History and attributes of selected Australian multi-tenure reserve networks

The need for conservation planning across the landscape, regardless of tenure, is widely recognised. In Australia, attempts to coordinate the management of conservation lands are characterised by models such as Biosphere Reserves and Conservation Management Networks. This paper outlines the history behind the formation and development of three networks in Australia—the Bookmark Biosphere Reserve, the Gippsland Plains Conservation Management Network, and the Grassy Box Woodlands Conservation Management Network—with particular emphasis on the tenure and protection attributes of the various components within these networks. Despite having a similar number of components, the total area represented in the networks varied markedly. There were few similarities in the proportion of components of various tenures and protection mechanisms among networks. Composition of networks is likely to be strongly influenced by both historical factors (degree of subdivision, land ownership and remaining vegetation) and contemporary factors (aims of the network and willingness of landowners to participate). Continued research into both the evolution and the physical and social dynamics of multi-tenure reserve networks enables a better understanding of their operation, and will ultimately assist in improved conservation planning across the landscape.

Australia`s box - ironbark forests and woodlands : saving the fragments of a threatened ecosystem

Australia's box-ironbark forests and woodlands once covered about 14 per cent of the State of Victoria on the riverine plains and foothills of the Great Dividing Range. But approximately 83 per cent of the total original habitat has been destroyed and what remains of this significant ecosystem is now highly fragmented and vulnerable to further degradation. Moreover, only 14 per cent of the area remaining is on public land. A 10 year campaign on the part of the environmental movement eventually succeeded in forcing the State government to conduct an independent inquiry into this ecosystem and make recommendations on future management. This paper outlines the innovative public participation process adopted by the Victorian State government and the outcomes of the inquiry. A subsequent compensation package for commercial operations disadvantaged by the proclamation of a series of new national parks is also discussed, as are the shortcomings of a process that can have little or no impact on what happens on private land.

Role of multi-tenure reserve networks in improving reserve design and connectivity

Multi-tenure reserve networks aim to connect areas managed for biodiversity conservation across public and private land. This paper seeks to determine to what extent multi-tenure reserve networks improve the reserve design and connectivity of the public protected area estate, using three networks in southeastern Australia as case studies. Network configuration varied considerably and those networks with generally larger parcels tended to be better connected. On average, public land components were larger than private land components in all networks. Two networks had 18 components physically adjoining other network components while another had only 6 components adjoining. Importantly for two of the networks, the average distance between the nearest neighbouring component was significantly less than average distances between public protected areas in the subregion. Thus these multi-tenure reserve networks acted to enhance the existing public protected area estate by increasing the potential linkages in the landscape and therefore the viability of individual public protected areas.

Evolving governance arrangements in multi-tenure reserve networks

Multi-tenure reserve networks (MTRNs) aim to connect areas managed for biodiversity conservation across public and private land (for example biosphere reserves (BRs) and conservation management networks (CMNs)). A key function of MTRNs is facilitating communication, information exchange and management activities between land managers of differing tenures not usually in contact with each other; governance arrangements are therefore crucial. Australian MTRNs vary greatly in their goals and measures of success, criteria for entry, ecosystems targeted, geographic extent and financial arrangements. The successful operation of a MTRN is likely to be influenced by a manager's confidence in the governance model/coordination arrangements (Belcher & Wellman 1991). We analysed the organizational structure of three Australian MTRNs (Fig. 1) including the objectives and role of the coordinating body, entry requirements, goals and measures of success, restrictions placed on the geographic or ecological extent of the network and financial arrangements. We highlight how substantial changes in governance arrangements have occurred for two of three networks studied, suggesting a fluid evolution of MTRN structures is likely.

Contribution of multi-tenure reserve networks to biodiversity conservation

A consistent and integrated approach to nature conservation across the landscape and regardless of tenure is widely recognised as essential in ensuring the effective conservation of biodiversity. 'Multi-tenure reserve networks', which incorporate public and private lands managed for conservation, are considered a means of achieving landscape scale conservation. Biosphere Reserves (BR) and Conservation Management Networks (CMN) are characteristic models in Australia. This thesis aims to evaluate the role of such networks in protecting biodiversity, specifically by: (1) analysing the spatial configuration (size, shape, connectivity) of networks and their individual components; (2) evaluating the contribution of networks (in real terms and in reporting procedures) to biodiversity conservation objectives; (3) analysing the influence of the attitudes and perceptions of land managers on the functionality of networks; and (4) evaluating the influence of coordinating bodies on network functionality. In order to account for deficiencies in existing classifications of conservation lands, a new classification system was developed for this thesis - the Conservation Lands Classification. This classification incorporates conservation mechanisms on public and private lands and forms the basis for comparing network components in three Australian case studies - the Bookmark BR located in the Murray Mallee of South Australia, the Gippsland Plains CMN on the eastern Gippsland Plains of Victoria and the Grassy Box Woodlands CMN across the inland slopes of New South Wales. The spatial configuration of individual components within networks was measured using spatial analysis techniques within a geographic information system (GIS). GIS was also used to measure the contribution that networks made to a comprehensive, adequate and representative reserve system through the ecosystems they protected. The attitudes and perceptions of landowners and managers within the networks were obtained using questionnaires. Questionnaires were also sent to network coordinators. Statistical and descriptive analysis was conducted on the results. The sizes of individual components varied markedly between the three networks, however within each network public reserves were on average larger than private conservation lands. Although levels of physical connectivity varied between networks, Bookmark BR and Gippsland Plains CMN showed greater similarity to each other than to the Grassy Box Woodlands CMN. The findings raise important questions about the real and perceived differences in the BR and CMN models. All networks, and particularly those components outside the public protected area estate, contributed to enhancing the protection of ecosystems unrepresented or under-represented in the reserve system, although the extent of this contribution varied between networks. Trade-offs between reserve design efficiency and a contribution to a comprehensive, adequate and representative reserve system were evident between networks. Bookmark BR was characterised by high connectivity, strong reserve design integrity but a lower contribution to protecting under-reserved ecosystems, whereas the opposite was evident in the Grassy Box Woodlands CMN. Over 88% of managers considered their involvement in multi-tenure reserve networks to be a positive or very positive experience. A lack of resources and time for management were considered major limitations of these networks. The majority (80%) of private land managers within networks were willing to be included in a national reserve system of conservation lands. This has important implications for the Australian National Reserve System, which currently incorporates mostly public land. The changing nature of the network coordination arrangements suggests an organic fluid evolution of network structures is likely, contrasting with the desire for legalistic and administrative rigidity promoted by government agencies. The thesis concludes that all the networks studied contribute in varying degrees to biodiversity conservation. The key factors influencing the current and potential contribution that such networks make are: (1) the aims, directions and restrictions set by or imposed upon the coordinating body; and (2) the biophysical nature of the surrounding bioregion and resultant historical land use and tenure pattern. Although the successful operation of such 'multi-tenure' networks ultimately relies on the willing participation of private landholders, ongoing institutional support is likely to be required for maintaining networks in the longer term. Considering networks are increasingly formed outside of the influence of government institutions, this presents a significant challenge for effective coordinated conservation.

An overview of the ecology, management and conservation of Australia's temperate woodlands

Australia’s temperate woodlands are environments of cultural and ecological importance and significant repositories of Australia’s biodiversity. Despite this, they have been heavily cleared, much remaining vegetation is in poor condition and many species of plants and animals are threatened. Here, we provide a brief overview of key issues relating to the ecology, management and policy directions for temperate woodlands, by identifying and discussing ten themes. When addressing issues relating to the conservation and management of temperate woodlands, spatial scale is very important, as are the needs for a temporal perspective and a complementary understanding of pattern and process. The extent of landscape change in many woodland environments means that woodland patches, linear networks and paddock trees are critical elements, and that there can be pervasive effects from ‘problem’ native species such as the Noisy Miner (Manorina melanocephala). These consequences of landscape change highlight the challenge to undertake active management and restoration as well as effective monitoring and long-term data collection. In developing approaches for conservation and management of temperate woodlands, it is essential to move our thinking beyond reserves to woodland conservation and management on private land, and recognise the criticality of cross-disciplinary linkages. We conclude by identifying some emerging issues in woodland conservation and management. These include the need to further develop non-traditional approaches to conservation particularly off-reserve management; the value of documenting approaches and programmes that demonstrably lead to effective change; new lessons that can be learned from intact examples of temperate woodlands; and the need to recognise how climate change and human population growth will interact with conservation and management of temperate woodlands in future decades

An Eyre Peninsula report card : adaptation practice and research in the far west of South Australia

The formation of Natural Resource Management Boards in South Australia provided a robust and integrated, and well resourced, regional landscape planning quasi-­‐authority in South Australia that has had major beneficial outcomes to several SA regions in being able to better co-­‐ordinate long term and creative public and private land management strategies, as well as enable several unique research projects to be tackled that would not otherwise under traditional fragmented state government agency configurations and relationships.

Hope for resurrecting a functionally extinct parrot or squandered social capital? Landholder attitudes towards the Orange-bellied Parrot (Neophema chrysogaster) in Victoria, Australia

In early 2010, after 27 years of recovery effort, the orange-bellied parrot (OBP; Neophema chrysogaster) was expected to be extinct in the wild within a few years. Shortly before the imminent wild extinction became evident, we surveyed landholders (114 responses of 783 surveys delivered) in part of the main non-breeding area, according to three classes of modelled habitat suitability ('high', 'medium', and 'low'). Predictions of the habitat models appear to correlate with landholder perceptions of the presence of OBP habitat on private land, thus the models appear a tractable way to identify key stakeholders worthy of priority consultation in relation to habitat works. Landholders were sympathetic to wetlands and birds, including OBPs (89.4% were aware of OBPs). Most indicated that they would be upset if the OBP went extinct and agreed that critical habitat should be protected; 80.7% were prepared to consider changes to the way they managed their land to benefit the species, and sought more information on how they could do so (64.0%). This study suggests that the habitat model usefully identified key stakeholders and the OBP enjoyed high awareness, concern, and engagement among many stakeholders, shortly before the species was considered functionally extinct. The maintenance of landholder support is likely to be critical if future attempts are made to reintroduce the species to the wild.

A review of the conservation ecology of round-leaf Pomaderris Pomaderris vacciniifolia F. Muell. ex Reissek (Rhamnaceae)

Round-leaf Pomaderris Pomaderris vacciniifolia F. Muell. ex Reissek (Rhamnaceae) is a Victorian endemic shrub listed as threatened under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 and critically endangeredunder the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. A review of the available literature for P. vacciniifolia indicated most information is anecdotal or found in unpublished works. Better understanding of the ecology of P. vacciniifolia may help explain why it is vulnerable, and enhance future management. Future research should focus towards better understanding of P. vacciniifolia habitat, reproductive ecology, seed dispersal mechanisms and competitive ability and how these compare with more common sympatric congeners, to determine whether any differences could explain the relative success of these species. Targeted searches for this species on public and private land are warranted to reveal additional populations and fully appreciate the distribution of this species. (The Victorian Naturalist 131 (2) 2014, 44-51).

Building Nature’s Safety Net 2014 : A decade of protected area achievements in Australia

The single most important asset for the conservation of Australia’s unique and globally significant biodiversity is the National Reserve System, a mosaic of over 10,000 discrete protected areas on land on all tenures: government, Indigenous and private,including on-farm covenants, as well as state, territory and Commonwealth marine parks and reserves.THE NATIONAL RESERVE SYSTEMIn this report, we cover major National Reserve System initiatives that have occurred in the period 2002 to the present and highlight issues affecting progress toward agreed national objectives. We define a minimum standard for the National Reserve System to comprehensively, adequately and representatively protect Australia’s ecosystem and species diversity on sea and land. Using government protected area, species and other relevant spatial data, we quantify gaps: those areas needing to move from the current National Reserve System to one which meets this standard. We also provide new estimates of financial investments in protected areas and of the benefits that protected areas secure for society. Protected areas primarily serve to secure Australia’s native plants and animals against extinction, and to promote their recovery.BENEFITSProtected areas also secure ecosystem services that provide economic benefits forhuman communities including water, soil and beneficial species conservation, climatemoderation, social, cultural and health benefits. On land, we estimate these benefitsare worth over $38 billion a year, by applying data collated by the Ecosystem ServicesPartnership. A much larger figure is estimated to have been secured by marineprotected areas in the form of moderation of climate and impact of extreme eventsby reef and mangrove ecosystems. While these estimates have not been verified bystudies specific to Australia, they are indicative of a very large economic contributionof protected areas. Visitors to national parks and nature reserves spend over $23.6 billion a year in Australia, generating tax revenue for state and territory governments of $2.36 billion a year. All these economic benefits taken together greatly exceed the aggregate annual protected area expansion and management spending by all Australian governments, estimated to be ~$1.28 billion a year. It is clear that Australian society is benefiting far greater than its governments’ investment into strategic growth and maintenance of the National Reserve System.Government investment and policy settings play a leading role in strategic growth of the National Reserve System in Australia, and provide a critical stimulus fornon-government investment. Unprecedented expansion of the National Reserve System followed an historic boost in Australian Government funding under Caring for Our Country 2008–2013. This expansion was highly economical for the Australian Government, costing an average of only $44.40 per hectare to buy and protect land forever. State governments have contributed about six times this amount toward the expansion of the National Reserve System, after including in-perpetuity protected area management costs. The growth of Indigenous Protected Areas by the Australian Government has cost ~$26 per hectare on average, including management costs capitalised in-perpetuity, while also delivering Indigenous social and economic outcomes. The aggregate annual investment by all Australian governments has been ~$72.6 million per year on protected area growth and ~$1.21 billion per year on recurrent management costs. For the first time in almost two decades, however, the Australian Government’s National Reserve System Program, comprising a specialist administrative unit and funding allocation, was terminated in late 2012. This program was fundamental in driving significant strategic growth in Australia’s protected area estate. It is highly unlikely that Australia can achieve its long-standing commitments to an ecologically representative National Reserve System, and prevent major biodiversity loss, without this dedicated funding pool. The Australian Government has budgeted ~$400 million per year over the next five years (2013-2018) under the National Landcare and related programs. This funding program should give high priority to delivery of national protected area commitments by providing a distinct National Reserve System funding allocation. Under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Australia has committed to bringing at least 17 percent of terrestrial and at least 10 per cent of marine areas into ecologically representative, well-connected systems of protected areas by 2020 (Aichi Target 11).BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATIONAustralia also has an agreed intergovernmental Strategy for developing a comprehensive, adequate and representative National Reserve System on land andsea that, if implemented, would deliver on this CBD target. Due to dramatic recent growth, the National Reserve System covers 16.5 per cent of Australia’s land area, with highly protected areas, such as national parks, covering 8.3 per cent. The marine National Reserve System extends over one-third of Australian waters with highly protected areas such as marine national parks, no-take or green zones covering 13.5 per cent. Growth has been uneven however, and the National Reserve System is still far from meeting Aichi Target 11, which requires that it also be ecologically representative and well-connected. On land, 1,655 of 5,815 ecosystems and habitats for 138 of 1,613 threatened species remain unprotected. Nonetheless, 436 terrestrial ecosystems and 176 threatened terrestrial species attained minimum standards of protection due to growth of the National Reserve System on land between 2002 and 2012. The gap for ecosystem protection on land – the area needed to bring all ecosystems to the minimum standard of protection – closed by a very substantial 20 million hectares (from 77 down to 57 million hectares) between 2002 and 2012, not including threatened species protection gaps. Threatened species attaining a minimum standard for habitat protection increased from 27 per cent to 38 per cent over the decade 2002–2012. A low proportion of critically endangered species meeting the standard (29 per cent) and the high proportion with no protection at all (20 per cent) are cause for concern, but one which should be relatively easy to amend, as the distributions of these species tend to be small and localised. Protected area connectivity has increased modestly for terrestrial protected areas in terms of the median distance between neighbouring protected areas, but this progress has been undermined by increasing land use intensity in landscapes between protected areas.A comprehensive, adequate and representative marine reserve system, which meetsa standard of 15 per cent of each of 2,420 marine ecosystems and 30 per cent of thehabitats of each of 177 marine species of national environmental significance, wouldrequire expansion of marine national parks, no-take or green zones up to nearly 30per cent of state and Australian waters, not substantially different in overall extentfrom that of the current marine reserve system, but different in configuration.Protection of climate change refugia, connectivity and special places for biodiversityis still low and requires high priority attention. FINANCING TO FILL GAPS AND MEET COMMITMENTSIf the ‘comprehensiveness’ and ‘representativeness’ targets in the agreed terrestrial National Reserve System Strategy were met by 2020, Australia would be likely to have met the ‘ecologically representative’ requirement of Aichi Target 11. This would requireexpanding the terrestrial reserve system by at least 25 million hectares. Considering that the terrestrial ecosystem protection gap has closed by 20 million hectares over the past decade, this required expansion would be feasible with a major boost in investment and focus on long-standing priorities. A realistic mix of purchases, Indigenous Protected Areas and private land covenants would require an Australian Government National Reserve System investment of ~$170 million per year over the five years to 2020, representing ~42 per cent of the $400 million per year which the Australian Government has budgeted for landcare and conservation over the next five years. State, territory and local governments, private and Indigenous partners wouldlikewise need to boost financial commitments to both expand and maintain newprotected areas to meet the agreed National Reserve System strategic objectives.The total cost of Australia achieving a comprehensive, adequate and representativemarine reserve system that would satisfy Aichi Target 11 is an estimated $247 million.

The establishment of large private nature reserves by conservation NGOs : key factors for successful implementation

Private nature reserves created by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) are increasing, and their growing number and extent means that they can potentially contribute to biodiversity goals at a global scale. However, the success of these reserves depends on the legal, economic and institutional conditions framing their creation and management. We explored these conditions, and the opportunities and challenges facing conservation organizations in managing private nature reserves, across several countries, with an emphasis on Australia. Results from 17 semi-structured interviews with representatives of private conservation organizations indicated that while private reserves may enhance the conservation estate, challenges remain. Legal frameworks, especially tenure and economic laws, vary across and within countries, presenting conservation organizations with significant opportunities or constraints to owning and/or managing private nature reserves. Many acquired land without strategic acquisition procedures and secured funding for property acquisition but not management, affecting the long-term maintenance of properties. Other typical problems were tied to the institutional capacity of the organizations. Greater planning within organizations, especially financial planning, is required and NGOs must understand opportunities and constraints present in legislative frameworks at the outset. Organizations must establish their expertise gaps and address them. To this end, partnerships between organizations and/or with government can prove critical.

Fire management on private conservation lands : knowledge, perceptions and actions of landholders in eastern Australia

Fire is an important natural disturbance process within the Australian landscape, but the complex and hazardous nature of fire creates a conservation management dilemma. For landholders of private conservation lands, management for conservation of biodiversity and risk reduction is complicated. Private conservation landholders in eastern Australia directed far less effort towards fire management than other conservation management actions, despite clearly acknowledging the risk and associated responsibilities of fire management on their lands. Nonetheless, landholders did undertake actions to reduce fuel hazards and prepare for wildfire events on their land. Despite the established role and benefits of fire to many ecosystems in the region, landholder understanding of the ecological role of fire was generally poor. Few landholders were aware of ecologically appropriate fire regimes for the vegetation types on their property, and few undertook fire management actions to achieve ecological outcomes. Site-specific obstacles, lack of fire management knowledge and experience, and legal and containment concerns contributed to the low level of fire management observed. There is a need for property-specific fire management planning across all private conservation lands, to further integrate ecological fire requirements into biodiversity management, and prioritise actions that aim to improve conservation outcomes while safeguarding life and property.