DOCSLIB.ORG

Review of Long-Term Shorebird Monitoring in North Western Australia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Review of Long-Term Shorebird Monitoring in North Western Australia Review of long-term shorebird monitoring in north Western Australia D.I. Rogers, M.P. Scroggie and C.J. Hassell July 2020 Arthur Rylah InstituteCatfish for Environmental release Mullinmur Research Technical Report Series No. 313 Acknowledgment We acknowledge and respect Victorian Traditional Owners as the original custodians of Victoria’s land and waters, their unique ability to care for Country and deep spiritual connection to it. We honour Elders past and present whose knowledge and wisdom has ensured the continuation of culture and traditional practices. We are committed to genuinely partner, and meaningfully engage, with Victoria’s Traditional Owners and Aboriginal communities to support the protection of Country, the maintenance of spiritual and cultural practices and their broader aspirations in the 21st century and beyond. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning PO Box 137 Heidelberg, Victoria 3084 Phone (03) 9450 8600 Website: www.ari.vic.gov.au Technical Report for: Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions Western Australia. Citation: Rogers, D.I., Scroggie, M.P. and Hassell, C.J. (2020). Review of long-term shorebird monitoring in north Western Australia. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Technical Report Series No. 313. Front cover photo: Shorebird flock on Eighty Mile Beach (Jan van de Kam). © The State of Victoria Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning 2020 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence. You are free to re-use the work under that licence, on the condition that you credit the State of Victoria as author. The licence does not apply to any images, photographs or branding, including the Victorian Coat of Arms, the Victorian Government logo, the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning logo Printed by Melbourne Polytechnic, Preston. ISSN 1835-3827 (print) ISSN 1835-3835 (pdf)) ISBN 978-1-76105-157-9 (Print) ISBN 978-1-76105-158-6 (pdf/online/MS word) Disclaimer This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication. Accessibility If you would like to receive this publication in an alternative format, please telephone the DELWP Customer Service Centre on 136 186, email customer. [email protected] or contact us via the National Relay Service on 133 677 or www.relayservice.com.au. This document is also available on the internet at www.delwp.vic.gov.au Review of long-term shorebird monitoring in north Western Australia Danny I. Rogers1, Michael P. Scroggie1 and Chris J. Hassell2 1 Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research 123 Brown St, Heidelberg VIC 3084 2 Global Flyway Network and Australasian Wader Studies Group. PO Box 3084, Broome, WA 6725 Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Technical Report Series No. 313 Shorebird monitoring in north Western Australia i Acknowledgements The report was commissioned by the Department of but prominent figures have included Rob Clemens, Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (DBCA). John Graff, Connie Grohmann, Kerry Hadley, Maarten We thank Chris Nutt, Naomi Findlay and Andy Hulzebosch, Nigel Jackett, Arthur Keates, Nyal Halford of DBCA for help during report preparation. Khwaja, Emelia Lai, Jan Lewis, Amanda Lilleyman, Grace Maglio, Clare and Grant Morton, Jo Oldland, The Australasian Wader Studies Group (ASWG) and Franky O’Connor, Maurice O’Connor, Kim Onton, Birdlife Australia have long supported the Monitoring Margot Ooerbeek, Ken Rogers, Liz Rosenberg, Yellow Sea Migrants in Australia (MYSMA) project Matt Slaymaker, Andrea Spencer, Jane Taylor, Ray which generated most of the count data on which Turnbull, Nick Ward, and Hazel Watson. this report is based. Funding for the MYSMA program over the years has come from a number of agencies, The report also considers data from demographic including DBCA, the Commonwealth Government monitoring projects. We thank the Global Flyway (through the Department of Environment and Network for access to their publications and results; Heritage, 2004-2006), Woodside Energy, the Western Theunis Piersma and Ying Chi (Ginny) Chan also Australian Marine Science Institute, Monash provided satellite tag tracks. We thank the AWSG for University and Birdlife Australia. Logistic support has access to their banding data and satellite-tagging been provided by DBCA, Broome Bird Observatory, tracks from north-western Australia; access to this Birdlife Australia, the Stoate family of Anna Plains data was facilitated by Clive Minton, Joris Driessens Station and John and Trish Grey of Thangoo Station. and Katherine Leung. Amanda Lilleyman provided We acknowledge the Yawuru People via the offices summaries of Eastern Curlew remote tracking data of Nyamba Buru Yawuru Limited for permission from the National Environment Science Program to monitor shorebirds on the shores of Roebuck Threatened Species Recovery Hub research project Bay, traditional lands of the Yawuru people. We ‘Strategic planning for the Far Eastern Curlew’ (a acknowledge the Karajarri and Nyangumarta people project also supported by Darwin Port, Charles for permission to survey birds on the shores of 80 Darwin University, Larrakia Rangers and the Mile Beach, traditional lands of the Karajarri and University of Queensland). Nyangumarta people. The report was improved by discussion or comments We are indebted to the many volunteers who have from Ben Fanson, Peter Menkhorst, Clive Minton and made the MYSMA counts possible. An especially Chris Nutt. prominent role has been played by Adrian Boyle, George Swann and staff of Broome Bird Observatory, We thank Rebekah Kington for help with formatting who have collectively been part of all surveys. It is and presentation of the report. not possible to name all other participants here, ii Shorebird monitoring in north Western Australia Contents Summary 1 Background ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Context ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Aims ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Methods ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Results .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Conclusions and implications .............................................................................................................................................................................................2 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Scope of this report ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................3 1.2 Why monitor shorebirds in north Western Australia? ..............................................................................................................................3 1.3 Requirements for long-term shorebird monitoring in north Western Australia....................................................................4 2 Overview of current monitoring 8 2.1 Shorebird counts ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 8 2.2 Demographic monitoring: age ratios ..................................................................................................................................................................12 2.3 Demographic monitoring: Annual survival .................................................................................................................................................... 13 2.4 Monitoring disturbance ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 16 2.5 Shorebird monitoring practices in other sites ............................................................................................................................................. 16 3 Complete shorebird counts of north Western Australian coastline 19 3.1 Complete surveys of Eighty Mile Beach ..........................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Table 7: Species Changing IUCN Red List Status (2014-2015)
    IUCN Red List version 2015.4: Table 7 Last Updated: 19 November 2015 Table 7: Species changing IUCN Red List Status (2014-2015) Published listings of a species' status may change for a variety of reasons (genuine improvement or deterioration in status; new information being available that was not known at the time of the previous assessment; taxonomic changes; corrections to mistakes made in previous assessments, etc. To help Red List users interpret the changes between the Red List updates, a summary of species that have changed category between 2014 (IUCN Red List version 2014.3) and 2015 (IUCN Red List version 2015-4) and the reasons for these changes is provided in the table below. IUCN Red List Categories: EX - Extinct, EW - Extinct in the Wild, CR - Critically Endangered, EN - Endangered, VU - Vulnerable, LR/cd - Lower Risk/conservation dependent, NT - Near Threatened (includes LR/nt - Lower Risk/near threatened), DD - Data Deficient, LC - Least Concern (includes LR/lc - Lower Risk, least concern). Reasons for change: G - Genuine status change (genuine improvement or deterioration in the species' status); N - Non-genuine status change (i.e., status changes due to new information, improved knowledge of the criteria, incorrect data used previously, taxonomic revision, etc.); E - Previous listing was an Error. IUCN Red List IUCN Red Reason for Red List Scientific name Common name (2014) List (2015) change version Category Category MAMMALS Aonyx capensis African Clawless Otter LC NT N 2015-2 Ailurus fulgens Red Panda VU EN N 2015-4
    [Show full text]
  • Nordmann's Greenshank Population Analysis, at Pantai Cemara Jambi
    Final Report Nordmann’s Greenshank Population Analysis, at Pantai Cemara Jambi Cipto Dwi Handono1, Ragil Siti Rihadini1, Iwan Febrianto1 and Ahmad Zulfikar Abdullah1 1Yayasan Ekologi Satwa Alam Liar Indonesia (Yayasan EKSAI/EKSAI Foundation) Surabaya, Indonesia Background Many shorebirds species have declined along East Asian-Australasian Flyway which support the highest diversity of shorebirds in the world, including the globally endangered species, Nordmann’s Greenshank. Nordmann’s Greenshank listed as endangered in the IUCN Red list of Threatened Species because of its small and declining population (BirdLife International, 2016). It’s one of the world’s most threatened shorebirds, is confined to the East Asian–Australasian Flyway (Bamford et al. 2008, BirdLife International 2001, 2012). Its global population is estimated at 500–1,000, with an estimated 100 in Malaysia, 100–200 in Thailand, 100 in Myanmar, plus unknown but low numbers in NE India, Bangladesh and Sumatra (Wetlands International 2006). The population is suspected to be rapidly decreasing due to coastal wetland development throughout Asia for industry, infrastructure and aquaculture, and the degradation of its breeding habitat in Russia by grazing Reindeer Rangifer tarandus (BirdLife International 2012). Mostly Nordmann’s Greenshanks have been recorded in very small numbers throughout Southeast Asia, and there are few places where it has been reported regularly. In Myanmar, for example, it was rediscovered after a gap of almost 129 years. The total count recorded by the Asian Waterbird Census (AWC) in 2006 for Myanmar was 28 birds with 14 being the largest number at a single locality (Naing 2007). In 2011–2012, Nordmann’s Greenshank was found three times in Sumatera Utara province, N Sumatra.
    [Show full text]
  • Keys to Identifying Little Curlew
    MIGRATION PATTERN Keys to identifying Little Curlew Little Curlewin winterquarters at Cairns, Queensland,Australia, November 1975. Photo/Toma• Pain Gardner Not surprisingly,no ornithologisthas seen both the Little and Eskimo curlews nutus)is a speciesheld by some This new speciesFor North heauthorsLittleto Curlew be conspecific(Numenius with mi- in the field. The only detailedpublished the Eskimo Curlew (N. borealis). It America can be readily comparisonis that based by Farrand breeds in northeastern Siberia (Labutin identified in flight and (1977) on the skins of both. He conclud- and others, 1982) and winters in Austra- producesa variety of vocal ed thatthe two formsare separablein the lasia. This speciesis regardedas "rare, and instrumental sounds field under ideal conditions, and writes: little-studied and threatened," rather than "The Eskimo Curlew is a more boldly "endangered,"in the U.S.S.R. (Banni- and coarselymarked bird, with heavier kov, 1978). Brett A. Lane, the wader streakingon the sides of the face and studiescoordinator for the Royal Austra- neck, and dark chevrons on the breast and lasian Ornithologists' Union (pets. flanks;the Little Curlewhas a relatively comm., December1982), saysthe spe- Jeffery Boswail morefinely streakedface and neck, and cies "possiblynumbers many thousands the breast is streaked rather than marked (10,000+ ?)." and with chevrons,the chevronsbeing few in The Little Curlew was recently ob- number and confined to the flanks. In served for the first time in North Amer- Boris N. Veprintsev bothspecies the underwing covertsand ica. The species'closest breeding ground axillaries are barred with dark brown, but to North America is only about 1250 in the Eskimo Curlew these feathers are a mileswest of the nearestpoint of main- rich cinnamon, while in the Little Curlew land Alaska.
    [Show full text]
  • The Kimberley Journey to an Awe-Inspiring Land
    The Kimberley Journey to an awe-inspiring land. The Kimberley provides adventurers with a truly epic experience. It’s here you can take part in one of the last true outback adventures and experience the spectacular scenery along the 660 kilometre Gibb River Road. Search for pearls in Broome, look for birds in one of the most biologically diverse areas on earth or walk through the World Heritage-listed Bungle Bungle in Purnululu National Park. The Kimberley in Western Australia is one of the world’s last great wilderness areas stretching from Broome in the west to beyond Kununurra to the east. Rocks and plateaus An outdoor Art gAllery The World Heritage listed Purnululu National Park is home The Kimberley has a rich Aboriginal history thought to to the awe-inspiring 350-million year-old Bungle Bungle stretch back over 50,000 years, with traditional laws and – a vast area of beehive like sandstone domes that rise customs depicted through intricate rock art paintings 300 metres out of the earth, creating narrow chasms and across the landscape. The world-famous Gwion Gwion hidden gorges. More than 650 types of plants, 130 birds, 81 rock paintings are an integral part of the landscape and reptile and 12 frog species live here. are older than the Egyptian pyramids. The Kimberley’s dramatic Wandjina paintings, the creator spirits of the In the north of the Kimberley, the Mitchell Plateau and land, has become an internationally-recognised symbol spectacular Mitchell Falls are one of the least disturbed of Aboriginal Australia and was an important part of the ecosystems left in the world and are of great biological opening ceremony of the Sydney Olympics in 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • The Systematic Position of the Surfbird, Aphriza Virgata
    THE SYSTEMATIC POSITION OF THE SURFBIRD, APHRIZA VIRGATA JOSEPH R. JEHL, JR. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104 The taxonomic relationships of the Surfbird, ( 1884) elevated the tumstone-Surfbird unit Aphriza virgata, have long been one of the to family rank. But, although they stated (p. most controversial problems in shorebird clas- 126) that Aphrizu “agrees very closely” with sification. Although the species has been as- Arenaria, the only points of similarity men- signed to a monotypic family (Shufeldt 1888; tioned were “robust feet, without trace of web Ridgway 1919), most modern workers agree between toes, the well formed hind toe, and that it should be placed with the turnstones the strong claws; the toes with a lateral margin ( Arenaria spp. ) in the subfamily Arenariinae, forming a broad flat under surface.” These even though they have reached no consensuson differences are hardly sufficient to support the affinities of this subfamily. For example, familial differentiation, or even to suggest Lowe ( 1931), Peters ( 1934), Storer ( 1960), close generic relationship. and Wetmore (1965a) include the Arenariinae Coues (1884605) was uncertain about the in the Scolopacidae (sandpipers), whereas Surfbirds’ relationships. He called it “a re- Wetmore (1951) and the American Ornithol- markable isolated form, perhaps a plover and ogists ’ Union (1957) place it in the Charadri- connecting this family with the next [Haema- idae (plovers). The reasons for these diverg- topodidae] by close relationships with Strep- ent views have never been stated. However, it silas [Armaria], but with the hind toe as well seems that those assigning the Arenariinae to developed as usual in Sandpipers, and general the Charadriidae have relied heavily on their appearance rather sandpiper-like than plover- views of tumstone relationships, because schol- like.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Character Description for Roebuck Bay
    ECOLOGICAL CHARACTER DESCRIPTION FOR ROEBUCK BAY Wetland Research & Management ECOLOGICAL CHARACTER DESCRIPTION FOR ROEBUCK BAY Report prepared for the Department of Environment and Conservation by Bennelongia Pty Ltd 64 Jersey Street, Jolimont WA 6913 www.bennelongia.com.au In association with: DHI Water & Environment Pty Ltd 4A/Level 4, Council House 27-29 St Georges Terrace, Perth WA 6000 www.dhigroup.com.au Wetland Research & Management 28 William Street, Glen Forrest WA 6071 April 2009 Cover photographs: Roebuck Bay, © Jan Van de Kam, The Netherlands Introductory Notes This Ecological Character Description (ECD Publication) has been prepared in accordance with the National Framework and Guidance for Describing the Ecological Character of Australia’s Ramsar Wetlands (National Framework) (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, 2008). The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) prohibits actions that are likely to have a significant impact on the ecological character of a Ramsar wetland unless the Commonwealth Environment Minister has approved the taking of the action, or some other provision in the EPBC Act allows the action to be taken. The information in this ECD Publication does not indicate any commitment to a particular course of action, policy position or decision. Further, it does not provide assessment of any particular action within the meaning of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth), nor replace the role of the Minister or his delegate in making an informed decision to approve an action. This ECD Publication is provided without prejudice to any final decision by the Administrative Authority for Ramsar in Australia on change in ecological character in accordance with the requirements of Article 3.2 of the Ramsar Convention.
    [Show full text]
  • Tasmanian Bird Report 38
    Tasmanian Bird Report 38 July 2017 BirdLife Tasmania, a branch of BirdLife Australia Editor, Wynne Webber TASMANIA The Tasmanian Bird Report is published by BirdLife Tasmania, a regional branch of BirdLife Australia Number 38 © 2017 BirdLife Tasmania, GPO Box 68, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia 7001 ISSN 0156-4935 This publication is copyright. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may, except for the purposes of study or research, be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission in writing of BirdLife Tasmania or the respective paper’s author(s). Acknowledgments NRM South, through funding from the Australian Government’s National Landcare Programme, has provided financial assistance for the publication of this report. We thank them both for this contribution. Contents Editorial iv Wynne Webber State of Tasmania’s terrestrial birds 2014–15 1 Mike Newman, Nick Ramshaw, Sue Drake, Eric Woehler, Andrew Walter and Wynne Webber Risk of anticoagulant rodenticides to Tasmanian raptors 17 Nick Mooney Oddities of behaviour and occurrence 26 Compiler, Wynne Webber When is the best time to survey shorebirds? 31 Stephen Walsh A Eurasian Coot nests in Hobart 32 William E. Davis, Jr Changes in bird populations on Mt Wellington over a 40-year period 34 Mike Newman 2016 Summer and winter wader counts 44 (incorporating corrected tables for 2015 summer counts) Eric Woehler and Sue Drake Editorial In this Tasmanian Bird Report we institute what is hoped to be a useful and ongoing enterprise, which replaces the systematic lists of earlier years: a report on ‘The state of Tasmania’s birds’.
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Ramsar Site Guidelines
    AUSTRALIAN RAMSAR SITE NOMINATION GUIDELINES Module 4 of the National Guidelines for Ramsar Wetlands— Implementing the Ramsar Convention in Australia WAT251.0912 Published by While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure that Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population the contents of this publication are factually correct, the and Communities Commonwealth does not accept responsibility for the accuracy GPO Box 787 or completeness of the contents, and shall not be liable CANBERRA ACT 2601 for any loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the contents of this publication. Endorsement Endorsed by the Standing Council on Environment and Citation Water, 2012. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population Copyright © Commonwealth of Australia 2012 and Communities (2012). Australian Ramsar Site Nomination Guidelines. Module 4 of the National Guidelines for Ramsar Information contained in this publication may be copied or Wetlands—Implementing the Ramsar Convention in Australia. reproduced for study, research, information or educational Australian Government Department of Sustainability, purposes, subject to inclusion of an acknowledgment of the Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Canberra. source. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to: ISBN: 978-1-921733-66-6 Assistant Secretary The publication can be accessed at http://www.environment. Aquatic Systems Policy Branch gov.au/water/topics/wetlands/ramsar-convention/australian-
    [Show full text]
  • Pages 345–366850.31 KB
    Conservation Science W. Aust. 8 (3) : 345–366 (2013) Wader numbers and distribution on Eighty Mile Beach, north-west Australia: baseline counts for the period 1981–2003 CLIVE MINTON 1, MICHAEL CONNOR 2, DAVID PRICE 3, ROSALIND JESSOP 4, PETER COLLINS 5, HUMPHREY SITTERS 6, CHRIS HASSELL 7, GRANT PEARSON 8, DANNY ROGERS 9 1 165 Dalgetty Road Beaumaris, Victoria 3193 2 19 Pamela Grove Lower Templestowe, Victoria 3107 [email protected] 3 8 Scattor View Bridford, Exeter, Devon EX6 7JF, UK 4 Phillip Island Nature Park, PO Box 97 Cowes, Victoria 3922 5 214 Doveton Crescent Soldiers Hill, Ballarat, Victoria 3350 6 Higher Wyndcliffe Barline, Beer, Seaton, Devon EX12 3LP, UK 7 PO Box 3089 Broome, Western Australia 6725 8 Western Australian Department of Parks and Wildlife, PO Box 51 Wanneroo, Western Australia 6065 9 340 Ninks Road St Andrews, Victoria 3761 ABSTRACT This paper analyses ground counts and aerial surveys of high-tide wader roosts conducted over the 23-year period from 1981 to 2003, at Eighty Mile Beach, north-west Australia. It provides a baseline data set with which later count data can be compared. Over the study period, Eighty Mile Beach held a maximum of around 470,000 waders in any given year. This represented around 20% of the total number of migratory waders visiting Australia each year and around 6% of the total East Asian – Australasian Flyway migratory wader population. The most numerous species were great knot (169,000), bar-tailed godwit (110,000), greater sand plover (65,000) and oriental plover (58,000).
    [Show full text]
  • Fact Sheet: Eighty Mile Beach
    Fact Sheet: Eighty Mile Beach Region North Coast Summary Imagine an isolated beach of endless white sand, seashells and turquoise waters, stretching so far it would take more than a week to walk its length. Aptly named, Eighty Mile Beach is indeed long, stretching 220 kilometres and renowned as Australia's longest uninterrupted beach. With its midpoint halfway between Broome and Port Hedland, Eighty Mile Beach is like no other beach in Australia – where the desert (Great Sandy Desert) meets the sea (Indian Ocean). It differentiates itself from other beaches with its low windswept dunes, an almost continuous curving coastline, and large tidal ranges that expose some 60,000 hectares of sand and mudflats, widening the intertidal zone at low tide to almost four kilometres in some sections. Generated on 27/09/2021 https://marinewaters.fish.wa.gov.au/resource/fact-sheet-eighty-mile-beach/ Page 1 of 7 Figure 1. The wide expanse of the intertidal zone as the tide returns on Eighty mile beach (Image: Tahryn Thompson) The seascape is even more remarkable due to an extraordinary diversity of marine life, which includes up to 400,000 migratory shorebirds, rich benthic (mud) fauna, breeding turtles and the world’s largest stocks of wild pearl shell. The shorebirds and marine life of this wetland are recognised internationally under the Ramsar Convention. Eighty Mile Beach is sea country for the Karajarri people to the north, the Nyangumarta people over most of its length and the Ngarla people in the vicinity of Cape Keraudren. Mythological and ceremonial sites, Aboriginal art, shell middens and fish traps are found throughout the area and each group retains social, spiritual and cultural bonds with their traditional land and sea country.
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Shorebirds Identification Sheet Department of the Environment Small Plovers and Turnstone and Water Resources No.1
    Australian Government Australian Shorebirds Identification Sheet Department of the Environment Small Plovers and Turnstone and Water Resources No.1 ORIENTAL PLOVER 25cm. M sparsely vegetated plains of arid large heavy bill inland and coastal mudflats and beaches of northern Australia adult breeding narrow bill adult male breeding adult adult non-breeding non-breeding long legs LARGE SAND PLOVER adult breeding 21cm. M coastal mudflats and bill short sandy intertidal zones and stout darker mask DOUBLE-BANDED PLOVER 19cm. M MONGOLIAN PLOVER 19cm. M coastal mudflats and adult breeding sandy intertidal zones RED-CAPPED PLOVER 15cm. R adult non-breeding rufous cap bill short and narrow winter visitor returning to New Zealand for summer adult non-breeding adult female coastal mudflats and sandy intertidal bare mudflats distinctive black markings zones, also open bare margins of inland and margins adult male on face and breastband of inland and freshwater and saline marsh, south-east coastal saline Australia wetlands BLACK-FRONTED DOTTEREL 17cm. R RED-KNEED DOTTEREL pairs or small family groups on dry margins of 18cm. R feshwater wetlands large or small feeds in shallow margins of inland short rear end freshwater wetlands including temporary shallows after rain black breast band and head, chestnut flanks, long legs with distinctive white throat pink upper half RUDDY TURNSTONE 23cm. M distinctive black hood and white wedge shaped bill collar uses stout bill to flip stones, shells, seaweed and drift- 21cm. R HOODED PLOVER wood on sandy or cobble sandy ocean beaches of beaches, rock platform or southern Australia, open short pink legs reef of coastal Australia edges of saltlakes in south-west Australia M = migratory .
    [Show full text]
  • Valuation of Disaster Risk Reduction Ecosystem Services of Australia's
    Valuation of disaster risk reduction ecosystem services of Australia’s coastal wetlands: review and recommendations REPORT PREPARED BY IDEEA GROUP 14 July 2020 Prepared for Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE) Reference ID: 3600004198 Date 14 July 2020 Institute for the Development of Environmental-Economic Accounting (IDEEA Group) ABN 22 608 437 056 [email protected] www.ideeagroup.com Authors John Finisdore, Dr. Nathan Waltham, Carl Obst, Ben Chipperfield, Reiss Mcleod, and Mark Eigenraam Dr. Roel Plant of UTS provided valuable insights when reviewing this report. Suggested citation IDEEA Group (2020) Valuation of disaster risk reduction ecosystem services of Australia’s coastal wetlands: review and recommendations. Prepared for the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE). Canberra, Australia. Disclaimer This document has been prepared in accordance with the scope of services described in the contract or agreement between IDEEA Group and the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE). This document is supplied in good faith and reflects the knowledge, expertise and experience of the advisors involved. The document and findings are subject to assumptions and limitations referred to within the document. Any findings, conclusions or recommendations only apply to the contract or agreement and no greater reliance should be assumed or drawn by the DAWE. IDEEA Group accepts no responsibility whatsoever for any loss occasioned by any person acting or refraining from action because of reliance on this document. Furthermore, the document has been prepared solely for use by DAWE. IDEEA Group accepts no responsibility for its use by other parties. Page 2 Contents 1 Executive summary ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]