FRESHWATER BIODIVERSITY:
Protecting Australian freshwater ecosystems in the face of infrastructure development
Jon Nevill
Water Research Foundation of Australia
Australian National University; Canberra
24 February 2001
CATALOGUE AND COPYRIGHT INFORMATION
Title:
Freshwater Biodiversity: protecting freshwater ecosystems in the face of infrastructure development.
© Jon Nevill, February 2001
Keywords: freshwater ecosystems, freshwater biodiversity, freshwater reserves, protected areas, cumulative effects, environmental impact assessment, catchment management.
Publisher: Water Research Foundation of Australia, Australian National University, Canberra.
For further information about this report, contact Jon Nevill, phone: (Australia) 0422 926 515; or email .
Copyright: Information presented in this document may be reproduced in whole or in part for study or training purposes, subject to the inclusion of acknowledgment of the source and provided no commercial usage or sale of the material occurs. Reproduction for purposes other than those given above requires written permission from the publisher. Requests for permission should be addressed to Jon Nevill, c/o Only One Planet, PO Box 106, Hampton, Victoria 3188, Australia.
Citation: this report may be cited as: Nevill, Jon (2001) Freshwater Biodiversity: protecting Australian freshwater ecosystems in the face of infrastructure development. Water Research Foundation of Australia, Australian National University; Canberra.
ISBN: 0-646-40891-7
Preface:
As an environmental scientist, I have spent many years working on water management issues: on the development of the East Gippsland Water Management Strategy (in Victoria), on the implementation of Queensland’s water quality policy, and in Tasmania working on the environmental assessment of water infrastructure proposals. These experiences left me convinced that, in spite of the best intentions of governments and water users, the programs which we have put in place are NOT effectively protecting freshwater biodiversity.
Given the scope of major strategies which have general support throughout Australia (such as the national biodiversity strategy, the National Water Quality Management Strategy, and the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) Water Reform Agenda) – why is this happening? This paper is my attempt to answer the question, and to suggest ways in which the situation might be improved. While it takes a broad overview, the paper focuses on four key issues, of which the most important two are:
- the management of the cumulative effects of incremental water developments, and
- the creation of systems of representative freshwater reserves.
I anticipate that this document may have a sequel, which may contain updated information on State water management programs. At this stage it could have the citation: Nevill J, and Phillips N (eds)(2004) The Australian Freshwater Protected Area Sourcebook: the policy background, role and importance of protected areas for inland aquatic ecosystems. Australian Society for Limnology Representative Reserves Working Group; Hampton Melbourne. Check my website ( if you are interested in this document.
Acknowledgments
Many people have contributed to the preparation of this paper. In draft form, its availability was circulated widely through the Australian Society for Limnology email forum, and the Inland Rivers Network newsletter. A variety of freshwater experts provided information and comment. I would particularly like to thank[1]:
Abel Immaraj, Alan Harradine, Alena Glaister, Alex Gardner, Andrew Boulton, Andy Spate, Angela Arthington, Anthony Burnell, Bart van der Wel, Barry Hart, Bill Humphreys, Bill O'Connor, Bill Phillips, Bill Williams, Bob Ford, Brendan Edgar, Brian Wilkinson, Bruce Cummings, Bruce Fitzgerald, Christine Jones, Chris Robson, Chris Walsh, David Dettrick, David Forsyth, Deborah Stevenson, Doug Hooley, Frederick Bouckaert, Gary Mavrinac, Gerry Bates, George Wilson, Helen Dunn, Hilda Nevill, Hugh Jones, Ian Mansergh, Ian Wallis, Ian White, James Maguire, Jane Lloyd, Janet Holmes, Jay Gomboso, Jenny Dyring, Jim Puckridge, Jim Tait, Jo Bragg, John Knowles, John Russell, Kathy Hicks, Keith Walker, Ken Thomas, Kerryn Richardson, Luke Pen, Lyall Hinrichsen, Margaret Brock, Mary Maher, Marnie Leybourne and team, Naomi Wright, Neil Hughes, Ngaire Phillips, Nick Gartrell, Paul Bennett, Paul Fitzsimons, Paul Swan, Peter Komidar, Pierre Horwitz, Robert Walsh, Robyn Saunders, Rocelle Lawson, Rod Banyard, Sally Bryant, Seamus Parker, Sean Hoobin, Simon Molesworth, Simon Ransome, Stephen Perris, Stewart Blackhall, Stuart Blanch, Stuart Halse, Stuart McCallum, Susan Cunningham, Tim Fisher, Tim Bond, Warwick Nash, and Winston Ponder.
I thank the Water Research Foundation and the Australian Conservation Foundation for providing financial support covering publication of this document. The costs of the research were met by Only One Planet.
Disclaimer
Responsibility for the views expressed, and any inadvertent errors or important omissions in the document, are mine alone. Views expressed do not necessarily represent the views of the Water Research Foundation or the Australian Conservation Foundation.
The document's coverage of State freshwater legislation, policy and on-ground programs is incomplete. A recent Land and Water Australia project has provided more detail on water management frameworks in four States: WA, SA, Victoria and Tasmania. Information on this project can presently be found at a temporary website: .
Jon Nevill.
FRESHWATER BIODIVERSITY:
PROTECTING FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS IN THE FACE OF INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
Contents:
1.Abstract......
2.Introduction......
2.1Australia’s track record......
2.2Scope and terminology......
2.3Threatening processes......
2.4Commonwealth and State roles: overview......
2.5Findings in brief......
3.International and national context......
3.1The cornerstone: good management of utilised ecosystems and protected reserves
3.2The development of a national biodiversity strategy......
3.3The COAG Water Reform Agenda......
3.4Freshwater biodiversity programs: an important “gap”......
3.5International agreements relating to wetlands......
3.6Ecosystem reserves: definition and management......
4.Cumulative impacts and the need for strategic planning......
4.1Cumulative effects: overview......
4.2Cumulative effects: background......
4.3Failure of existing strategic planning frameworks......
4.4The tragedy of the commons......
4.5The tyranny of small decisions......
4.6The need for new directions in strategic planning......
4.7Linking the management of groundwater and surface water......
4.8Quality assurance: auditing and enforcing implementation......
4.9An example: capping water extraction......
4.10Managing cumulative effects: summary......
5.Freshwater biodiversity : Commonwealth programs......
5.1The Commonwealth’s role......
5.2Commonwealth Wetlands Policy......
5.3Commonwealth environmental assessment......
5.4Commonwealth reserve programs......
5.5Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act......
5.6Freshwater reserves; the National Heritage framework......
5.7The National Wild Rivers Program......
5.8The Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation (Land and Water Australia)
5.9The National Land and Water Resources Audit......
5.10National River Health Program......
5.11The Murray-Darling Basin Commission......
5.12The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation......
5.13AFFA and the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality......
5.14National Rivers Consortium......
6.Freshwater biodiversity : State programs......
6.1Overview......
6.2Freshwater environments in the States......
6.3Victoria......
6.4New South Wales......
6.5Queensland......
6.6South Australia:......
6.7Western Australia......
6.8Tasmania......
6.9Northern Territory......
6.10Australian Capital Territory......
6.11Summary tabulation......
7.Essential elements in State programs......
7.1A natural resource accounting framework......
7.2Environmental assessment requirements......
7.3A system of State-owned protected areas complemented by private reserves;..
7.4A natural resource management framework (legislation and infrastructure).....
7.5Land use planning (LUP) requirements......
7.6Coordination of programs......
8.Conclusions and recommendations......
8.1The current situation needs urgent review......
8.2What needs to be done?......
9.Government agreements relating to wetlands......
9.1International......
9.2National......
10.Bibliography......
11.Abbreviations......
12.Appendix 1: Methods for waterway classification and assessment......
13.Appendix 2: Model statutory objectives and principles......
14.Endnotes......
1.Abstract
Policy and programs currently in place in Australia for the protection of freshwater biodiversity are discussed, primarily within the context of the frameworks provided by key international, national and State strategies. By way of comparison, reference is made in passing to biodiversity programs in terrestrial and marine environments. The context of current freshwater biodiversity conservation programs, particularly in relation to infrastructure development programs, is outlined on a State-by-State basis. Future conservation policy and program options are discussed, with attention focused on options involving the creation of freshwater reserves for the protection of representative ecosystems, and the management of cumulative effects.
The paper identifies three important gaps in existing programs at Commonwealth and State levels: (a) a failure by State governments to develop comprehensive and effective programs to manage the cumulative effects of incremental infrastructure development, (b) the completion of comprehensive State-wide freshwater ecosystem inventories, and (c) programs to develop representative freshwater ecosystem reserves. The paper also advocates increased levels of strategic planning (through existing Integrated Catchment Management (ICM) mechanisms) focused on controlling cumulative effects, and incorporating biodiversity conservation. Two other key recommendations relate to (a) the extension of water management regimes, including environmental flow programs, to cover both surface flows and groundwater in a fully integrated fashion, and (b) the full incorporation of quality assurance principles into water management programs, especially with regard to compliance enforcement and auditing.
2.Introduction
2.1Australia’s track record
Australia does not have a good record in regard to the protection of the nation’s biodiversity[2]. As documented in books such as They all ran wild, and The great extermination, the early settlement of Australia by Europeans was marked by a disregard of the value of native flora and fauna, indiscriminate and unsustainable harvesting, massive habitat destruction, and the introduction of exotic plants, animals and diseases which caused havoc amongst native populations.
The eminent biologist, John Gould, warned that the Thylacine faced the prospect of extinction 90 years before the last specimen died in lonely captivity. The extinct Thylacine is now Tasmania’s fauna emblem, a sad indictment of the inability of politicians and the community to act in the face of incremental pressures for “development”.
I argue in this paper that, in spite of significant gains, the mistakes of the past are being repeated today, in more subtle forms. I refer particularly to (a) the general absence of comprehensive systems of representative freshwater reserves, and (b) the lack of management frameworks capable of controlling the cumulative effects of incremental water infrastructure development, particularly with respect to biodiversity values.
2.2Scope and terminology
"Freshwater" in this paper is used as a shorthand term for inland waters (as distinct from marine waters). The central arguments of the paper apply equally to inland saline ecosystems, or coastal brackish systems heavily dependent on river or groundwater flow. The term "freshwater" has currency as a keyword for searching subjects covered in this paper, so has been chosen as the most appropriate title word.
This is not a background paper, and it assumes that the reader has some knowledge of freshwater biodiversity issues. The paper does NOT define biodiversity, discuss the values of biodiversity, discuss the need to protect freshwater biodiversity, nor does it attempt to establish the gravity of the Australian situation regarding the conservation of freshwater ecosystems. These issues are discussed elsewhere[3]. Additionally, the paper does not attempt to provide a comprehensive examination of the freshwater reserve[4] concept, or examine the role, importance or function of representative reserves[5]. For a more comprehensive consideration of representative freshwater reserves, refer to the work by the Australian Society for Limnology working group on representative reserves: (don’t forget to include the underscores).
The paper does, however, examine:
- key government commitments (at State and Commonwealth levels) regarding the protection of freshwater biodiversity, and
- the degree to which these commitments are being met by existing programs related to the management of freshwater resources. These programs include both programs focused on the conservation of freshwater biodiversity, as well as those focused on controlling the impacts of water use and catchment water-based infrastructure.
The paper concludes by examining gaps in current policies and programs, and finishes with a number of recommendations. The management of cumulative effects, and the development of representative reserves form the focus of the paper's recommendations. Integrated management of groundwater, and effective compliance enforcement programs, are issues considered in less detail. While the document's coverage of State freshwater programs is, to a degree, incomplete, additional information on the management frameworks of four States (WA, SA, Victoria and Tasmania) can be obtained from the temporary website of a current Land and Water Australia project: .
While the paper focuses on four key issues, there are two key issues which the paper does not discuss. The first is fish passage. Many native fish undertake life-cycle journeys taking them from the estuaries at river mouths to the headwaters of these rivers. The construction of dams and weirs, generally speaking, makes these journeys difficult or impossible. Considerable advances have been made in the development of fishways in recent years[6]; however this knowledge is generally not being widely applied. And fishways currently don't help fish travelling downstream over dam spillways - a dangerous exercise[7]. Freshwater turtles and crayfish may also be adversely affected by dams and weirs. Some turtle and crayfish species are also highly restricted - appearing only in one or two river systems. Many aspects of turtle and crayfish ecology are in urgent need of research. We risk loosing species that are undescribed, without knowing their distribution or ecology.
The second issue relates to environmental assessment processes applicable to large dams. Environmental impact assessments are traditionally confined to the direct effects of the dams themselves. There is an urgent need to extend assessments of large agricultural dams to encompass the long-term direct and indirect effects of both the dams and the irrigation proposals which the dams depend on for their financial viability.
The term “reserve” used here means tracts of land and/or water, over which particular management regimes are applied[8]. “Protected areas”, as defined by the World Conservation Union (IUCN 1994) are areas of land and/or water “especially dedicated to the protection and maintenance of biological diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal or other effective means”. The term “reserve” is used here in the sense of IUCN classes I-IV in which direct human intervention and modification are limited[9].
Where 'representative freshwater reserves' are discussed, these include all inland aquatic ecosystems: lakes, wetlands, karst and other underground ecosystems, springs, rivers and their associated channels, billabongs, and immediate surrounds (including sub-surface ecosystems). Where the ecologies of estuaries are dominated by inland water flows rather than marine influences, these too may be included. The term 'representative' can be taken as shorthand for 'comprehensive, adequate and representative' within the meaning attributed to that phrase in the Convention on Biological Diversity 1992, and the National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia's Biological Diversity 1996.
Where the term 'groundwater' is used, this refers to all subsurface water. While I favour the use of the Ramsar definition of 'wetlands' (which includes both still waters and flowing waters (eg: rivers), where the term 'wetlands' is used in this paper it is used in the sense more common in Australia: ie: excluding flowing waters such as the main channels of rivers and streams. Where the term 'intrinsic value' is used, this refers to strictly non-human values. 'Infrastructure' includes dams, weirs, river off-takes, bores, agricultural drains, levee banks, evaporative basins, and irrigation schemes.
'Catchment management' in this paper means natural resource management within catchment boundaries, and covers the integrated management of land, water and biological resources. However, this paper does not concern itself with terrestrial issues in this context, simply to avoid diluting the focus of the paper on water-related issues.
Australia has six States and two Territories. The word 'State' is used as shorthand to encompass all these jurisdictions.
2.3Threatening processes
Australia is the world's driest inhabited continent (the driest being Antarctica), and rainfall over much of the land is highly variable. In the two centuries since European occupation, fresh water (both surface and ground) has often been a scarce commodity, and (generally speaking) supplies have been extensively harvested and allocated for human use. For example, if all existing water allocations in the Murray-Darling Basin (Australia's largest river basin, covering 14% of its total land mass – over a million square kilometres) were implemented, around 90% of the average natural stream flow would be diverted[10]. The lower Murray now experiences drought level flows three years out of every four, compared to one in twenty years under natural circumstances[11]. The loss of biodiversity in the region and degradation of its rivers is well documented. In particular, the native fish species of the Murray-Darling Basin have suffered serious declines in both distribution and abundance resulting in the threatened status of one-quarter of the thirty-five species present (MDBC 2002).
In spite of gross over-allocation of the water resource, the Murray-Darling Basin Ministerial Council has had difficulty implementing a cap on water usage[12]. The cap was set at 1994 extraction levels, and may not be sufficiently restrictive to protect the remaining biodiversity of many of the Basin's rivers and wetlands[13]. In the Queensland and Victorian sections of the basin, harvesting of surface flows with off-stream dams continues to be unregulated by State governments, although these flows should shortly come under State controls as new water legislation is implemented (see the discussion of State water programs below).
Wetlands have been extensively drained, cleared and grazed for agriculture. Overall, around 50% of Australia’s wetlands have been converted to other uses[14]. In some areas the situation is much worse: for example, less than 4% of wetlands in the south-east of South Australia remain, and about 1% in the Greater Adelaide Metropolitan Region. In New South Wales, the Macquarie Marshes, arguably one of the most important wetlands in the southern hemisphere for waterbirds, is among many major wetlands to be seriously degraded[15]. Because wetlands store and slowly release water over time, their loss has further accentuated the highly variable natural flows in unregulated rivers.