Conservation Action Planning June 2016 Summary

Sustainable Water Resources

A Collaborative, Landscape Planning Approach to Water Conservation in the Northern and Yorke NRM Region,

Compiled by: James McGregor (Greening Australia) for the Northern and Yorke Natural Resources Management Board and the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources

Cover Images

1 2 3

4 5 6

1) Yappala Springs (courtesy M. Durant), 2) Hutt River Gauging Station, 3) Diamond Lakes, 4) Coonatoo Station Permanent Pools Monitoring (courtesy J. Munro), 5) Pipeline near Port Augusta (courtesy M. Durant), 6) Beetaloo Reservoir (courtesy J. Munro).

Acknowledgements

Current and previous participants of the Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning process including Andy Sharp, Anne Hallett, Anne Jensen, Claudia Smith, Dan Rogers, Damian Stahm, Daniel Penny, Danny Doyle, Darren Alcomb, Eric Sommerville, Glyn Ashman, Grant Chapman, Jackie O’Reilly, James McGregor, Jaqueline Frizenschaf, Jason Van Laarhoven, Jennifer Munro, Karla Billington, Kerry Ward, Kumar Savadamuthu, Michael Manou, Nick Calhoun, Nick Whiting, Pam Pilkington.

This document may be cited as:

McGregor, J. (2015) Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2015. Report to the Northern and Yorke Natural Resources Management Board and Department of Environment Water and Natural Resources. Greening Australia.

Version: 30/06/16

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 2

Contents Page

1. Background 5 1.1. Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……. 5 1.2. Regional Planning Context……………………………………………………..…………………………………………………..………..... 6 1.3. Sustainable Water Project Area……………………………………………………………………………………………………….………... 7 1.4. Social Context……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………… 13

2. Identification of Conservation Assets 14 2.1. Methodology for Identifying Conservation Assets ……………………………………………………………………………………… 14 2.2. Conservation Assets of the Northern and Yorke Region…………………………..…………………………………………….…. 14

3. Viability of Conservation Assets 19 3.1. Methodology for Assessing Viability …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 19 3.2. Viability of the Conservation Assets of the Northern and Yorke Region …..…………………….……………………….… 19

4. Threats to Conservation Assets 21 4.1. Methodology for Assessing Threats…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 21 4.2. Threats to the Conservation Assets of the Northern and Yorke Region.……………………………………………………… 21

5. Setting Conservation Objectives 23 5.1. Methodology for Setting Conservation Objectives………………………………………………………….…………………………… 23 5.2. Conservation Objectives of the Northern and Yorke Region……………………………………………………………………… 23

6. Conservation Strategies, Actions Steps and Key Programs 25 6.1. Methodology for Developing Conservation Strategies, Action Steps and Key Programs……………………………… 25 6.2. Conservation Strategies, Action Steps and Key Programs ……..……………………………………………………………..……. 26

7. Monitoring and Evaluation 29 7.1. Methodology for Developing a Monitoring Program…………………………………………………………………………………… 29 7.2. Monitoring Indicators for the Northern and Yorke Region…………………..……………………………………………………... 29

8. Appendices 30 Appendix 1: Northern and Yorke Natural Resources Management Board Goals………………………………………………………… 30 Appendix 2: Participants of the Southern CAP process……………………………………………………………………..31

9. References 32

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 3

Tables Table 1 Existing Programs and Legislation ………………….……………………………………………………….……….…...... 6 Table 2 Selected Demographic Statistics from the Australian Bureau of Statistics………………………………….…………… 13 Table 3 Key Attributes of Conservation Assets ………………………………..……………………………………………………….………….. 20 Table 4 Viability Ratings for Conservation Assets………………………………………………..…………………………………….………….. 20 Table 5 Key Threats to Conservation Assets……………………………………………………………………………………………….…….…… 22

Maps Map 1. Sustainable Water Project Area ………………………………………………………………………………….………………………..... 8 Map 2. Land Use in the Region …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 9 Map 3. Surface Water Resources ………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………………. 11 Map 4. Ground Water Resources ……..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 12 Map 5. Conservation Assets of the Sustainable Water Project Area………………………………………………………………….…. 16

Abbreviations CAP Conservation Action Planning DEWNR Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources GA Greening Australia NRM Natural Resources Management PWRA Prescribed Water Resource Area SA South Australia SAW SA Water Corporation

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 4

1. Background

1.1. Introduction

This document summarises the progress of the Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning (CAP) process to the 30th June 2016. The process commenced in March 2014 and the planning team (refer Appendix 4) has met four times to develop the conservation plan for the region.

The focus of the Sustainable Water Conservation Action Plan was on

“The Sustainable Use and Management of the Region’s Water Resources”

With consideration given to the following water uses:  Town Water Supplies  Mining and Industrial  Private Domestic Supplies  Stock Water  Urban Amenity  Agriculture  Recreation and Tourism  Viticulture  Early European Heritage  Horticulture  Indigenous Heritage  Environmental Water

1.1.1. Conservation Action Planning (CAP)

The planning process for the Sustainable Water Project uses the Conservation Action Planning (CAP) framework developed by the US-based conservation group The Nature Conservancy www.nature.org as its basis. This framework is widely used in the development of international conservation projects and is becoming more widely adopted in Australia for planning large scale conservation projects with multiple stakeholders. One of the underpinning goals of CAP planning is to move conservation projects from the site scale (10’s or 100’s of hectares) to the conservation and preservation of functional landscapes (100,000’s hectares) which are able to sustain biodiversity at an eco-regional scale (Low 2003). This CAP utilises the same principals of biodiversity conservation for water conservation.

The CAP process typically involves a series of conservation planning workshops with 5-10 participants from multiple organisations. The process is facilitated by a trained CAP coach and uses a standard step-by-step methodology (refer Low 2003) and an Excel-based program, or Miradi software, to guide participants through the development of a 1st iteration landscape conservation plan.

Whilst built on solid scientific principles, the approach recognises that there are often large gaps in knowledge and data sets and hence a strong on-going adaptive management ethic is implied throughout the process. It also recognises that a large amount of knowledge exists with local practitioners and therefore incorporates local practitioner input into the planning process.

The major steps in the CAP process, as outlined in this document, are:

 an analysis of the regional context in which conservation is to occur;  the identification of conservation assets and nested assets (i.e. ecosystems, communities and species);  an analysis of the viability (i.e. health) of the conservation assets and the key threats;  the development of measurable objectives to achieve the long-term conservation of the assets;  the development of conservation strategies, action steps and key programs to achieve the conservation objectives;  the development of a practical monitoring and evaluation program and adaptive management framework.

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 5

1. Background

1.2 Regional Context

1.2.1 Northern and Yorke Natural Resources Management (NRM) Board Region

The NRM region extends from the northern plains in the south to the Southern Flinders Ranges in the north, and includes the whole of the Yorke Peninsula. In total the Northern and Yorke NRM region covers over 3 million hectares and supports a population of approximately 95,000 people (Northern and Yorke NRM Board, 2009).

As opposed to other Conservation Action Plans (e.g. Biodiversity or Soil) which divide the region into three discrete CAP regions, the entire NRM region is covered by a single Sustainable Water CAP.

1.2.2 Water Management Organisations, Programs and Legislation

The CAP process is a planning process which complements existing plans and strategies (refer Appendix 3 for Northern and Yorke NRM regional goals).

The principle organisations involved in water management in the region are the Northern and Yorke Natural Resources Management Board, the State Government Department for Environment, Water and Natural Resources and SA Water Corporation. The former organisations underwent a merger in 2010/2011 and now function primarily as one organisation. Local landholders, farmers and pastoralists are also supported by organisations such as Rural Solutions of South Australia in utilising both surface and ground water resources.

Table 1: Existing Water Programs, Strategies and Legislation

National State (SA) Regional (N&Y NRM) National and State Legislation  National Water  State Strategic Plan  Northern and Yorke  Water Act 2007 Initiative  Tackling Climate NRM Plan (National) Change  Baroota Prescribed  Water Amendment Act  State Natural Water Allocation 2008 (National) Resources Plan (in  Natural Resources Management Plan development) Management Act 2004  Water For Good  Water (SA) Plan Allocation Plan  Development Act 1993  SAW Long Term Plan (SA) for Yorke Peninsula  SAW Long Term Plan for Upper Spencer Gulf

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 6

1. Background

1.3 Sustainable Water Project Area

The Sustainable Water project area covers approximately 3.6 million hectares which includes the entire Northern and Yorke NRM Region from Hamley Bridge in the south to Hawker in the north, as well as a section of in the South Australian Arid Lands NRM Board region (refer Map 1).

1.3.1 Regional Landforms

The project area is characterised by gently undulating plains and low foothills, with a series of low ridgelines extending south of the southern edge of the Flinders Ranges. There are 4 distinct geomorphological areas 1) Yorke Peninsula, 2) Northern , 3) Mount Lofty Block and 4) Southern Flinders Ranges (Graham et al, 2001). The highest points in the region are and Mount Brown at around 960 metres.

1.3.2 Climate and Rainfall

The project area is subject to a typical Mediterranean climate with mild wet winters and hot dry summers. This pattern is most pronounced in the south of the region and becomes less so in the north where summer rainfall events are common. The climate and rainfall are strongly influenced by the topography with annual average rainfall in high altitude areas in excess of 600 mm while the northern plains country receives less than 200 mm. The region is prone to periodic droughts which have occurred with relative regularity since records began (Schwertfeger & Curran in Davies et al, 1996).

1.3.3 Aboriginal Culture

Aboriginal people maintain a rich connection to the region and this is demonstrated by the numerous significant sites and artefacts found throughout the region. A number of language groups are associated with the region including the Nukunu of the Southern Flinders Ranges, the Adnyamuthanha in the northern parts of the Southern Flinders Ranges, the Ngadjuri of the woodlands in the middle of the region, the Pankarla (Bungala) from around Port Augusta and west, the Narungga of the Yorke Peninsula and the Kaurna of the southern parts of the region.

1.3.4 Regional Land Use

By a wide margin the dominant land uses in the region are stock grazing (44% of area) and broad acre cropping (40% of area). Other significant land uses in the region include public and private conservation reserves, transport and defence (refer Map 2).

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 7

1. Background

Map 1: Sustainable Water Project Area

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 8

Map 2: Land Use in the Region

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 9

1. Background

Surface Watercourses and Water Bodies

There are 4 major watercourses which traverse the region; The Willochra Creek starts in the Southern Flinders Ranges near Melrose and traverses the Willochra Plain in the north of the region, terminating in . The total catchment area for the Willochra Creek is around 639,000 hectares.

The Broughton River starts between Spalding and in the Centre of the region and terminates in the Spencer Gulf south of . The River’s catchment covers around 565,000 hectares and includes other significant water courses including the Hutt and Hill River (between Clare and Spalding) and the Rocky River (between Murray Town and ). This catchment also includes two large reservoirs; Beetaloo Reservoir and Bundaleer Reservoir.

The starts near Manoora in the south east of the region and terminates in the St. Vincent Gulf at Port Wakefield. The total catchment covers around 69,000 hectares.

The Light River starts also starts near Manoora in the south east of the region and terminates in the St. Vincent Gulf near Two Wells. The total catchment covers around 175,000 hectares and includes the Gilbert River (between Manoora and Hamley Bridge).

Several large perennial water bodies also occur in the region; The Peesey Swamps and Yorketown Lakes of the southern Yorke Peninsula (south of Minlaton) are internally drained saline lakes. They generally have localised surface water catchments, totalling around 18,000 hectares but also have some connection to the ocean (Durant, 2013).

The Bumbunga Lakes, situated at Lochiel in the centre of the region, is an internally drained hyper saline system with a catchment of around 29,000 hectares. Lake Bumbunga supports a salt harvesting enterprise and is known for its aesthetic appeal and land yachting.

The Diamond Lakes extend from Brinkworth to Whitwarta in the centre of the region. Their catchment covers around 108,000 hectares. Prior to extensive land clearance and drainage modifications the lakes were a freshwater system which periodically drained into the Wakefield River. The lakes are now hyper saline and very rarely flow into the Wakefield River.

Porter and Apoinga Lagoons east of have localised catchments of around 17,000 hectares and 3,000 hectares respectively. In recent history when high runoff increased water volumes the lake became a popular recreational location. Porter Lagoon is believed to have historically been a predominantly ephemeral lake with small perennial refuge areas in the middle which is similar to the present regime.

Ground Water Basins

9 ground water basins are recognised to at least partially occur in the region:  The Adelaide Geosyncline covers around 7,686,000 hectares from the southern tip of the Fleurieu Peninsula to Farina in the north and Broken Hill in the east.  The Carribie Basin covers 10,000 hectares north of Marion Bay at the southern end of the Yorke Peninsula.  The Gawler Craton covers 14,421,000 hectares from the Nullarbor Plain in the east, to the southern tip of the Eyre Peninsula to Roxby Downs in the north.  The Para-Wurlie Basin covers 4,500 hectares to the west of Warooka at the southern end of the Yorke Peninsula.  The Pirie Basin covers 285,000 hectares of land but primarily lies below much of the Spencer Gulf.  The St. Vincent Basin covers 582,000 hectares of land but primarily lies below the St. Vincent Gulf.  The Torrens Basin covers 1,303,000 hectares from Miranda on the Mambray Coast to Farina in the north.  The Walloway Basin covers 83,000 hectares near Orroroo from Mannanarie in the south to Johnburgh in the north.  The Willochra Basin covers 160,000 hectares from in the south to Simmonston in the north.

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 10

1. Background

Map 3: Surface Water Resources

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 11

1. Background

Map 4: Ground Water Resources

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 12

1. Background

1.4 Social Context

1.4.1 Population

The main population centres are Port Augusta and Port Pirie with a little over 13,000 people in each urban locality. Most other towns in the region are much smaller with around 4,500 people at Kadina, 3,500 at Clare, 1,700 at Peterborough and 1,500 at Jamestown. Total population is difficult to assess as the CAP boundary does not correspond to statistical boundaries, however an approximation using Local Government Areas gives a figure of approximately 114,000 people (refer to Table 2 below).

Table 2: Selected Demographic Statistics from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (www.abs.gov.au) Population Population Population Population 10 Year Change Location Density 2003 2008 2013 % No. (people/km²) Barunga West (DC) 2,596 2,575 2,452 -6 -144 1.5 Clare and Gilbert Valleys (DC) 8,335 8,537 8,994 8 659 4.8 Copper Coast (DC) 11,144 12,382 13,687 23 2,543 17.7 Flinders Ranges (DC) 1,785 1,753 1,649 -8 -136 0.4 Goyder (DC) 4,261 4,249 4,239 -1 -22 0.6 Light (RC) 11,491 13,138 14,459 26 2,968 11.3 Mallala (DC) 7,710 8,285 8,611 12 901 9.2 Mount Remarkable (DC) 2,937 2,915 2,785 -5 -152 0.8 Northern Areas (DC) 4,770 4,717 4,508 -5 -262 1.5 Orroroo/Carrieton (DC) 1,009 938 860 -15 -149 0.3 Peterborough (DC) 2,010 1,887 1,785 -11 -225 0.6 Port Augusta (C) 13,998 14,348 14,605 4 607 12.7 Port Pirie City and Dists (M) 17,536 17,619 17,625 1 89 10.0 Wakefield (DC) 6,552 6,585 6,826 4 274 2.0 Yorke Peninsula (DC) 11,519 11,360 11,119 -3 -400 1.9 TOTAL 107,653 111,288 114,204 6 6,551 2.7

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 13

2. Identification of Conservation Assets

2.1. Methodology for Identifying Conservation Assets

The first step in the conservation action planning process involves the identification of a small number of focal conservation assets (i.e. ecosystems, communities or species) that collectively represent the biodiversity of a region. The explicit assumption within this process is that by conserving representative examples of broad-scale communities and ecosystems, the majority of species will also be conserved. The list of focal conservation assets therefore need not be long and exhaustive; rather, it should be short and representative. In general, the CAP methodology recommends that no more than eight conservation assets are selected to be the focus of a landscape conservation program.

The asset selection process begins by identifying the coarse-scale ecosystems and communities for conservation. The issue of whether to lump individual ecosystems and communities together or split into individual conservation assets is often a difficult one. In general, ecosystems and communities are lumped together if they: ● co-occur across the landscape; ● share similar ecological processes; ● share similar threats.

The next step is to screen for species and communities occurring at smaller scales that are not well “nested” within the broader set of ecosystems or communities; that is, those species and communities whose conservation requirements are not met through the conservation of the coarse-scale assets (as suggested by Noss et al. 1999; Margules and Pressey 2000; MacNally et al. 2002). This approach is known as the coarse filter – fine filter approach (Groves 2003). Examples of species often not captured by coarse-scale assets include: ● rare, threatened and endemic species; ● species with highly disjunct (spatially separate) populations or restricted distributions; ● keystone or highly interactive species (those that have a disproportionate influence on the structure and ecological function of the community); ● wide-ranging species.

Species and communities that fall into the above categories may be captured by threatened species recovery programs or may need to be considered as separate conservation assets.

Source: Adapted from Low (2003)

2.2. Water Conservation Assets of the Northern and Yorke Region

Seven key conservation assets have been identified by the Sustainable Water planning team. Each conservation asset is associated with numerous nested assets (i.e. River Systems, Lakes, Ground Water Basins, etc.) which are an important focus of conservation efforts and help further define the asset. The seven key conservation assets and associated nested assets are described in more detail in the following section. The spatial distribution of most of the assets is presented in Map 5.

1. Lower North Surface Water Catchments 2. Upper North Surface Water Catchments 3. Clare Valley Prescribed Water Area 4. Surface Water Reservoirs 5. High Value Ground Water 6. Medium Value Ground Water 7. Alternative Water Sources

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 14

2. Identification of Conservation Assets

2.1.1. Lower North Surface Water Catchments

The Lower North Surface Water Catchments captures three major river systems including the Broughton River, Wakefield River and the Light River catchments. Use of water in this asset is primarily for stock with some irrigation and domestic use. Some water is accessed directly from waterways by stock, however much is captured in dams or drawn from permanent pools. All rivers typically display low base flows which are higher in winter and punctuated by periodic floods.

Part of the Broughton and Wakefield catchments are annexed for inclusion in the Prescribed Surface Water asset and the Surface Water Reservoir asset. Nested Assets KEY CATCHMENTS Broughton River KEY CATCHMENTS Wakefield River KEY CATCHMENTS Light River RESOURCE USE Stock RESOURCE USE Irrigation RESOURCE USE Domestic

2.1.2. Upper North Surface Water Catchments

The Upper North Surface Water Catchments include one significant water way, the Willochra Creek. The Willochra Creek is an ephemeral system flowing for 3-4 months of the year and punctuated by periodic floods. The other catchment in the asset is the Mambray Coast, which is a series of disconnected creek which terminate in the upper Spencer Gulf. This asset is noted for its upper catchment being in the higher rainfall Southern Flinders Ranges with subsequent flows across arid plains. High rainfall events and associated flooding during

summer are relatively common.

Part of the Baroota Creek catchment is annexed for inclusion in the Prescribed Surface Water asset and the Surface Water Reservoir asset. Nested Assets WATERBODIES Willochra Creek WATERBODIES Baroota Creek WATERBODIES Mambray Creek RESOURCE USE Stock RESOURCE USE Irrigation RESOURCE USE Domestic

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 15

2. Identification of Conservation Assets

Map 5: Conservation Assets of the Sustainable Water Project Area

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 16

2. Identification of Conservation Assets

2.1.3. Prescribed Water Area

Prescribed Water Resource Areas (PWRA) are currently prescribed under South Australia’s Natural Resources Management Act 2004. One Prescribed Surface Water Areas is included in this asset; Clare Valley (prescribed since 1996). A second PWRA, Baroota (prescribed since 2008), was removed from the assets due to the expectation its prescription will not continue into the longer term. Use of water in this asset is for stock, irrigation, domestic and town water use and comes from a variety of sources, including streams, rivers and dams. The Barossa PWRA which is partly within the project area is not considered in this plan.

Nested Assets PRESCRIBED AREAS Clare Valley WATERBODIES Hutt River WATERBODIES Hill River WATERBODIES Wakefield River WATERBODIES Skillogalee Creek WATERBODIES Quaternary Sedimentary Aquifers (Clare) WATERBODIES Proterzoic Fractured Rock Aquifers (Clare) RESOURCE USE Stock RESOURCE USE Irrigation RESOURCE USE Domestic RESOURCE USE Town Supply

2.1.4. Surface Water Reservoirs

Whilst the project area includes many surface water reservoirs, this asset is intended to include the three large reservoirs; Baroota, Bundaleer and Beetaloo. These reservoirs are no longer used for town water supply but are maintained by SA Water for emergency supply only. It is anticipated that their utility as recreational destinations may be developed in the future.

Nested Assets AUS SA RESERVOIR Baroota RESERVOIR Beetaloo RESERVOIR Bundaleer

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 17

2. Identification of Conservation Assets

2.1.5. High Value Ground Water

High value ground water refers to basins of high quality (salinity <2,000 ppm) water and bores which support town water supplies. These are displayed as polygons for aquifers or points for bores. Two aquifers which meet the criteria are the Carribie Basin and the Para-Wurlie Basin at the southern end of the Yorke Peninsula. Bores which meet the criteria occur throughout the project area, but are primarily situated along the Southern Flinders Ranges.

Nested Assets WATERBODIES Carribie Basin WATERBODIES Para-Wurlie Basin KEY LOCATIONS Southern Flinders Ranges RESOURCE USE Town Supply

2.1.6. Medium Value Ground Water

Medium value groundwater refers to basins of moderate quality (salinity 2,000 - 7,000 ppm) which support irrigation, stock and domestic use. Town water supplies taken via bores from these basins are included in the High Value Ground Water asset.

Nested Assets WATERBODIES Balaklava Groundwater Area WATERBODIES Booborowie Groundwater Area WATERBODIES Walloway Basin WATERBODIES Willochra Basin RESOURCE USE Stock RESOURCE USE Domestic \

2.1.7 Alternative Water Sources to Locally Available

This asset refers to Imported Water, Wastewater, Stormwater and Reused Water schemes and infrastructure centred on developed areas. This asset is recognition of the reliance in some areas, especially the Yorke Peninsula, on supplementary water including reticulated Murray River water. This imported water is relatively expensive so it is used when other supplies (surface and ground water) are not of sufficient quality or are too expensive to use. This water is primarily used for municipal water supply and irrigation of high value crops and reduces the reliance on other water sources where they both exist.

Nested Assets WATERBODIES Stormwater Wetlands INFRASTRUCTURE Stormwater System INFRASTRUCTURE Murray River Pipeline RESOURCE USE Irrigation RESOURCE USE Town Supplies

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 18

3. Viability of Conservation Assets

3.1. Methodology for Assessing the Viability of Conservation Assets

The second step in the conservation action planning process is an assessment of the viability (or overall health) of the conservation assets. This is a four step process.

Step 1 Identification of a small number (3 - 5) of key attributes for each conservation asset. Key attributes represent the critical factors required for the long term viability of the conservation assets. These factors relate to the size, condition and landscape context of the assets and include attributes such as hydrological regimes, water quality and capacity of resource (refer Table 4).

Step 2 Identification of appropriate monitoring indicators for each key attribute. Monitoring indicators are easily measurable factors closely related to the status of the key attributes. For example, the frequency, duration and timing of flood events may be an appropriate monitoring indicator for hydrological regimes.

Step 3 Development of criteria for rating the current status of each indicator. The development of criteria for rating the status of each indicator is an iterative process that typically starts as a simplified qualitative assessment (e.g. lots, some, few) and is progressively developed into more refined, numeric value ranges (e.g. 1,000 megalitres of water for 3 months during late spring).

Step 4 Ranking the current status of each indicator to determine the overall viability of the conservation assets. The final step in assessing the viability of the conservation assets is to rank the current status of each indicator based on the criteria for poor, fair, good and very good (described below). These individual ratings are rolled up in the Conservation Action Planning software to provide an assessment of the overall viability for each asset (refer table 4).

POOR - allowing the factor to remain in this condition for an extended period of time will make restoration or preventing extirpation practically impossible. FAIR – the factor is outside its range of acceptable variation and requires human intervention. If unchecked, the target will be vulnerable to serious degradation. GOOD – the factor is functioning within its range of acceptable variation; it may require some human intervention. VERY GOOD – the factor is functioning at an ecologically desirable status, and requires little human intervention.

Source: adapted from Low (2003)

3.2. Viability of the Conservation Assets of the of the Northern and Yorke Region

The overall viability of the conservation assets, as assessed by the planning team, is displayed in Table 5. Viability was determined by identifying and rating the current status of the key attributes of each conservation asset based on considerations of size, condition and landscape context (refer Table 4). These assessments were supported by existing monitoring data and reports for some key attributes and in other cases were based on local expert opinion. The absence of quantitative data for assessing the viability of many key attributes highlights a gap in the existing monitoring programs and an area for future development (refer section 7).

Table 5 shows that prescribed surface water areas, terminal saline lakes, high value ground water and medium value ground water were assessed to be of good overall viability. The remainder of the conservation assets were assessed to be of fair overall viability. There was significant disagreement in the group about whether surface water catchments, particularly the lower north surface water catchments, actually have poor viability. The point of disagreement was whether the poor health of the lower reaches reflects overall poor health of the asset, or whether the average health of the catchment, being fair, is an accurate reflection of the current status. This has not yet been resolved.

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 19

3. Viability of Conservation Assets

Table 3: Key Attributes of Conservation Assets Conservation Asset Landscape Context Condition Size

• Geomorphology • Community Value • Capacity of Resource • Groundwater/Surface water • Indigenous Community • Storage interaction Value Lower North Surface Water • Hydrological Regime • Permanent Pools Water Catchments • Permanent Pools volume/ Quality and Depth duration/ connectivity • Water Quality

• Geomorphology • Community Value • Capacity of Resource • Groundwater/Surface water • Indigenous Community • Storage Upper North Surface Water interaction Value Catchments • Hydrological Regime • Permanent Pools Water • Permanent Pools volume/ Quality and Depth duration/ connectivity • Water Quality • Capacity of Resource Prescribed Water Area • Community Value • Storage Surface Water Reservoirs • Water Quality

• Frequency of High Value • Pollutants • Capacity of Resource High Value Ground Water Ground Water Wells • Salinity • Seawater Intrusion • Water Quality • Frequency of High Value • Pollutants • Capacity of Resource Medium Value Ground Ground Water Wells • Salinity Water • Seawater Intrusion • Water Quality • Stormwater Regime • Access Alternative Water Sources • Capacity of Resource • Wastewater Reuse

Note: Status of Key Attribute - Poor, Fair, Good, Very Good, Not Scored

Table 4: Overall Viability Ratings for Conservation Assets Landscape Overall Conservation Asset Condition Size Context Viability Lower North Surface Water 1 Fair Poor Poor Poor Catchments Upper North Surface Water 2 Fair Poor Fair Fair Catchments

3 Prescribed Water Area - - Fair Fair

4 Surface Water Reservoirs - Good Good Good

5 High Value Ground Water Good Good Good Good

6 Medium Value Ground Water Good Good Good Good

7 Alternative Water Sources Fair - Fair Fair

Overall Landscape Viability Fair

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 20

4. Threats to Conservation Assets

4.1. Methodology for Assessing Threats

The third step in the conservation action planning process involves the identification of high priority threats to the conservation assets. This is a two-step process.

The first step involves an assessment of the severity of the key stresses to the conservation assets. Stresses are inversely related to the key attributes (refer section 3) and may include altered reduced rainfall, reduced water quality, habitat fragmentation, etc. Stresses are ranked from very high to low based on:

● severity of damage where it occurs i.e. what level of damage can reasonably be expected within 10 years under current circumstances (Very High - destroys or eliminates the conservation asset, High - seriously degrades, Medium - moderately degrades, Low - slightly impairs); ● scope of the damage i.e. what is the geographic scope of impact on the conservation asset that can be reasonably expected within 10 years under current circumstances (Very High - very widespread, High - widespread, Medium - localised, Low - very localised).

The second step in the process involves the identification and ranking of the source of stresses (i.e. the direct threats). For example, the source of stress for reduced species diversity may be total grazing pressure or the source of stress for altered hydrological regimes may be river extraction. Sources of stress are ranked from very high to low based on:

● contribution of the source to the stress i.e. expected contribution of the source, acting alone, to the full expression of the stress under current circumstances (i.e. Very High - very large contributor, High - large contributor, Medium - moderate contributor, Low - small contributor). ● irreversibility of the stress caused by the source (Very High - not reversible, High - reversible, but not practically affordable, Medium - reversible with reasonable commitment of resources, Low - easily reversible at low cost).

Once the stresses and sources are ranked according to the above criteria, a summary rating for each threat is generated by the Conservation Action Planning (CAP) software. This results in the threats summary table (refer Table 6) that allocates a ranking for each threat from very high to low, both in terms of the threat to the individual conservation assets and to the collective impact of the threat across the landscape.

Source: adapted from (Low 2003)

4.2. Threats to the Conservation Assets

The key threats to the conservation assets have only been partially assessed by the planning team (see Table 6). The named threat is a truncated version of the threat, which is captured in full stress-source wording in the CAP workbook. For example “Reduced Water Quality (turbidity, nutrients, E. coli) by inappropriate watercourse stock access (inc. feedlots)” has been shortened to “Inappropriate watercourse Stock Access” below to allow the table to fit onto the page.

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 21

4. Threats to Conservation Assets

Table 5: Key Threats to Conservation Assets

Lower North Upper North Prescribed Surface High Value Medium Alternative Surface Surface Surface Water Ground Value Water Overall Water Water Water Reservoirs Water Ground Sources Threat Threats Across Assets Catchments Catchments Areas Water Rank

Project-specific threats 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Reduced / altered rainfall by Long term climate Very Very Very Very High change (100yrs) High High High High Increased extraction caused by climate change High High High High High (drought or increased temperatures)(50yrs) Long term Climate Change (altered rainfall High High High High High patterns: timing, intensity, volume) Increased Potential Evapotranspiration (100 yrs High High High High High climate change) Reduced/Altered recharge and flows caused by Med Low High Low Med Med Low Med climate variability (10 yrs)

Inappropriate watercourse Stock Access Med High Low Med

Historic Riparian Vegetation Removal High Med Med

Inefficient water storage (evaporation from High Med Med dams)

Reduced cover caused by wildfire Low Low High Med

Agricultural chemical misuse/accident Low Med Med Med

Inappropriate total grazing pressure Low Med Med Med

Water contamination caused by poor well Med Med Med integrity

Increased reticulated water costs Low Low Med Low Low Low

Changes in land use Low Med Low Low Low

Contour banks and diversions Low Med Low Low

Increased reed abundance Med Low Low

Improved crop water use Med Low Low

Reduced water quality caused by fish stocks Med Low

Reduced reticulated water costs Med Low

Insufficient River Murray Water Level Med Low

Poor River Murray Water Quality Med Low

Pipeline Infrastructure failure Med Low

Scouring and deposition caused by extreme Med Low events

Sea level rise (hydraulic gradient) (100yrs) Med Low

Very Very Threat Status High High High High High High High High

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 22

5. Setting Conservation Objectives

5.1. Methodology for Setting Conservation Objectives

The fourth step in the conservation action planning process involves setting measurable objectives that, if achieved, would ensure the long term conservation of the assets. In particular, objectives are developed in line with the S.M.A.R.T principles (i.e specific, measurable, attainable, realistic and time-bound) and are aimed at addressing high priority threats or achieving improvements in size, condition and landscape context attributes. Some useful considerations for setting conservation objectives relating to size, condition and landscape context are described below:

Size: Species-area curves provide useful guidelines for setting goals relating to the amount of habitat required for conservation. A variety of studies indicate that, as a general rule, retaining 30-40 percent of pre-European extent will conserve 80-90 percent of species associated with a particular habitat type (Dobson 1996, Nachlinger et al. 2001). As a general rule, a minimum 30-40 percent area target may be applied for conservation assets that have not been subject to broad scale clearance. For highly depleted or restricted conservation assets this may be raised to 50 percent.

Condition: Condition attributes such as native flora and fauna diversity / composition and water quality are often poorly recorded at the landscape scale but are integral to the concept of functional landscapes. Maintaining ecological integrity over long time periods requires condition attributes functioning within their natural range of variation over specified geographical areas and time periods. Historical condition benchmarks (i.e. pre-European), when available, provide a useful reference point for goal setting; however, caution should be applied due to the likely influence of climate change (Harris et al. 2006) and historical degradation (e.g. salinity). In some regions, benchmark conditions may be referenced to regional condition monitoring manuals (e.g. NCSSA Bushland Condition Monitoring)

Landscape Context: The spatial distribution of habitat “patches” and key disturbance events such as fire and hydrological regimes are critical to conservation at the landscape scale. Much of the theory relating to the spatial distribution of habitat is underpinned by metapopulation theory in which independent species populations may eventually go extinct due to the incremental impacts of wildfire, weeds, predation and population dynamics. The protection and management of existing populations, habitats and refugia, together with the restoration of terrestrial and aquatic processes is therefore critical to landscape conservation. Factors for goal setting relating to the spatial distribution of patches include the size, shape, number and distance between patches. Goals for fire and hydrological regimes should consider the timing, frequency, duration and extent.

5.2. Conservation Objectives

These conservation objectives are written in draft form and provide guidance to the development of strategies and program development. It is recognised that

Asset: Surface Water Catchments (LN, UN, Reservoirs) Threat: Inappropriate Stock Access By 2030 achieve ‘Good’ water quality for all surface Water Reservoirs and Surface Water Catchments impacted by inappropriate stock access.

Asset: Surface Water Catchments (LN, UN, Reservoirs) Threat: Historic Riparian Vegetation Removal By 2030 riparian vegetation is restored in priority areas of surface water catchments to improve water quality.

Asset: Surface Water Catchments (LN, UN, Reservoirs) Threat: Inefficient Water Storage By 2050, xx% of farm dams are modified to meet some criteria* to minimise losses to evaporation. *Criteria to be determined

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 23

5. Setting Conservation Objectives

Asset: Surface Water Reservoirs Threat: Sedimentation from Wildfire By 2030, Sustainable fire management implemented across all Reservoir Catchments to prevent large, fire driven sedimentation events.

Asset: All Threat: Long Term Climate Change By 2030, the region is minimising its contribution to anthropomorphic climate change.

Asset: Surface Water Catchments (LN, UN) Attribute/Viability: ‘Fair’ Hydrological Regime By 2030, hydrological regimes are restored to ‘good’ for key reaches of the Surface Water Catchments.

Asset: Surface Water Catchments (LN, UN) Attribute/Viability: ‘Poor’ Indigenous Community Value By 2030, all/xx% areas of cultural importance are managed to restore critical values (e.g. water levels, condition, etc.) TBC with indigenous representative(s)

Asset: Surface Water Catchments (LN, UN) Attribute/Viability: ‘Poor/Fair’ Storage By 2030 storages retain not more than 25% of mean streamflow for all catchments and sub catchments (25% Deane & Greaves, 2008, suggested limit)

Asset: Alternative Water Sources Attribute/Viability: ‘Fair’ Storm Water (outside of SW Catchments) By 2030, township outflows into the sea are managed to ensure outputs are not detrimental to the environment.

Asset: Prescribed Water Areas Threat: Increased Reticulated Water Costs TBC

Asset: All Threat: Drought TBC

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 24

6 Conservation Strategies, Action Steps and Key Programs

6.1. Methodology for Developing and Prioritising Conservation Strategies

The fifth step in the conservation action planning process involves the identification of effective strategies and action steps to achieve the conservation objectives developed in Section 5. This is a three step process.

Step 1 Conduct a thorough situation analysis of the key factors related to the conservation objectives. This includes consideration of the causal factors underlying particular threats and potential hurdles for enhancing the condition of conservation assets (e.g. social, cultural, economic and individual motivations). This can help pinpoint opportunities for intervention and guide decisions about which delivery mechanisms are best employed to achieve the conservation objectives (e.g. direct landholder targeting, use of volunteers or contractors, market based instruments, education programs, or legislative and policy changes).

Step 2 Brainstorm conservation strategies and action steps. Conservation strategies and action steps are the broad courses of action required to achieve the conservation objectives. There are essentially three “pathways” for strategy development that should be considered for threat abatement objectives. These include: ● direct protection or management of land or water; ● influencing a key decision maker; ● addressing a key underlying factor.

Once the major strategies are identified, they may be broken down into smaller, more detailed action steps.

Step 3 Prioritise conservation strategies and action steps according to a cost-benefit and feasibility analysis. Useful considerations for prioritising strategies and action steps include the relative biodiversity value of the asset (e.g. nationally threatened habitat type), its level of threat, the contribution of the strategy to meeting the conservation objective, the duration of the benefit achieved and the potential leverage of the action (e.g. high profile site that provides a catalyst for further action). Feasibility of implementation should also be considered including the total cost and time required to implement the strategy, the ease of land access and the degree to which a lead individual / institution exists to implement the strategy. It may be useful to initially prioritise a small number of conservation strategies that provide a mix of high benefit and high feasibility (i.e. low hanging fruit) actions. In particular the high feasibility actions ensures that projects can get some early ‘runs on the board’ to leverage investment into the more complex and costly strategies. The use of specialised prioritisation tools such as the Investment Framework for Environmental Resources – INFFER (http://www.inffer.org/) can aid this process.

Use of Conceptual Models

Conceptual models are increasingly being used for strategy development in conservation planning. A conceptual model is a visual method (diagram) of representing a set of causal relationships between factors that are believed to impact on one or more of the conservation assets. A good model should explicitly link the conservation assets to the direct threats impacting them, the factors (i.e. indirect threats) influencing the direct threats, and the strategic activities proposed to mitigate those factors (WWF 2005).

The Miradi software program (www.miradi.org) can be used to develop conceptual models and fully supports the Conservation Action Planning (CAP) process. It is recommended that conservation projects that have applied the CAP process investigate the use of the Miradi software and conceptual models during the strategy development stage.

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 25

6 Conservation Strategies, Action Steps and Key Programs

Actions 6.2. Conservation Strategies and Action Steps

Objective 1: By 2030 achieve ‘Good’ water quality for all surface Water Reservoirs and Surface Water Catchments impacted by inappropriate stock access.

Strategy 1.1: By 2030 stock access in all surface Water Reservoirs and Surface Water Catchments is managed to minimise water quality impacts Priority: TBC Action Steps: 1. Identify and prioritise areas where impacts occur 2. Explore suitable/alternative methods to achieve management change – Incentives, Education, etc. 3. Implement fencing program to physically exclude stock from watercourse and contributing adjacent areas 4. Water quality monitoring (before/after) for performance monitoring.

Objective 2: By 2030 riparian vegetation is restored in priority areas of surface water catchments to improve water quality.

Strategy 2.1: Implement Strategic Revegetation Program to reinstate vegetation for habitat and buffering/water filtering (i.e. the Rivers Project) Priority: TBC Action Steps: 1. Identify and prioritise areas where revegetation is required. 2. Landholder engagement to determine feasibility of revegetation at required scale. 3. Implement revegetation on-ground works (ideally combining aspects of Strategy 1.1) 4. Baseline and performance monitoring.

Objective 3: By 2050, xx% of farm dam are modified to meet some criteria to minimise losses to evaporation.

Strategy3.1: Farm dams are modified or replaced to reduce losses (evaporation, etc.) to reduce extraction and increase flows Priority: TBC Action Steps: 1. Determine if there are suitable alternatives for storage 2. Conduct cost/benefit analyses which includes benefits to landholder and resource users. 3. Develop best practice guidelines. 4. Establish demonstration sites 5. Education program utilising above two resources 6. Explore suitability of incentives program for implementation of best practice

Objective 4: By 2030, Sustainable fire management implemented across all Reservoir Catchments to prevent large, fire driven sedimentation events.

Strategy 4.1: Landscape scale fire management Priority: TBC Action Steps: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 26

6 Conservation Strategies, Action Steps and Key Programs

Objective 5: By 2030, the region is minimising its contribution to anthropomorphic climate change.

Strategy 5.1: Priority: TBC Action Steps: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Objective 6: By 2030, hydrological regimes are restored to ‘good’ for key reaches of the Surface Water Catchments.

Strategy 6.1: Environmental water releases from reservoirs Priority: TBC Action Steps: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Strategy 6.2: Strategic management of storages (decommission or alter inefficient storages) Priority: TBC Action Steps: 1. Determine if there are suitable alternatives for storage 2. Conduct cost/benefit analyses which includes benefits to landholder and resource users. 3. Develop best practice guidelines. 4. Establish demonstration sites 5. Education program utilising above two resources 6. Explore suitability of incentives program for implementation of best practice

Objective 7: By 2030, all/xx% areas of cultural importance are managed to restore critical values (e.g. water levels, condition, etc.)

Strategy 7.1: Appropriate management of culturally important places. Priority: TBC Action Steps: 1. Determine what the indigenous values are 2. Determine the best way to manage sites for these (site specific management plans and/or guiding principles) 3. Implement management plans where possible, or assist land managers to adapt management according to above 4. Explore incentives or other funding model to achieve above where voluntary uptake insufficient.

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 27

Conservation Strategies, Action Steps and Key Programs

Ac Objective 8: By 2030 storages retain not more than 25% of mean streamflow for all catchments and sub catchments.

Strategy 8.1: Monitoring and measuring program to determine current stream flows and storages. Priority: TBC Action Steps: 1. 2. 3.

Strategy 8.2: Strategic management of storages (decommission or alter inefficient storages) Priority: TBC Action Steps: 1. Determine if there are suitable alternatives for storage 2. Conduct cost/benefit analyses which includes benefits to landholder and resource users. 3. Develop best practice guidelines. 4. Establish demonstration sites 5. Education program utilising above two resources 6. Explore suitability of incentives program for implementation of best practice

Objective 9: By 2030, township outflows into the sea are managed to ensure outputs are not detrimental to the environment.

Strategy 9.1: Strategic interception and management of stormwater outfalls Priority: TBC Action Steps: 1. Identify where large systems are 2. Determine water quality 3. Identify appropriate intervention methods, i.e. small scale wetlands, mechanical (e.g. sand filter), etc. 4. Implement intervention 5. Performance monitoring (water quality)

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 28

7 Monitoring, Evaluation and Adaptive Management

7.1. Methodology for Developing a Monitoring Program

The final step in the conservation action planning process is an ongoing one which involves the development and implementation of a rigorous monitoring, evaluation and adaptive management program. This serves a number of important functions including:

● determining whether the strategies and actions are achieving the conservation objectives; ● showing trends in the condition of conservation assets and the levels of threat; ● demonstrating the effectiveness and efficiency of investment into the conservation program; ● linking local conservation outcomes with other programs to describe the local-global biodiversity outlook

In particular two types of monitoring and evaluation are identified in the conservation action planning process: 1) strategy effectiveness monitoring, and 2) resource condition monitoring (i.e. asset condition and / or level of threat).

Appropriate Level of Resourcing for Monitoring and Evaluation

Many researchers and conservation practitioners agree that a monitoring effort of 10-20% of the total program budget is an appropriate level of resourcing. However the level of resources allocated to monitoring should vary in proportion to the level of certainty surrounding an assumption that action A will lead to outcome B. Higher levels of uncertainty may necessitate greater monitoring effort (i.e. replicated experiments and trials) to test a particular conservation theory.

Use of Results chains

Results chains are a relatively recent tool to assist conservation planners test assumptions that an action will achieve a desired objective. Results chains are broadly based on principles of logical framework analysis (developed in the 1960’s) and are supported by Miradi software (www.miradi.org ). By identifying interim results or milestones along a trajectory towards the delivery of an outcome, results chains make implicit assumptions about the expected results of activities explicit. This process typically results in more rigorous strategy development by the project team. Once a sequence of outputs and outcomes are represented as a results chain diagram, it is relatively easy to visualise and identify monitoring indicators and milestones along the way to a conservation goal.

7.2. Monitoring Indicators

An effective monitoring program for the region should achieve two major outcomes:

1) RESOURCE CONDITION MONITORING ● provide quantitative data to confirm or revise the current status of the key attributes and overall viability of the conservation assets & / or the current status of the key threats; ● establish baseline data to monitor future changes in the status of the key attributes and overall viability of the conservation assets &/ or status of the key threats;

2) STRATEGY EFFECTIVENESS MONITORING ● provide quantitative data to assess the effectiveness of the conservation strategies and action steps and identify areas for refinement.

Monitoring indicators should be closely associated to the status of the key attributes and address landscape context, condition and size attributes of the conservation assets. A monitoring program should also make use of any existing monitoring data to ensure resources are used efficiently. This may involve creating links with other organisations that have complimentary aims or legislative requirements to undertake monitoring.

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 29

8. Appendix

Appendix 1: Northern and Yorke Natural Resources Management Board Goals

WATER RESOURCES

By 2030, the amount of surface and groundwater available is maintained within the bounds of historical variations and does not deviate significantly from seasonal climatic drivers. By 2030, fluctuations in groundwater levels, pressures and seasonal spring and baseflows will be maintained within the limits previously observed in the region, for comparable climatic conditions. By 2030, flow regimes in priority river catchments do not deviate significantly from previously observed seasonal and inter-annual variations for comparable climatic conditions. By 2015, a revised Water Allocation Plan, compliant with National Water Initiative guidelines, is in place for the Clare region. By 2015, the Baroota area has an approved Water Allocation Plan in place. By 2015, the management of water resources is regulated by a series of defined Water Affecting Activities. By 2030, water quality is maintained, within climatic limitations and natural conditions, within levels set for aquatic ecosystems in the Environment Protection (Water Quality) Policy. By 2030, mean nutrient levels in watercourses are maintained below Environment Protection Policy (Water Quality) guidelines for aquatic ecosystems. By 2030, fluctuations in salinity levels in surface water and groundwaters exhibit trends that reflect climatic and seasonal influence and do not exceed levels recorded prior to 2008. By 2015, Stormwater and Flood Mitigation Plans are implemented for regional cities and major towns. By 2015, local Development Plans incorporate principles to protect water quality, as presented in the Regulations and Policies of the NRM Plan. By 2015, salinity management plans are implemented in high priority catchments. By 2030, core refuge areas are protected by a 20% reduction in the extent of priority degrading watercourse management issues. By 2015, the length of watercourses unaffected by priority degrading management issues is increased by 5%, with a focus on protecting core refuge areas. By 2015, River Management Plans are reviewed for the Light, Wakefield and Broughton Rivers

TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS

By 2030, inland and estuarine water-dependent ecosystems are maintained or improved in condition from 2008 levels. By 2015, the condition of at least 600 ha of water dependent ecosystems is improved compared to 2008. By 2015, the extent of watercourse, wetland and other water dependent ecosystems does not decline from 2008 levels. By 2015, at least 25% of areas classified as “important riverine habitat” are protected and actively managed. By 2015, at least 25% of areas classified as “good native watercourse vegetation” are protected and actively managed. By 2015, Water Allocation Plans provide water to meet the needs of the environment.

PEST PLANTS AND ANIMALS

By 2030, there is a net reduction in the impact caused by pest plants and animals on the environment, primary production and the community. By 2030, the distribution and abundance of introduced pest plants has not increased compared with 2008. By 2030, the distribution and abundance of pest animals has not increased compared with 2008. By 2015, pest risk assessment and management plans are operational for priority pest plants and animals By 2015, 50% of priority areas are managed to control feral animals. By 2015, 90% of roadsides are managed with effective weed control programs By 2030, no new significant introduced pest species have become established.

By 2015, biosecurity and incursion response plans are operational for priority pest plants and animals.

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 30

8. Appendix

Appendix 2: Current and Previous Participants of the Sustainable Water Conservation Planning Team Member Organisation Andy Sharp Dept. for Environment, Water and Natural Resources Dan Rogers Dept. for Environment, Water and Natural Resources Daniel Penny Dept. for Environment, Water and Natural Resources Danny Doyle Dept. for Environment, Water and Natural Resources Darren Alcomb Dept. for Environment, Water and Natural Resources Jason Van Laarhoven Dept. for Environment, Water and Natural Resources Jennifer Munro Dept. for Environment, Water and Natural Resources Kumar Savadamuthu Dept. for Environment, Water and Natural Resources Nick Calhoun Dept. for Environment, Water and Natural Resources Nick Whiting Dept. for Environment, Water and Natural Resources Eric Sommerville Northern & Yorke Natural Resources Management Board Anne Hallett Northern & Yorke Natural Resources Management Sub Group Claudia Smith Northern & Yorke Natural Resources Management Sub Group Grant Chapman Northern & Yorke Natural Resources Management Sub Group Jackie O’Reilly Northern & Yorke Natural Resources Management Sub Group Kerry Ward Northern & Yorke Natural Resources Management Sub Group Pam Pilkington Northern & Yorke Natural Resources Management Sub Group Glyn Ashman SA Water Damian Stahm SA Water Jaqueline Frizenschaf SA Water James McGregor Greening Australia Michael Manou Australian Water Environments Karla Billington Naturallogics Consulting Anne Jensen

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 31

9. References

Conservation Measures Partnership (2007). Open standards for the practice of conservation. Available online at: www.conserveonline.org .

Barnett, S.R.; 2009; Groundwater Resource Assessment of the Baroota Prescribed Water Resources Area, South Australia. Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation.

Clarke, D. and Thomson, T.; 2007; Clare Valley 2006-2007 District Summary Irrigation Annual Report.

Cresswell, D.; 1999; Wakefield River Scientific Panel Assessment of Environmental Flow: Hydrology

Cresswell, D.; 2001; Broughton River Scientific Panel Assessment of Environmental Flow: Hydrology

Cresswell, R. and Liddicoat, C.; 2004; Application of Airborne Geophysical Techniques to Salinity Issues around Jamestown, South Australia.

Deane, D. and Walters, A.C.; 2008; Baseline survey of refugia pools in the north-eastern Willochra Creek and western Lake Frome Catchments.

Deane, D. and Graves, C.; 2008; Preliminary Estimates of Farm Dam Development in the Northern and Yorke NRM Region.

Deane, D., Phipps L. and Magarey, P.; 2006; Ecological Condition Assessment: Streams of the Mambray Coast.

Department for Water; 2011; Baroota PWRA Groundwater Status Report 2009-10.

Department for Water; 2011; Walloway Basin Groundwater Level and Salinity Status Report 2009-10.

Department for Water; 2011; Willochra Basin Groundwater Level and Salinity Status Report 2009-10.

Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources; 2011; Baroota PWRA Groundwater Level and Salinity Status Report 2011.

Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources; 2012, Clare PWRA Surface Water Status and Condition Report 2010-11.

Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources; 2012; Clare Valley PWRA Groundwater Level and Salinity Status Report 2011.

Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources; 2012; Walloway Basin Groundwater Level and Salinity Status Report 2011.

Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources; 2012; Willochra Basin Groundwater Level and Salinity Status Report 2011.

Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources; 2013; Baroota PWRA Groundwater Level and Salinity Status Report 2012.

Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources; 2013; Clare Valley PWRA Fractured Rock Aquifer Groundwater Level and Salinity Status Report 2012.

Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation; 2006; Review of Groundwater Level and Salinity Monitoring Data Clare PWRA Management Zones.

Dobson, A.P. (1996). Conservation and Biodiversity. New York: Scientific American Library.

Dooley, T., Henschke, C. and Longbottom, H.; 2002; Salinity Management in Province 9. A Groundwater Flow System in the Northern And Yorke Agricultural Districts.

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 32

Durant, M. (2013) Scoping Report : Peesey Swamps, Southern Yorke Peninsula, Report to the Northern and Yorke Natural Resources Management Board and the Yorke Peninsula CAP Working Group.

Environment Protection Authority; 2003; Saltwatch Summary Reprot: May 2001, May 2002.

Evans, S.; 2004; Baroota Groundwater Resource – Monitoring Review and Augmentation.

Favier, D., Rixon, S. and Scholz, G.; 2000; A River Management Plan for the Wakefield Catchment.

Favier, D., Scholz, G., VanLaarhoven, J., Bradley, J. and Phipps L.; 2004; A River Management Plan for the Broughton Catchment.

Foundations of Success. (2007). Using Results Chains to Improve Strategy Effectiveness: An FOS How-To Guide. http://fosonline.org/Site_Documents/Grouped/FOS_Results_Chain_Guide_2007-05.pdf

Green, G., Gibbs, M, and Wood, C; 2011; Impacts of Climate Change on Water Resources, Phase 3, Volume 1: Northern and Yorke Natural Resources Management Region. Science, Monitoring and Information Division, Department for Water.

Groves, C.R. (2003). Drafting a Conservation Blueprint: A Practitioners Guide to Planning for Biodiversity. The Nature Conservancy. Island Press, Washington.

Harding, A., Henschke, C., Ciganovic, P. and Dooley, T.; 2003; Upper Light River Salinity Management Plan.

Harding, A., Henschke, C., Ciganovic, P. and Dooley, T.; 2005; South East Broughton River Salinity Management Plan.

Harding, A., Henschke, C., Ciganovic, P. and Dooley, T.; 2006; Northern Broughton River Salinity Management Plan.

Harding, A., Henschke, H., Ciganovic, P. and Dooley, T.; 2005; Gilbert River Salinity Management Plan.

Harding, A., Henschke, H., Ciganovic, P. and Dooley, T.; 2006; Northern Broughton River Salinity Management Plan.

Harris, J. A., Hobbs, R., Biggs, E. and Aronson, J. (2006). Ecological restoration and global climate change. Restoration Ecology 14(2): 170-176.

Henschke, C., Harding, A. and Wright, S.; 2008; Mid to Lower Light River Salinity Management Plan.

Henschke, C., Longbottom, H., Dooley, T. and Ciganovic, P.; 2004; Winulta – Yorke Valley (North Maitland Flat, Winulta Creek, Winulta South & Yorke Valley Sub-catchments) Salinity Management Plan.

Landres, P.B., Morgan, P. and Swanson, F.J. (1999). Overview of the use of natural variability concepts in managing ecological systems. Ecological Applications 9: 1179-1188.

Lloyd, L.; 2000; A Report on the Environmental Water Requirements & Ecology of the Broughton River, S.A.

Love, A.J., Cook, P.G., Harrington, G.A. and Simmons, C.T.; 2010; Groundwater Flow in the Clare Valley.

Low, (2003). Landscape-scale Conservation: A Practitioners Guide. The Nature Conservancy, 4th Edition

Lukasiewicz , A., Finlayson, C. M. and Pittock, J.; 2013; Incorporating Climate Change Adaptation into Catchment Management: A User Guide. Report No. 76.

MacNally, R., Bennett, A.F., Brown, G.W., Lumsden, L.F., Yen, A., Hinkley, S., Lillywhite, P. and Ward, D. (2002). How well to ecosystem-based planning units represent different components of biodiversity? Ecological Applications 12: 900-912.

Magarey , P. and Deane, D.; 2005; Booborowie Valley Groundwater Monitoring Status Report 2005.

Magarey , P. and Deane, D.; 2006; Willochra Basin Groundwater Monitoring Status Report 2005.

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 33

Magarey, P.D. and Deane, D.; 2004; Small Groundwater Basins Risk Assessment: Northern and Yorke Agricultural District.

Margules, C.R. and Pressey, R.L. (2000). Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405: 243-253.

McMurray, D.; 2004; Farm Dam Volume Estimations from Simple Geometric Relationships. and Clare Regions, South Australia.

Munro, J.; 2009; Clare District Summary Irrigation Annual Report 2008-09.

Munro, J.; 2010; Clare District Summary Irrigation Annual Report 2008-09. Northern and Yoke Natural Resources Management Board.

Northern and Yoke Natural Resources Management Board and the Department of Water Land and Biodiversity Conservation; 2009; Concept Statement for the Water Allocation Plan for the Baroota Prescribed Water Resources Area.

Northern and Yorke Natural Resource Management Board (2009), Northern and Yorke Regional NRM Plan. Northern and Yorke Natural Resources Management Board; 2009; Water Allocation Plan for the Clare Valley Prescribed Water Resources Area.

Noss, R. F.E., Dinerstein, B., Gilbert, M., Gilpin, B.J., Miller, B.J., Terbough, J. and Trmbulak, S. (1999). Core areas: where nature begins. In J. Terbough and M. Soule, eds., Continental Conservation: Scientific Foundations of Regional Reserve Networks, pp 99-128. Washington DC: Island Press.

Richard Clark and Associates; 2006; Investigation into the Timing, Amount and Causes of Reductions in Surface Flows in the Clare Area.

Risby, L., Scholz, G., Vanlaarhoven, J. and Deane, D.; 2003; Willochra Catchment Hydrological and Ecological Assessment.

Roberts, S.; 2007; Northern and Yorke Natural Resources Management Region Water Monitoring Review.

SA Water, 2010, SA Water’s Long Term Plan for Yorke Peninsula (including the Upper Paskeville, Warooka and Lower Paskeville water supply systems).

Stewart, S.; 2006; Clare Prescribed Water Resources Area Groundwater Monitoring Status Report 2005.

Stokes, Z. (2008) Landholders, Landholdings and Landuse in the CAP sub-regions of the Northern & Yorke NRM Board region. Rural Solutions SA

Thomson, T.; 2008; Clare Valley 2007-2008 District Summary Irrigation Annual Report.

VanLaarhoven, J., Scholz, G., Phipps, L. and Favier, D.; 2004; A River Management Plan for the Light Catchment.

White, M. and Scholz, G.; 2008; Prioritising Springs of Ecological Significance in the Flinders Ranges.

Williams, M. V.; 2011; Regional Observation Well Upgrade: Baroota Prescribed Wells Area, Walloway Basin, Willochra Basin and Adelaide Plains.

Wilson, H. E. C., Imgraben, S., Auricht, C. M.; 2014; Assessment of Vulnerability of Water Assets to Hydrological Change Caused by Coal Seam Gas and Large Coal Mining Development in South Australia. Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources.

WWF. (2005). Basic Guidance for Cross-Cutting Tools: Conceptual Models. www.panda.org/standards or http://assets.panda.org/downloads/1_4_conceptual_model_11_08_05.pdf

Sustainable Water Conservation Action Planning Summary 2016 34