Accounting for habitat and seafloor structure characteristics on southern rock lobster (Jasus edwardsii) assessment in a small marine reserve

Where to place marine protected areas (MPAs) and how much area they should cover are some of the most basic questions when designing MPAs. Based on the theory of island biogeography, larger reserves are likely to protect more species and individuals but smaller reserves have been shown to positively influence populations. In this study, we assess a localised population of the ecologically and economically important southern rock lobster (Jasus edwardsii) inside and outside a small reserve. We used standardised fishery assessment trapping methods to sample J. edwardsii populations inside a reserve and an adjacent area outside the reserve. The population characteristics of the captured individuals were compared inside and outside the reserve using t tests (male size, female size,number of reproductive females, number of individuals and biomass), and we found that there were significantly greater numbers and larger individuals and biomass inside the reserve. However, many assessments of MPA effectiveness are confounded by differences in habitat. To account for possible differences in habitat, we collected multibeam bathymetry data to allow us to characterise seafloor structure and video data to assign each sampling location to a biotope class based on macroalgae assemblages. Then, using generalised linear models (GLMs), we assessed differences in populations while accounting for habitat. The GLMs revealed that there was still a significant difference in populations inside the reserve despite habitat differences inside and outside the reserve. We demonstrate a methodological approach to provide a baseline data set to assess MPA effectiveness through time and measure how habitat may respond to indirect consequences of fishing or other human impacts at the species or ecosystem level. We also highlight some of the limitations in sampling design and data availability common in MPA studies and resulting implications for assessment.

Quantitative experimental comparison of single-beam, sidescan, and multibeam benthic habitat maps

Map comparison is a relatively uncommon practice in acoustic seabed classification to date, contrary to the field of land remote sensing, where it has been developed extensively over recent decades. The aim here is to illustrate the benefits of map comparison in the underwater realm with a case study of three maps independently describing the seabed habitats of the Te Matuku Marine Reserve (Hauraki Gulf, New Zealand). The maps are obtained from a QTC View classification of a single-beam echosounder (SBES) dataset, manual segmentation of a sidescan sonar (SSS) mosaic, and automatic classification of a backscatter dataset from a multibeam echosounder (MBES). The maps are compared using pixel-to-pixel similarity measures derived from the literature in land remote sensing. All measures agree in presenting the MBES and SSS maps as the most similar, and the SBES and SSS maps as the least similar. The results are discussed with reference to the potential of MBES backscatter as an alternative to SSS mosaic for imagery segmentation and to the potential of joint SBES–SSS survey for improved habitat mapping. Other applications of map-similarity measures in acoustic classification of the seabed are suggested.

Comparison of a self-processed EM3000 multibeam echosounder dataset with a QTC view habitat mapping and a sidescan sonar imagery, Tamaki Strait, New Zealand

A methodology for automatically processing the data files from an EM3000 multibeam echosounder (Kongsberg Maritime, 300 kHz) is presented. Written in MatLab, it includes data extraction, bathymetry processing, computation of seafloor local slope, and a simple correction of the backscatter along-track banding effect. The success of the latter is dependent on operational restrictions, which are also detailed. This processing is applied to a dataset acquired in 2007 in the Tamaki Strait, New Zealand. The resulting maps are compared with a habitat classification obtained with the acoustic ground-discrimination software QTC View linked to a 200-kHz single-beam echosounder and to the imagery from a 100-kHz sidescan sonar survey, both performed in 2002. The multibeam backscatter map was found to be very similar to the sidescan imagery, quite correlated to the QTC View map on one site but mainly uncorrelated on another site. Hypotheses to explain these results are formulated and discussed. The maps and the comparison to prior surveys are used to draw conclusions on the quality of the code for further research on multibeam benthic habitat mapping.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of marine protected areas in temperate waters of Australasia

An evaluation of the effectiveness of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in temperate waters of Australasia has been conducted for this thesis. The aim was to identify key elements needed in a strategy for establishment and management of MPA’s in temperate waters of Australasia. This aim was achieved by assessing how effective a sample of MPA’s has been in meeting the conservation objectives for their establishment and by identifying factors that have contributed to success or failure of the MPA’s in meeting these objectives. Particular attention was paid to the objectives of ecological sustainability and biodiversity preservation. A MPA for the purposes of this research was defined as an area of coastal or marine environment, with a substantial subtidal component, set aside by law primarily for conservation purposes. The study region encompassed the coastal zones of Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia (Australia) and New Zealand. The questions posed in order to address the aim of this thesis were; a) Have existing MPA’s been effective in achieving conservation objectives? b) What have been the important influences on effectiveness of existing MPA’s? c) What are the key elements required for implementation of effective MPA’s? The thesis is divided into three parts. Part I is a review of the literature on implementation and effectiveness of MPA’s. Part II presents a detailed evaluation of one MPA: Point Lonsdale Marine Reserve (PLMR), Victoria, Australia. Part in is an evaluation of a number of Australasian temperate MPA’s based on information provided in a survey of people involved in management of MPA’s, and from a variety of published and unpublished documents. The MPA’s are described, evidence about ecological effectiveness is presented and factors that have enhanced and limited the ability of these MPA’s to achieve conservation objectives are derived. A substantial amount of scientific evidence was found for increases in abundance, mean size and size range of fish and invertebrate populations within the boundaries of ‘no-take’ MPA’s, Some evidence was found for ‘spillover’ of adults and juveniles into adjacent fishing grounds. Ecological effects detected within ‘no-take’ MPA’s in Australasia matched those described in the literature. The abundance and mean size of a number of previously exploited species have increased, migration into adjacent fishing grounds has been documented, and species richness has increased in at least one MPA. The PLMR was established primarily to protect the scientifically significant intertidal rock platforms. The results of the case study suggest that this objective has been achieved. Opinions about effectiveness were obtained for 28 MPA’s. Of these 19 were considered to be achieving some objectives and 10 were considered to be performing well in terms of overall ecological effectiveness. Positive effects on biodiversity were generally assumed as a result of reduction of damaging anthropogenic effects on habitat. Many questionnaire respondents noted an increase in community awareness about and support for marine conservation as a result of proclamation of MPA’s, Overall, the results support the value of MPA’s for sustainability of fish stocks and preservation of biodiversity, but there is substantial doubt over whether some of the MPA’s are too small to maintain benefits in the long-term. ‘No-take’ MPA’s, particularly those more remote from the impacts of human activities, have been the most effective in achieving objectives. A number of interacting factors important to eventual success of MPA’s were identified. The most important enhancing factors identified for the PLMR were physical attributes that limit the extent of human use and a strong conservation ethic amongst many of the visitors to this marine reserve. Limiting factors were far more numerous. Of most concern is the inadequacy of at-site management. Almost half of visitors to the area were not aware of its marine reserve status, despite the fact many were frequent visitors. The need for better educational and interpretative material on-site is highlighted by the results of the PLMR visitor survey. A total of 56 factors that have enhanced effectiveness and 46 factors that have limited effectiveness of Australasian temperate MPA’s were identified. A number of factors were important in more than one MPA and this was used to derive a set of critical, or key, factors. For example, a conclusion of all three approaches used in this study is that failure to implement day-to-day management through lack of resources was a major constraint on effectiveness. The importance of MPA’s to marine conservation depends, in part, on how well they are managed. The key factors that influence MPA effectiveness were used as the basis for derivation of the main requirements for implementation of MPA’s that will be capable of meeting the objectives for their establishment. The most important needs are: • that ‘no-take’ areas surrounded by buffer zones form the basis for a system of MPA’s; • that a high level of protection is bestowed by legislation and regulations; • that a minimum size be set for the ‘no-take’ core areas; • that the selection of sites for MPA’s takes into account land-based impacts; • that institutional arrangements are developed specifically for MPA’s; • that funding for MPA’s is increased to enable effective management; • that day-to-day management is implemented in all MPA’s, with enforcement and education programs as priority areas; • that a monitoring program for one or more MPA in each 'State' is established to provide evidence of ecological effects of reservation; • that public and stakeholder involvement in development and implementation of MPA’s is encouraged as this will influence the degree of public support and compliance; • that community-based programs to educate the general public, stakeholders, the media and decision-makers about the value of MPA’s are essential; and • that measures to reduce financial impact on affected stakeholders be implemented.

Marine protected areas of the Otway bioregion

Along Victoria’s coastline there are 30 Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) that have been established to protect the state’s significant marine environmental and cultural values. These MPAs include 13 Marine National Parks (MNPs), 11 Marine Sanctuaries (MSs), 3 Marine and Coastal Parks, 2 Marine Parks, and a Marine Reserve, and together these account for 11.7% of the Victorian marine environment. The highly protected Marine National Park System, which is made up of the MNPs and MSs, covers 5.3% of Victorian waters and was proclaimed in November 2002. This system has been designed to be representative of the diversity of Victoria’s marine environment and aims to conserve and protect ecological processes, habitats, and associated flora and fauna. The Marine National Park System is spread across Victoria’s five marine bioregions with multiple MNPs and MSs in each bioregion, with the exception of Flinders bioregion which has one MNP. All MNPs and MSs are “no-take” areas and are managed under the National Parks Act (1975) - Schedules 7 and 8 respectively.

This report updates the first Marine Natural Values Study (Plummer et al. 2003) for the MPAs in the Otway bioregion on the west coast of Victoria and is one of a series of five reports covering Victoria’s Marine National Park System. It uses the numerous monitoring and research programs that have increased our knowledge since declaration and aims to give a comprehensive overview of the important natural values of each MNP and MS.

Marine protected areas of the central Victoria bioregion

Along Victoria’s coastline there are 30 Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) that have been established to protect the state’s significant marine environmental and cultural values. These MPAs include 13 Marine National Parks (MNPs), 11 Marine Sanctuaries (MSs), 3 Marine and Coastal Parks, 2 Marine Parks, and a Marine Reserve, and together these account for 11.7% of the Victorian marine environment. The highly protected Marine National Park System, which is made up of the MNPs and MSs, covers 5.3% of Victorian waters and was proclaimed in November 2002. This system has been designed to be representative of the diversity of Victoria’s marine environment and aims to conserve and protect ecological processes, habitats, and associated flora and fauna. The Marine National Park System is spread across Victoria’s five marine bioregions with multiple MNPs and MSs in each bioregion, with the exception of Flinders bioregion which has one MNP. All MNPs and MSs are “no-take” areas and are managed under the National Parks Act (1975) - Schedules 7 and 8 respectively.

This report updates the first Marine Natural Values Study (Plummer et al. 2003) for the MPAs in the Central Victoria bioregion on the central coast of Victoria and is one of a series of five reports covering Victoria’s Marine National Park System. It uses the numerous monitoring and research programs that have increased our knowledge since declaration and aims to give a comprehensive overview of the important natural values of each MNP and MS.

Marine protected areas of the Victorian embayments bioregion part 1 : Port Phillip Bay

Along Victoria’s coastline there are 30 Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) that have been established to protect the state’s significant marine environmental and cultural values. These MPAs include 13 Marine National Parks (MNPs), 11 Marine Sanctuaries (MSs), 3 Marine and Coastal Parks, 2 Marine Parks, and a Marine Reserve, and together these account for 11.7% of the Victorian marine environment. The highly protected Marine National Park System, which is made up of the MNPs and MSs, covers 5.3% of Victorian waters and was proclaimed in November 2002. This system has been designed to be representative of the diversity of Victoria’s marine environment and aims to conserve and protect ecological processes, habitats, and associated flora and fauna. The Marine National Park System is spread across Victoria’s five marine bioregions with multiple MNPs and MSs in each bioregion, with the exception of Flinders bioregion which has one MNP. All MNPs and MSs are “no-take” areas and are managed under the National Parks Act (1975) - Schedules 7 and 8 respectively.

This report updates the first Marine Natural Values Study (Plummer et al. 2003) for the MPAs in the Port Phillip Bay area of the Victorian Embayments bioregion and is one of a series of five reports covering Victoria’s Marine National Park System. It uses the numerous monitoring and research programs that have increased our knowledge since declaration and aims to give a comprehensive overview of the important natural values of each MNP and MS.

Marine protected areas of the Victorian embayments bioregion part 2 : Western Port Bay and Corner inlet

Along Victoria’s coastline there are 30 Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) that have been established to protect the state’s significant marine environmental and cultural values. These MPAs include 13 Marine National Parks (MNPs), 11 Marine Sanctuaries (MSs), 3 Marine and Coastal Parks, 2 Marine Parks, and a Marine Reserve, and together these account for 11.7% of the Victorian marine environment. The highly protected Marine National Park System, which is made up of the MNPs and MSs, covers 5.3% of Victorian waters and was proclaimed in November 2002. This system has been designed to be representative of the diversity of Victoria’s marine environment and aims to conserve and protect ecological processes, habitats, and associated flora and fauna. The Marine National Park System is spread across Victoria’s five marine bioregions with multiple MNPs and MSs in each bioregion, with the exception of Flinders bioregion which has one MNP. All MNPs and MSs are “no-take” areas and are managed under the National Parks Act (1975) - Schedules 7 and 8 respectively.

This report updates the first Marine Natural Values Study (Plummer et al. 2003) for the MNPs in the Western Port Bay (WP) and Corner Inlet (CI) areas of the Victorian Embayments bioregion. It covers Yaringa, French Island, Churchill Island and Corner Inlet MNPs. This report is one of a series of five reports covering Victoria’s Marine National Park System. It uses the numerous monitoring and research programs that have increased our knowledge since declaration and aims to give a comprehensive overview of the important natural values of each MNP.

Marine protected areas of the Flinders and Twofold Shelf bioregions

Along Victoria’s coastline there are 30 Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) that have been established to protect the state’s significant marine environmental and cultural values. These MPAs include 13 Marine National Parks (MNPs), 11 Marine Sanctuaries (MSs), 3 Marine and Coastal Parks, 2 Marine Parks, and a Marine Reserve, and together these account for 11.7% of the Victorian marine environment. The highly protected Marine National Park System, which is made up of the MNPs and MSs, covers 5.3% of Victorian waters and was proclaimed in November 2002. This system has been designed to be representative of the diversity of Victoria’s marine environment and aims to conserve and protect ecological processes, habitats, and associated flora and fauna. The Marine National Park System is spread across Victoria’s five marine bioregions with multiple MNPs and MSs in each bioregion, with the exception of Flinders bioregion which has one MNP. All MNPs and MSs are “no-take” areas and are managed under the National Parks Act (1975) - Schedules 7 and 8 respectively.

This report updates the first Marine Natural Values Study (Plummer et al. 2003) for the MPAs in the Flinders and Twofold Shelf bioregions on the east coast of Victoria and is one of a series of five reports covering Victoria’s Marine National Park System. It uses the numerous monitoring and research programs that have increased our knowledge since declaration and aims to give a comprehensive overview of the important natural values of each MNP and MS.

Foraging behaviour and habitat utilisation of Australasian gannets determined using GPS loggers

Australasian gannets (Morus serrator) breed in the cool temperate waters of south-eastern Australia and also at several localities around New Zealand, where they are a major marine predator feeding on commercially-exploited pelagic fish. This study investigated the foraging behaviour and habitat utilization of gannets at Pope’s Eye Marine Reserve during the 2005-2005 breeding period using GPS-depth-loggers. GPS data were recorded for a total of 45 foraging trips from 20 individuals. Gannets were found to forage at average maximum distances of 52.7 km (± 29.6 km) from the colony, with total foraging path lengths of 177.1 km (± 93.4 km) and foraging trip durations of 16.5 h (± 9.9 h). During foraging trips gannets spent on average 31.5% (± 11.4) of the time flying at an average flight speed of 47.3 km h-1 (± 2.9 km h-1). Gannets made an average of 39.8 (± 35.2) dives per trip and 3.8 (± 5.6) dives per daylight hour. Dives had an average depth of 3.5 m (± 1.1 m) and a mean maximum depth of 7.0 m (± 3.0 m), lasting for a mean dive duration of 5.3 sec (± 1.3 sec). Gannets foraged predominantly in shallow coastal waters and there was some evidence for foraging site fidelity. Considerable individual variation in foraging strategies was also observed. The results highlight the potential of GPS technology to reveal the fine-scale foraging behaviour of marine predators, thereby improving our understanding the interaction between marine predator populations, commercially exploited fish stocks and the marine environment.

Climate change and community response in the Borough of Queenscliffe

The Borough of Queenscliffe (BoQ) occupies a unique place among coastal Victorian locations. Situated at the tip of the Bellarine Peninsula, the Borough has approximately 3000 permanent residents, one third of who are over 60 years old. The Borough is also the smallest in Victoria, covering a total area of 13 square kilometres. BoQ is also unique because of its location. The Borough is almost totally surrounded by water and much of this is classified as maritime national park. The Swan Bay Marine Reserve is a Ramsar site and is therefore a wetland of international significance. The Borough relies heavily on tourism for its economic livelihood.

This paper begins with an overview of the BoQ in geographic, demographic and economic terms and then discusses the possible effects and impacts of climate change, as they relate to this small community. These sections are viewed from environmental, economic and social perspectives. Environmental impacts include the erosion of the coastal sand dune system and the loss of habitat for the orange-bellied parrot. Social impacts include the health effects and dangers of flooding for low-lying housing. Various indicators of community response are described, particularly the activities of the local climate change action group. Their strategy can essentially be described as a ‘push upward and downward’ approach. Innovative actions to implement this strategy are described in the paper.

Opportunistic visitors : long-term behavioural response of bull sharks to food provisioning in Fiji

Shark-based tourism that uses bait to reliably attract certain species to specific sites so that divers can view them is a growing industry globally, but remains a controversial issue. We evaluate multi-year (2004–2011) underwater visual (n = 48 individuals) and acoustic tracking data (n = 82 transmitters; array of up to 16 receivers) of bull sharks Carcharhinus leucas from a long-term shark feeding site at the Shark Reef Marine Reserve and reefs along the Beqa Channel on the southern coast of Viti Levu, Fiji. Individual C. leucas showed varying degrees of site fidelity. Determined from acoustic tagging, the majority of C. leucas had site fidelity indexes >0.5 for the marine reserve (including the feeding site) and neighbouring reefs. However, during the time of the day (09:00–12:00) when feeding takes place, sharks mainly had site fidelity indexes <0.5 for the feeding site, regardless of feeding or non-feeding days. Site fidelity indexes determined by direct diver observation of sharks at the feeding site were lower compared to such values determined by acoustic tagging. The overall pattern for C. leucas is that, if present in the area, they are attracted to the feeding site regardless of whether feeding or non-feeding days, but they remain for longer periods of time (consecutive hours) on feeding days. The overall diel patterns in movement are for C. leucas to use the area around the feeding site in the morning before spreading out over Shark Reef throughout the day and dispersing over the entire array at night. Both focal observation and acoustic monitoring show that C. leucas intermittently leave the area for a few consecutive days throughout the year, and for longer time periods (weeks to months) at the end of the calendar year before returning to the feeding site.

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.

Outcropping reef ledges drive patterns of epibenthic assemblage diversity on cross-shelf habitats

Seafloor habitats on continental shelf margins are increasingly being the subject of worldwide conservation efforts to protect them from human activities due to their biological and economic value. Quantitative data on the epibenthic taxa which contributes to the biodiversity value of these continental shelf margins is vital for the effectiveness of these efforts, especially at the spatial resolution required to effectively manage theseecosystems. We quantified the diversity of morphotype classes on an outcropping reef system characteristic of the continental shelf margin in the Flinders Commonwealth Marine Reserve, southeastern Australia. The system is uniquely characterized by long linear outcropping ledge features in sedimentary bedrock that differ markedly from the surrounding low-profile, sand-inundated reefs. We characterize a reef system harboring rich morphotype classes, with a total of 55 morphotype classes identified from the still images captured by an autonomous underwater vehicle. The morphotype class Cnidaria/Bryzoa/Hydroid matrix dominated the assemblages recorded. Both a and b diversitydeclined sharply with distance from nearest outcropping reef ledge feature. Patterns of the morphotype classes were characterized by (1) morphotype turnover at scales of 5 to 10s m from nearest outcropping reef ledge feature, (2) 30 % of morphotype classes were recordedonly once (i.e. singletons), and (3) generally low levels of abundance (proportion cover) of the component morphotype class. This suggests that the assemblages in this region contain a considerable number of locally rare morphotype classes. This study highlights the particular importance of outcropping reef ledge features in this region, as they provide a refuge against sediment scouring and inundation common on the low profile reef that characterizes this region. As outcropping reef features, they represent a small fraction of overall reef habitat yet contain much of the epibenthic faunal diversity. This study has relevance to conservation planning for continental shelf habitats, as protecting a single, or few, areas of reef is unlikely to accurately represent the geomorphic diversity of cross-shelf habitats and the morphotype diversity that is associated with these features. Equally, whendesigning monitoring programs these spatially-discrete, but biologically rich outcropping reef ledge features should be considered as distinct components in stratified sampling designs.