ESTUARIES I E / Moore Estuary i E2 I I Suan Estuary I €3 I I Peel-Harvey Est. I I I Leschenault Est. I €4

I Moore River I I Suan River I I Ellen Brook I I Goegrup I

~ANDARAGAN i DP i Red ~uiiy PLATEAU I Coorang I Cleuley I I Mogumber I I I I I I DANDARAGAN PLATEAU I Op/D I Yannanal I DPD I DARLING PLATEAU I I I I INTERFACE I 1 I 1 I I I I I DARLING PLATEAU I D I Walyunga 4 0 1 I 02 1 I Little Dardanup I I I I Harris River 1 03 I 04 I I / Nalyerin I D5 1 I Hothan I I 06 I / 8rockman I I I I I I I C1 I COLLIE BASIN I c j SCIIO~~S I I I I I

LeProvost. Semeniuk & Chalmer

I YETLANO' I (listed in groups 1- within consanguineous 1 suites, following I A C.l. Seneniuk. 1987) 1 I Long Swamp I Leda I UP Stakehill System A 1 l/p System BlC I l/p Anstey stakehill J I l/p Stakehill System M 1 l/p Clifton Martin Tank Pollard Duck Pond Xyalup

North Lake 1 P Bibra 1 r Kogolup 1 langebup I r Thompson I P Banganup I r Spectacles I P Bollard Bulrush 1 P Mealup 1 r NcLarty I P Handen 11 Pinjar I P Moore River I National Park System i s Culcadarra 1 Gnangara I UP Jandabup I Adams 1

LeProvost. Semeniuk & Chalmer YETLANO' (listed in groups within consanguineous suites, following C.A. Semeniuk. 1987)

Hariginiup Sydney Road Swamp P. Sydney Road Swamp H. Yea1 Bindiar East Gnangara #12 East Gnangara #13 Pine Forest L, H, N #7 lelaleuca Pk Pine Forest A-Y Gingin 8r. H. East Handurah Red Lake Willie Pool Roe Suamp Piney Lakes Booragoon Blue Gum Jandakot nuckenburra Riverdale Beernullah Flat Beermullah Lake White Lake Big Bootine Little Bootine Nambung Ranbung Suanp A E B Coonabidgee Banbun nungala Wright Road

LeProvost. Semcniuk & Chalmer I I I I WETLAMO' 1 ASSESSMEIT OF COISERVATIOI SIG~IFICA~CE~ I ) (listed in groups I 1 I within consanguineous I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I ( suites, follouing IAIBIc 101 EIF 161 HI1 IJIKI I C.A. Semeniuk, 1987) ( I I I I I I I I I I I I Balannup /I! 1P I 1) I 1) I 1 I I I Wright Lake 111 IP I 1) I 1) I 1 I I 1 Mary Carroll I IM I IP I 1) I 1) I In lP 1 I Forrestdale 1 In I Ir 1 i 1)s I 1)s I IH ir I I Tomato Lake 111 IlIlI) I 1) I I 11 1 ( Hazelmere Lakes 111 11 I 1) I 1) I I 11 I I Kooljerrenup Area 111 1 I 1) I 1) I I I I I nuchea I 1 I I 1 1) I I I 1 IP I 1 Bennett Brook I In I Ir I 1)s I I I 1 I I I Yangedi I In I Ir I 1) I I 1 1 I I I Benger Ir )VH 1s Ir I i 1 s InliI s I s IH Ir I I Terang lr IH I lr I 1 I I?/ 1 Ir I I Keysbrook 1 1 MIL 1 IP I I I I I I IP I I ~rixton-YuleConplex I i I I 1s 1 1 I 1 I I I I I Toaah Road 111 IP I 1 I I 1 I I r/p I 1 Twin Swanps I I I In I i I li I I 1 1s I I Martin's Reserve 111 In 1 i I I I I 1 1s 1 I Moore River E tuary I r 1 H/L I s I s I Is1 IPISI Is1 3a Swan Estuary Is/iIH Is Is Islil s Is Is IH Is 1 3 b Ir 1 I Peel-Harvey Estuary I i I VH I s I i I s/i I s I i I s 1 s I H I n I 3c ( Leschenault Estuary I r I H I s/n 1 s 1 s/i I s I n I s I s I H I n I I Moore River ' Ir In In IP I 151 1~1~1151 1 Swan River IsIHIs IsIPsI sIsI Is1 I Canning River 1% IH 1s 1s I P I s I I s I s IH 1s I I I I I

3 The following parts of estuaries are considered particularly significant:

(a) Swan: Alfred Cove Pelican Point Melville uith freeway foreshore Belmontl8aysuater tidal marsh

(6) Peel Harvey: Mouth of Murray River Mouth of Harvey River Boggy Bay Coodanup Styx Heron Point

LeProvost, Serneniuk & Chalrner I-- -- 1 - I I I WETLARO I ASSESSWERT OF CORSERVATION SIGWICANCE~ I I (listed in groups 1 I I within consanguineous I 1 I I I 1 I I I 111 1 suites, following IAIBIC 101 EIF IGI HI1 IJIKI I C.A. Seaeniuk, 1987) 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I I Ill I N. Oandalup River 1s 1s 1s I P ! s I 1 I s I lS I 1 S. Oandalup River 1s IH 1s 1s 1 P I s 1 I s I s 1 Is I I Serpentine River 1s (H 1s 1s I P 1 s 1 1s I s 1 1s 1 I Murray River IsIHIs I~IPI~IIsIsIHl I I Harvey River 1s IH 1s lr 1 P I s I 1 s 1 s IL I 1 ( Preston River 1s IH IS IS IPIS 1 IS 1s 1 1 I 1 Collie River 1s IH Is IS IP1s I 1s 1s I I 1 I Ellen Brook 1 lrI IH lr I I Jane Brook I s I Chandala 1 r I Guanarnup I r I Yalbanberup I r i Goegrup I r 1 Millows I I Red Gully I ( Clewley I Moaumber

I Lake hangar 1 I I IP 1 I I 1 I 111 ( Walyunga I I I Ir I I I I I Ill I Red Swam 1) Ilk! I)n I I l/pI r/sI 1 s I I Ir 1 i ~ooroolobBrook #I j) 1) 1) I r I) I I 1) I I lr I I Avon River 1) 1) 1) Ir 1) I I 1) I 111 I Gidgegannup Brook #1 1) 1) 1) I slr 1) 1 I 1) I I 1 I ( Goonaring 1) 1) 1) Ir 1) I 1 1) I 111 I Belaring 1) 1) 1) s/n I r 1) UP I r/s I 1) s 1 111 I Black Swamp 1) 1) H 1) / r 1) I I 1) I 111 I Helena River #1 1) r 1) 1) I r 1) I I 1) I 1 1 1 1 Jane Brook #1 1) 1) 1) Ir 1) I I 1) I 111 I Swan River #1 1) 1) 1) Ir 1) I I 1) 1 111 I Serpentine River #1 1) 1) 1) I r 1) 1 I 1) I 111 I I I I I I I I I I I

LcProvost. Semeniuk & Chalmer

TMLE 15

1 PRELIIIINART LIST Of YETLAMS ff IIEGIONAL TO INtEPIATIOIAL SIMIFICAICE IN THE DUILI16 SYSTEM

[Note: This listing identifies wetlands in the Darling System uhich are considered by a number of wetland experts, on the basis of currently available information, to be of regional to international significance. It is not intended to be used as a final or comprehensive list.]

COASTAL PLAIN YETLANDS

Richmond Spectacles Mungala lalyungup Bollard Bulrush Wright Road Cooloongup Mealup Forrestdale

Becher HcLarty Bennett-. .. book Peelhurst Hamden Benger Lake Preston Pinjar Lake Terang Loch ncNess Moore River National Park System .T-wagfs Yonderup Culcadarra Martin's Reserve Joondalup Gnangara' Brixton-lule Complex Goolellal Jandabup Moore River Estuary Guelup Mariginiup Swan Estuary Herdsaan Sydney Road Suamp P. , Peel-Harvey Estuary Honger Sydney Road Swamp H. Leschenault Estuary Coogee East Gnangara #12 Moore River Henderson East Gnangara #13 Swan River Ht Brown Pine Forest L,M,H Canning River Stakehill System BIC Roe Swamp ti. Dandalup River Anstey (Stakehill J) Piney Lakes S. Dandalup River Lake Clifton Riverdale Serpentine River Hartin Tank Beermullah Flat Hurray River Pollard Beermullah Lake Harvey River Duck Pond White Lake Preston River Bidaninna big Bootine Collie River North Lake Little Bootine Ellen Brook Bibra Lake Raabung Jane Brook Yangebup Nambung Swamps Chandala Thorpson Coonabidgee Guanarnup Banganup Bambun Yalbanberup Goegrup

'lhere a wetland system has been identified as significant, there may be portions of the system of high environmental value and other portions which have become degraded. Identification of specific significant areas was beyond the scope of this study.

LcProvost. Serneniuk & Chalrner I Yillous Helena River #1 Canning River Headwaters Red Gully Jane Brook #1 Serpentine River Headuaters 1 Clevley Suan River X1 Harris River i I nogumber Serpentine River Oingham River ! lannamal Hurray River #1 Collie River East Yalyunga Ernest River #1 Ralyerin Red Swamp Augustus River #1 Yourdamung Yooroloo Brook #1 Creeks crossing Scarp Manaring Lake Avon River North Dandalup Hotham River Gidgegannup Brook #1 Harvey River Brockaan River Goonaring Yungong Area Lake Needoonga Belaring Darkan Sraap Lake Chittering Black Suamp Darkan River Headwaters

Yetlands are listed in groupings that relate to consanguineous wetland suites. The listing is ordered by geoaorphic unit, progressing from west to east. Within each unit. wetlands are ordered fron north to south.

LcProvost. Semeniuk & Chalmer Figure 1: Location map (after C.A. Semeniuk, 1987b).

LeProvost. Semeniuk Sr Chalrncr 5 1 EVALUATION BASE NATURAL HISTORY INFORMATION BASE

Types of studies required

4. Usage of wollnnds, Guldellnes lor 2. Wotland domains Classlflcallon of weiland vogetatldn nnd mlgrallon evalualion of wellands between wellands as a result ol by fauna I Illeralure rovlow and - furlher desian 1 cgclallon cnlcoorles (this 8ludy) ldcnllllcallon ol lhc vnrloun lypcs 01 OSO~on oxlcnl ol covcr. lake wcllnnd sullos and ,lcrnal orgnnlsnllon. II,CI~ occurrence In Ize, and dIscrcIn domalns orlsllcs/e1rucIurC

!. Appllcallon ol cvnl~~atlonscl~orne In pilol sludy

s~zo01 clrclo 0lndlcclcs cxtcnl C usnoo

wldlh ol palhwoy 'lndlcoles CxtCnl C UBOBO

3. Prellrnlnary ldenllllcallon 01 Compnrleon ol wnllands ol slgnllican \ Provldcs a rcglonol =rovldcs a SIIC-PPOCI~I'c. lmportnnco 01 wnllonds pcrspccIIvo 01 Ill0 In Ihe Darllng Syslen clsdslllcallon lo to lnuno nnd lmporlonc dlelrlbullon of Iho dellnonlo IYPOS 01 01 wollnnds I0 0 wollnnd lypcs wollonda ml~rnllonroulo - 4 I I I Describe I I Classify I Wetland Vegetation I I Wetland I to Add to Wetland I Classification I II I I

I Obtain i i FORRULATE i i Assess status of I I Information on I I I I Wetland Vegetation I I Other Aspects, 1 DATA I (Extent of Clearing) I I e.g. Fauna Usage. !-*I I I Human Uses I I BASE I

I Apply Criteria to I I Evaluate Conservation I I Values of Wetland I I Resources I

I Apply Assessment I I Procedure to Assess I I Significance of 1 I I Wetland 1 I

''First Tier" Assessment I "Second Tier" I Assessaent I Identify Xetlands of I I I Outstanding I I I Conservation Value I I

I Determine Management I I IfWetland is not 1 I Priorities I I Identified as I I 1 I Outstanding, Carry I I Out Further Assessment I

Figure 3: Conceptulal summary of the approach to wetland evaluation.

LeProvost, Semcniuk & Chalrncr 53 BROAD CATEGORIES OF WETLAND SYSTEMS

-- - SYSTEM 1 SALINITY I CLOSED I OPEN

Fresh

Mixed or .... Alternating ...... - ::: :Fiats.'.'. '.' ...... Estuarine ...... Saline ......

Stippled area marks the categories of land-based wetlands that are the subject of this paper

Figure 4: (after C.A. Semeniuk, 1987b) WETLAND COMPONENTS FOR USE IN CLASSIFICATION

Permanently Bash t CRITERIA USED TO Inundated DEVELOP Scasonally CROSS-SECTIONAL SHAPE Channel PRIMARY WETLAND lnundated CATEGORIES Seasonally Flat waterlogged

Fresh - - Megascale A Subsaline - - Macroscale ttyposallne Mesoscalo Mesosellno - - Mlcroscale Hypersaline - - Leptoscale Brlno - CRITERIA USED TO Llnear ,- -, DEVELOP - Elongate u, SECONDARY - Irregular Poikilohaline - Ovoid Stasohallne - Round Straight 1 sinuous 1 I Anostomoslng 2 Irregular

Tellurlc I I A Meteorlc WATER MAINTENANCE STRATIGRAPHY ( ORIGIN ) hlarlnc

CRIT~RIANOT USED It1 THIS PAPER bORIGIN J PLAN GEOMETRY OF WETLANDS

CHANNEL BASIN

SINUOUS

Figure 6: (after C.A. Serneniuk, 1987b).

LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalmer k I....,.....,.,,LOW SlONlFlCAUCE 1 2 3 4 5 6' 7 8 0 10 11 12 13 14 15 CONSEIIYAllOU CRITERIA

YER[ HCH YMRW

123 4 56 7 8 9101112131415

Figure 7: Histograms illustrating techniques for assessing the conservation value of wetlands utilising 15 criteria, each scored on a xale of -5 (after LSC, 1985).

LeProvost, Semeniuk & Chalmcr 57 transect

ocean

transect.

LeProvost, Scmeniuk & Chalmer CATEGORIES OF WETLANDS

0 1 , 1 r st. STATUS OF VEGETATION

Figure 9: Lake Joondalup to Walyunga wetland transect:

A. categories of wetlands; B. status of vegetation. SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL ELLEN BROOK 1 Very .Noh n * 3- =! Modwate to Mgh z 2- Q ------a Low 1 2 A 6 8 10 12 14 16

SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL LITTLE DUNDABAR SWAMP very high WALYUNGA 5 Very high 11 ------> 4 -I 3- Moderate to high ij Moderate to high 2 2- 1,I I 1; Q 11 -- I !I,,!7Lo w !-fr!!! LOW !I,,!7Lo w IIII!-fr!!! 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 6 8 10 12 14 16 CONSERVATION CRITERIA

SlGNlFlCA.NCE LEVEL PINE FOREST C

3- *-I Moderate to high Moderate to high I I -Z 2------(5 ------LOW Low ,,,,I 111 III I I I I I I 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 2 4 6 ' 8 10 12 14 16 CONSERVATION CRITERIA CONSERVATION CRITERIA

SlGNlFlCANCE LEVEL SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL

EAST GNANGARA 12 Very high O'BRIEN ROAD 10 very high n 4 ------

if + i Moderate to high I!I I!I , Moderate to high 1 ------Low LOW 11111 1 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 CONSERVATION CRITERIA CONSERVATION CRITERIA

iWlN SWAMPS 1 SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL Verv hloh REEN ROAD 5 Very h~gh n 4 ------

Moderate to high Moderate to hlgh

2 4 8 8 10 12 14 CONSERVATION CRITERIA CONSERVATION CRITERIA NOTE : Conservation criteria are defhed in Table 10. Wetland locations are shown in FWe 9. - - Figure 10 A: Histograms illustrating the technique for "first-tier" assessment of the conservation value of selected wetlands in the Lake Joondalup-Walyunga transect. . Lake Joondalup and Twin Swamps 1 scored highly (4 or 51 on almost all criteria, and are clearly of outstanding conservation value. Similarly, East Gnangara 12 and Walyunga 5 scored highly on several criteria and are assessed as having significant importance for conservation.

Ellen Brook 1 scored on the low to moderate scale (1 to 3) for most criteria, but scored highly (5) on criterion 15 as part of a linked natural system. This wetland would therefore be assessed as significant on the basis of this criterion alone, as its destruction or alternate use could reduce the conservation value of the wetland system for a number of purposes including fauna migration.

The wetlands designated as Pine Forest C, O'Brien Road 5, O'Brien Road 10 and Reen Road 5 scored in the low to moderate range (1 to 3) on all criteria. While not of outstanding conservation value, these wetlands have some value at the local, parochial or regional level for some purposes and these values must be considered in making future decisions on their development or management. For example, O'Brien Road 5 scored 2/3 on criterion 1, as it was assessed as an undisturbed, regionally significant example of a wetland type which is reslricted in distribution.

. Little Dundarbar Swamp, a disturbed, degraded wetland, scored 1 on all criteria, and would therefore be assessed as currently having low conservation value. Such wetlands may still have local significance and could be considered for rehabilitation if there is a local need, for example for recreational areas.

Figure 10 8. Nc:es on -:erpre:a:,on of h~stogra~s b. DANDARAGAN DANDARAGAN PLATEAU: PLATEAU Mesozolc rock

C: Geomorphic elements A: Geornorphlc units B: -logy (after McArthur tr Bettenay (after Churchward t, McArthur, (after Biggs et- -al., 1980) , 1960) . Qu. 1. COOLOONGUP

25. S.?: BALCATTA

Figure 12: Selected exarnoles cL some ccrsan~uineousstudies of wetlaccs (after C.;. Semeniu~, 19E7a). EOM0RPH:C SETTING luindalup Dunes Cooloongup Becher Peelhurst Prcslon OIY. 1 bearwcad Dunes Yanchcp S. 1 Balcalta 1 5.2 Coogee Slakehill ioongarillup Plain Clillon Kooallup Bibrn SIB. 1 Hamden jassendean Dunes Pinjar Gnangara Jandakol 8.3 Riverdale 3assendean-Plnjarra Beermullah BIP. 1 ransillon OR Mungala BlP.2 jassondean wllh Muchoa BlP.3 luvlal lcalures Bcnnel Brook BlP.4 Benser BIP.5 'inlarra Plain Keysbrook I P.l Moore Esluary Swan Esluary

Moore River Swan River R.2 Ellen Brook R.3 Goegrup Dandaragan Plaloau Thc Willows Red Gully Clewley Mogurnber Dp.4 Dandaragan Plaleau- Wannamal Darling Plaleau lnlerlace Darling Plaleau Walyunga

Harrls River Nalyerln 0.4 Holham 0.5 Brockmen - ~- Collie Basin

Figure 13: Distribution of the consanguineous wetland suites in domains throughout the Darling System (after C.A. Semeniuk, 1987a). \ I Flgura 14: Location of selected signlflcant wetlands in the Darllng System.