Aquatic Conservation Assessments (ACA) using AquaBAMM for the riverine wetlands of the Great Barrier Reef catchment Version 1.1 October 2009 Published by the Department of Environment and Resource Management, Queensland Government The State of Queensland, Department of Environment and Resource Management 2009. This work is copyright. It may be reproduced for study, research or training purposes subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgment of the source and no commercial usage or sale. Reproduction for purposes other than those listed above requires the prior written permission of the Department of Environment and Resource Management. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Manager, Media and Corporate Relations Unit, Public Affairs Division, PO Box 15155 City East BRISBANE QLD 4002 Australia. Disclaimer: Information in this document does not necessarily represent Government policy. While this publication has been prepared with care, the Queensland Government accepts no liability for any decisions or actions taken on the basis of this document. Cite this document as: Inglis, S.N. and Howell, S. (2009). Aquatic Conservation Assessments (ACA), using AquaBAMM, for the riverine wetlands of the Great Barrier Reef catchment. Published by the Department of Environment and Resource Management, Brisbane. © The State of Queensland (Department of Environment and Resource Management) 2009 Prepared by: Selena Inglis1 Principal Planning Officer Steven Howell1 Manager, Biodiversity Assessment 1 Natural Resources and Environment Division, Department of Environment and Resource Management, PO Box 15155 City East BRISBANE QLD 4002 Australia Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank Peter Macdonald, Michael Ronan, Tim Ryan, Shane Chemello, David McFarland, Anthony Morrison, Niall Connolly, Mark Kelton, Anthony Backer, Rochae Cameron, John Platten, Steve Elson, Darren Fielder, Plaxy Barratt, Wes Davidson and Bruce Wilson for their support and input to this project. Special thanks also goes to Heidi Millington for all her hard work and support throughout the project. Cover photos (from top to bottom): 1. Suttor River (be_00288) – Selena Inglis 2. Litoria fallax – Anthony Backer 3. Haughton River (ha_00017) – Selena Inglis 4. Nymphea gigantea – Selena Inglis 5. Connors River (is_00109) – Selena Inglis 6. Majors Creek (ha_00031) – Selena Inglis (background photo) Version Release Date 1.1 30/10/09 Table of contents 1 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................... 1 1.1 THE GREAT BARRIER REEF STUDY AREA............................................................................. 2 1.2 WET TROPICS.................................................................................................................... 4 1.3 BURDEKIN ......................................................................................................................... 6 1.4 FITZROY ............................................................................................................................ 7 2 METHODS AND IMPLEMENTATION ..................................................................... 9 2.1 AQUABAMM ..................................................................................................................... 9 2.2 SUBSECTIONS.................................................................................................................... 9 2.3 ASSESSMENT PARAMETERS................................................................................................ 9 2.4 DATASETS ....................................................................................................................... 12 2.5 IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................................................. 12 2.6 TRANSPARENCY OF RESULTS............................................................................................ 24 3 RESULTS .............................................................................................................. 25 3.1 GBR CATCHMENT OVERALL RESULTS................................................................................ 25 3.1.1 AquaScore ........................................................................................................... 25 3.1.2 Criteria scores...................................................................................................... 35 3.2 SUMMARY........................................................................................................................ 38 3.2.1 Conservation value categories ............................................................................ 38 3.2.2 Broad trends ........................................................................................................ 38 3.3 CASE STUDY ONE – HERBERT CATCHMENT........................................................................ 40 3.3.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 40 3.3.2 Summary of results for the Herbert catchment.................................................... 41 3.3.3 AquaScore results................................................................................................ 41 3.3.4 Criteria results...................................................................................................... 44 3.4 CASE STUDY TWO – MACKENZIE CATCHMENT .................................................................... 46 3.4.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 46 3.4.2 Summary of results for the Mackenzie catchment............................................... 46 3.4.3 AquaScore results................................................................................................ 48 3.4.4 Criteria results...................................................................................................... 50 3.5 FIELD TRUTHING .............................................................................................................. 52 3.5.1 Subsections traversed ......................................................................................... 52 3.5.2 Field interpretation of ACA results – ecological versus condition assessment ... 60 4 SUMMARY............................................................................................................. 61 5 RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................................... 61 6 REFERENCES....................................................................................................... 62 7 ATTACHMENTS.................................................................................................... 63 ATTACHMENT A WET TROPICS AQUATIC FLORA EXPERT PANEL REPORT ................................ 63 ATTACHMENT B WET TROPICS AQUATIC FAUNA EXPERT PANEL REPORT ................................ 63 ATTACHMENT C WET TROPICS WETLAND ECOLOGY EXPERT PANEL REPORT .......................... 63 ATTACHMENT D BURDEKIN AQUATIC FLORA EXPERT PANEL REPORT ...................................... 63 ATTACHMENT E BURDEKIN AQUATIC FAUNA EXPERT PANEL REPORT...................................... 63 ATTACHMENT F BURDEKIN WETLAND ECOLOGY EXPERT PANEL REPORT ................................ 63 ATTACHMENT G FITZROY AQUATIC FLORA EXPERT PANEL REPORT......................................... 63 ATTACHMENT H FITZROY AQUATIC FAUNA EXPERT PANEL REPORT ........................................ 63 ATTACHMENT I FITZROY WETLAND ECOLOGY EXPERT PANEL REPORT................................... 63 Tables Table 1 GBR catchments subject to an ACA using AquaBAMM ................................................. 2 Table 2 CIM list for the GBR catchment....................................................................................... 9 Table 3 Stratification in study areas of the GBR catchment....................................................... 12 Table 4 Implementation table for the GBR catchment riverine ACA .......................................... 13 Table 5 AquaScore summary ..................................................................................................... 25 Table 6 AquaScore and dependability summary for all study areas .......................................... 27 Table 7 Summary by criteria....................................................................................................... 35 Table 8 Herbert catchment criteria rating distribution by AquaScore value and dependability.. 44 Table 9 catchment criteria rating distribution by AquaScore value and dependability............... 50 Table 10 Subsections inspected during field truthing by catchment .......................................... 54 Table 11 Subsections traversed during field truthing by AquaScore ......................................... 55 Figures Figure 1 The 35 GBR catchments where ACAs have been conducted ....................................... 3 Figure 2 Interrogating the ACA results for a subsection in the GIS environment ...................... 24 Figure 3 AquaScore for all catchments (coloured by subsection).............................................. 26 Figure 4 Herbert catchment AquaScore..................................................................................... 41 Figure 5 Herbert catchment dependability ................................................................................. 42