A site selection process for environmental offsetting purposes in Queensland

A method of selecting land in any region of Queensland for offsetting purposes is devised, employing uniform standards. The procedure first requires that any core natural asset lands, Crown environmental lands, prime urban and agricultural lands, and highly contentious sites in the region be eliminated from consideration. Other land is then sought that is located between existing large reservations and the centre of greatest potential regional development/disturbance. Using the criteria of rehabilitation (rather than preservation) plus proximity to those officially defined Regional Ecosystems that are most threatened, adjacent sites that are described as ‘Cleared’ are identified in terms of agricultural land capability. Class IV lands – defined as those ‘which may be safely used for occasional cultivation with careful management’,2 ‘where it is favourably located for special usage’,3 and where it is ‘helpful to those who are interested in industry or regional planning or in reconstruction’4 – are examined for their appropriate area, for current tenure and for any conditions such as Mining Leases that may exist. The positive impacts from offsets on adjoining lands can then be designed to be significant; examples are also offered in respect of riparian areas and of Marine Parks. Criteria against which to measure performance for trading purposes include functional lift, with other case studies about this matter reported separately in this issue. The procedure takes no account of demand side economics (financial additionality), which requires commercial rather than environmental analysis.

SAMUDRA Report, No. 49, March 2008

Report: Traceability - Tracing the Fish. Uruguay: Fisheries Development - Worn-out Policies. Document: Civil Society Statement - Recognize Rights. Report: ICSF Workshop - Towards a New Commons. Notice: 4SSF Conference - Securing Sustainable Small-scale Fisheries. Malawi: Fisheries Management - Participatory Fisheries Management Revisited. Notice: ICSF Resources - Recent Releases. France: Marine Parks - Reversing from a Dead End. Report: WFFP - Re-energizing for Dignity and Prosperity. Iceland: Human Rights - Common Property or Personal Property? (56 pp.)

Coral reef resources of East Africa, Kenya, Tanzania and the Seychelles

Coral reefs are widespread along the east African coast and Seychelle islands. Their roles in island building and coastal protection are often underestimated, they are also important fishery habitats and major tourist attractions. The east African marine fishery production, estimated at 1.4-4.9 tonnes per km super(2), is principally a result of artisanal fishing. Siltation, trampling, and destructive fishing methods are the main cause of coral reef degradation along the east African coast and associated islands. Legislation has been implemented to protect coral reefs by establishing marine parks and reserves. However, poaching and anchor damage are widespread on these protected reefs. Legislative provision to increase the benefit to fishing communities may reduce poaching. The establishment of exclusive nature reserves may be one way to ensure preservation of some coral reefs in the region.

Corals, fishermen and tourists

Two major anthropogenic activities that disturb coral reefs are fishing and tourism, even though coral reefs are important for both fishing and tourism. Already more than 60 per cent of all reefs worldwide are endangered. The use of explosives and poison by small-scale fishers, to supply the market for live fish for aquariums and for human consumption, cause irreversible damages to reefs. Similarly, rapid and unmanaged coastal development for marine tourism negatively affects coral reefs in many ways. Though marine parks and marine protected areas are being promoted all over the world, developing countries need assistance in establishing and assessing such reserves and for taking appropriate actions for rehabilitation of reefs. These can be accomplished through partnership projects.

Més valor per a les Illes Formigues

Per iniciativa de la Cofraria de Pescadors de Palamós, el Ministeri de Medi Ambient i Medi Rural i Marí estudia des de fa uns mesos convertir les Illes Formigues i els seus voltants en una reserva marina d'interès pesquer

Understanding student expectations in developing environmental science courses

Developing relevant and innovative University courses is a complex and often difficult task. This is particularly true when developing environmental science courses as the banner of environmental science has the potential to include an extremely vast array of subject material and course content. Added to this is the diversity of students entering these courses, and their associated course expectations and aspirations. A third component that cannot be ignored when developing courses includes employer demands and expectations of graduates at course completion. As tertiary educators we therefore have the challenge of developing innovative environmental science courses that are academically challenging, but meet the expectations of students, staff and potential future employers. To ensure that we meet this challenge it is vital that we determine the expectations of all relevant parties (students, staff, and potential employers) and develop our courses accordingly.  Here we report on the 'student expectations' component of this. To determine student expectations we conducted a survey of all commencing first year environmental science students. The survey asked students to provide information on drivers for course selection, preferred learning styles, the importance of different approaches to teaching, subject interest areas and employment aspirations. Our results found that environmental science students have a preference for fieldwork and hands-on experience and are very supportive of teaching that combines different teaching methods. On-line teaching was not supported by commencing environmental science students. Commencing students showed a very strong interest in key subject areas of environmental science such as Wildlife, animal conservation, national and marine parks, conservation and marine Wildlife; however, some of the critical areas of environmental science such as population statistics, social sciences and chemistry did not attract the same level of interest. Most commencing students had some idea on where they would like to gain employment on course completion. Knowledge relating to student expectations is Vital, particularly when designing courses, developing specific unit content and undertaking marketing and course information sessions. With this knowledge we can be confident that students enrolling in environmental science will, to a large extent, have their expectations met.

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.

Sea search : a community-based citizen science monitoring program for Victoria, Australia, Marine National Parks and Marine Sanctuaries

Community involvement in monitoring Victoria’s Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) engages coastal volunteers in looking after their marine ‘front yards”. The Management Strategy for Victoria’s System of Marine National Parks and Marine Sanctuaries dedicates an entire theme to community engagement with core key performance areas. This includes community participation. The Sea Search community based monitoring program was developed in 2003 to engage volunteers in meaningful ecological data collection for future sustainability of Victoria’s MPAs. Deakin University, an academic institute, and Parks Victoria, the management agency for Victoria’s MPAs, through a research partner program, trialled three different habitat monitoring methodologies. The trails assessed volunteer ability to collect scientific data, and social science aspects for their involvement in a community-based monitoring program. Information collected by volunteers, feeds directly into their local MPA management strategies to address issues such as climate change, introduced pests and human impacts and natural ecological variation.

The Sea Search program addresses the two action programmes, Agenda 21 and the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, created at the United Nations Earth Summit, held in 1992. Both documents highlight the need for community engagement and capacity building for sustainability, health and integrity of the earth. Involvement in the Sea Search program builds the volunteer’s capacity by learning scientific skills, interacting with other like minded community members, and creating relationships with all organisations involved in the delivery of the program. In this regard, Sea Search is a citizen science program involving all sectors in society by promoting public-interest and research for decision making and planning of Victoria’s system of Marine National Parks and Marine Sanctuaries.

Amenity grasses for salt-affected parks in coastal Australia

In February 2004, Redland Shire Council with help from a Horticulture Australia research project was able to establish a stable grass cover of seashore paspalum (Paspalum vaginatum) on a Birkdale park where the soil had previously proved too salty to grow anything else. Following on from their success with this small 0.2 ha demonstration area, Redland Shire has since invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in successfully turfing other similarly “impossible” park areas with seashore paspalum. Urban salinity can arise for different reasons in different places. In inland areas such as southern NSW and the WA wheatbelt, the usual cause is rising groundwater bringing salt to the surface. In coastal sites, salt spray or periodic tidal inundation can result in problems. In Redland Shire’s case, the issue was compacted marine sediments (mainly mud) dug up and dumped to create foreshore parkland in the course of artificial canal developments. At Birkdale, this had created a site that was both strongly acid and too salty for most plants. Bare saline scalds were interspersed by areas of unthrifty grass. Finding a salt tolerant grass is no “silver bullet” or easy solution to salinity problems. Rather, it buys time to implement sustainable long-term establishment and maintenance practices, which are even more critical than with conventional turfgrasses. These practices include annual slicing or coring in conjunction with gypsum/dolomite amendment and light topdressing with sandy loam soil (to about 1 cm depth), adequate maintenance fertiliser, weed control measures, regular leaching irrigation was applied to flush salts below the root zone, and irrigation scheduling to maximise infiltration and minimise run off. Three other halophytic turfgrass species were also identified, each of them adapted to different environments, management regimes and uses. These have been shortlisted for larger-scale plantings in future work.

Resource survey of Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary, 1983

Forward: Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary (LKNMS) was designated in 1981 to protect and promote the study, teaching, and wise use of the resources of Looe Key Sanctuary (Plate A). In order to wisely manage this valuable resource, a quantitative resource inventory was funded by the Sanctuary Programs Division (SPD), Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in cooperation with the Southeast Fisheries Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA; the Cooperative Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Studies (CIMAS), University of Miami; the Fisher Island Laboratory, United States Geological Survey; and the St. Petersburg Laboratory, State of Florida Department of Natural Resources. This report is the result of this cooperative effort. The objective of this study was to quantitatively inventory selected resources of LKNMS in order to allow future monitoring of changes in the Sanctuary as a result of human or natural processes. This study, referred to as Phase I, gives a brief summary of past and present uses of the Sanctuary (Chapter 2); and describes general habitat types (Chapter 3), geology and sediment distribution (Chapter 4), coral abundance and distribution (Chapter 5), the growth history of the coral Montastraea annularis (Chapter 6), reef fish abundance and distribution (Chapter 7), and status of selected resources (Chapter 8). An interpretation of the results of the survey are provided for management consideration (Chapter 9). The results are expected to provide fundamental information for applied management, natural history interpretation, and scientific research. Numerous photographs and illustrations were used to supplement the report to make the material presented easier to comprehend (Plate B). We anticipate the information provided will be used by managers, naturalists, and the general public in addition to scientists. Unless otherwise indicated, all photographs were taken at Looe Key Reef by Dr. James A. Bohnsack. The top photograph in Plate 7.8 was taken by Michael C. Schmale. Illustrations were done by Jack Javech, NMFS. Field work was initiated in May 1983 and completed for the most part by October 1983 thanks to the cooperation of numerous people and organizations. In addition to the participating agencies and organizations we thank the Newfound Harbor Marine Institute and the Division of Parks and Recreation, State of Florida Department of Natural Resources for their logistical support. Special thanks goes to Billy Causey, the Sanctuary Manager, for his help, information, and comments. We thank in alphabetical order: Scott Bannerot, Margie Bastian, Bill Becker, Barbara Bohnsack, Grant Beardsley, John Halas, Raymond Hixon, Irene Hooper, Eric Lindblad, and Mike Schmale. We dedicate this effort to the memory of Ray Hixon who participated in the study and who loved Looe Key. (PDF contains 43 pages)

The long and winding road : the development of a comprehensive, adequate and representative system of highly protected marine protected areas in Victoria, Australia

In 2002, the state of Victoria, Australia increased its “no-take” marine protected areas (MPAs) 100 fold to cover over 5% of its coastal waters in a comprehensive, adequate and representative system of marine national parks and sanctuaries. Given the ambitious targets set for MPA establishment globally in 2003 at the World Summit for Sustainable Development this apparently remarkable achievement could be an example to other nations and states attempting to establish substantial MPA systems.

This paper describes and discusses the factors that contributed to the establishment of the Victorian system and the relevance of these factors to other jurisdictions.

Community group volunteer perceptions and awareness of Victorian marine protected areas

In 2004, a Community Based Monitoring (CBM) program for Victoria’s Marine National Parks and Marine Sanctuaries was developed. A key performance area for Victoria’s Marine Protected Area (MPA) Management Strategy is community engagement. This program was developed to incorporate the key performance principles of community education, participation and engagement. CBM involves scientific protocols to monitor different habitat types in a MPA. As part of the CBM project, perceptions and values of MPAs were investigated through a pilot survey of 125 community group volunteers from 4 volunteer groups. Surveys were sent to all community group members which included participants and non-participants in the CBM program. Questions sought qualitative and quantitative information, focusing on personal values of MPAs. The surveys included questions associated with CBM, MPA management and environmental issues affecting the marine environment. Responses from the pilot study indicated that 50% of the volunteers participated in CBM to learn more about scientific research, and 30% wanted to work close to nature. This pilot study will form the basis of a larger-scale study to investigate community group perceptions of MPAs and identifying how to maintain volunteer enthusiasm, interest and motivation in a CBM program.

Yaringa and French Island Marine National Park habitat mapping

Deakin University and the Department of Primary Industries were commissioned by ParksVictoria (PV) to create two updated habitat maps for Yaringa and French Island MarineNational Parks. The team obtained a ground-truth data set using in situ video and still photographs. This dataset was used to develop and assess predictive models of benthic marine habitat distributions incorporating data from World-View-2 imagery atmospherically corrected by CSIRO and LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) bathymetry. In addition, the team applied an unsupervised classification approach to an aerial photograph to assess the differences between the two remote sensors. This report describes the results of the mapping as well as the methodology used to produce these habitat maps.This study has provided mapping of intertidal and subtidal habitats of Yaringa and FrenchIsland MNPs at a 2 m resolution with fair to good accuracies (Kappa 0.40-0.75). These were combined with mangrove and saltmarsh habitats recently mapped by Boon et al. (2011) to provide compete-coverage habitat maps of Yaringa and French Island MNPs.The mapping showed that Yaringa MNP was dominated by mangroves, wet saltmarsh and dense Zostereaceae, covering 33%, 29% and 19%, respectively. Similarly, intertidalvegetation and subtidal vegetation (dominated by Zosteraceae) covered 26% and 25% ofFrench Island MNP. However, as a result of turbidity and missing satellite imagery 27% ofFrench Island MNP remains unmapped.The coupling of WV-2 and LiDAR reduced potential artefacts (e.g. sun glint causing whiteand black pixels known as the “salt and pepper effect”). The satellite classification appeared to provide better results than the aerial photography classification. However, since there is a two-year difference between the capture of the aerial photography and the collection of the ground-truth data this comparison is potentially temporally confounded. It must also be noted that there are differences in costs of the data,the spatial resolution between the two datasets (i.e. WV-2 = 2 m and the Aerial = 0.5 m) and the amount spectral information contained in the data (i.e. WV-2 = 8 bands and the aerial = 4 bands), which may ultimately determine its utility for a particular project.The spatial assessment using FRAGSTATs of habitat patches within Yaringa MNP provides a viable and cost effect way to assess habitat condition (i.e. shape, size and arrangement).This spatial assessment determined that dense Zosteraceae and NVSG habitat classeswere generally larger in patch size and continuity than the medium/sparse Zosteraceaehabitat. The application spatial techniques to time-series mapping may provide a way toremotely monitor the change in the spatial characteristics of marine habitats.This work was successful in providing new baseline habitat maps using a repeatable method meaning that any future changes in intertidal and shallow water marine habitats may be assessed in a consistent way with quantitative error assessments. In wider use, these maps should also allow improved conservation planning, fisheries and catchment management, and contribute toward infrastructure planning to limit impacts on Western Port.