Australia's biodiversity

Newsletter on biological diversity conservation actions

Biolinks No. 5
Biodiversity Section
Department of Environment, Sport and Territories - June 1993
ISSN 1037 4434

Australia ratifies Convention

Australia ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity on 18 June 1993.

Australia has now joined some 20 countries, including Canada, Japan and China, in ratifying the Convention. Thirty ratifications are required for the Convention to enter into force. This is expected to occur early in 1994.

In announcing ratification, Ros Kelly, the Minister for the Environment, Sport and Territories, said, "through implementation of the Convention all countries can come together in an effective partnership to halt the global loss of biological diversity".

"Australia has a special role to play in protecting global biodiversity as we are one of approximately twelve countries containing almost 70% of the world's species", Mrs Kelly said.

Senator Gareth Evans, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, said, "many primary industries essential to our export earnings are dependent either directly or indirectly on our biological diversity and that of other countries. It is in our economic and environment interests to take strong and decisive action under the guidance of the Convention to maximise the benefits to be gained from a healthy environment and ecologically sustainable development".

The Ministers said that ratification was undertaken following extensive consultation with the States and Territories in accordance with the Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment. This process has culminated in agreement to ratification being reached at the Council of Australian Governments meeting on 9 June 1993.

The Convention was developed over a period of nearly four years under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). Australia signed the Convention on World Environment Day, 5 June 1992, at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro.

Convention momentum maintained

Countries around the world are intent on sustaining the momentum which was built up during the development of the Convention on Biological Diversity. To date, 164 countries together with the European Community have signed the Convention and some 21 countries have ratified it. Many other countries are either in the process of ratifying or are considering ratification.

In April this year President Clinton announced the support of the United States of America for the Convention. The United States signed the Convention on 4 June 1993, stating that the Convention can play a key role in stemming the loss of the Earth's species, their habitats and ecosystems by providing a forum for focussing the energy of common international concern toward a coherent, dynamic, and urgent action plan for the future. The United States also believes that the Convention presents a unique opportunity for nations to realise economic benefits from the conservation and sustainable use of their genetic resources. When presenting the Convention to the United States Senate for ratification the Clinton administration intends to provide interpretations on the respect of intellectual property rights, technology transfer, funding of the global environmental facility and participation of the private sector.

In view of the importance of the Convention to the global community, a great deal of work is being undertaken, particularly by UNEP, to facilitate its early and effective operation.

UNEP established 4 expert panels to prepare reports and make recommendations in order to assist the consideration of issues by the Intergovernmental Committee on the Convention on Biological Diversity (IGC). The panels undertook their work from December 1992 to March 1993. The panels dealt with: biological diversity conservation and sustainable use priorities and a scientific and technological research agenda; the economic implications of biological diversity conservation and sustainable use; technology transfer and financial issues; and the need for and modalities of a protocol on living modified organisms produced by biotechnology.

Work was also undertaken by another group to revise country study guidelines, aimed at assisting countries to assess the status and value of their biological diversity and biological resources and to demonstrate how countries can use this information as an input to the national biological diversity planning process.

To further facilitate the early operation of the Convention, an Expert Conference on Biodiversity was held in Norway at the end of May 1993 to consider the reports of the UNEP Expert Panels, together with a range of associated issues of relevance to the Convention.

The IGC, established by the UNEP Governing Council, will meet in late September 1993 to undertake preparatory work for the first Conference of the Parties to be held within one year of the Convention entering into force.

National Strategy update

Work on development of a national strategy is being undertaken by the Australian and New Zealand Conservation Council (ANZECC) Task Force on biological diversity. The work of the Task force takes into consideration the draft strategy prepared by the Biological Diversity Advisory Committee (BDAC). This work is being undertaken in consultation with other relevant Ministerial Councils and organisations. The Task Force has met on five occasions and is undertaking further work on revising a draft strategy in light of comments from relevant Commonwealth, State and Territory government agencies and ministerial bodies, industry and local government groups and peak conservation bodies. The Task Force will provide a draft national strategy to ANZECC for endorsement and forwarding on to the council of australian Governments (CoAG) for agreement.

Endangered Species Protection Act

The Endangered Species Protection Act 1992  came into effect on the 30 April, 1993. The purpose of the Act is to provide a framework for the protection of endangered and vulnerable species and ecological communities.The Act and the Endangered Species Program is administered by the Australian Nature Conservation Agency (formerly the Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service).

Conservation of Asian biodiversity

Asia is a region of great geographic and biological diversity. It includes the world's highest mountain system, the second largest rainforest complex, extensive coral reefs, as well as thousands of islands. There is both tremendous species richness in Asia and high levels of endemism. China, Indonesia, India and Malaysia are among the world's dozen or so megadiverse countries which between them hold 60-70% of the world's total biological diversity.

Asia's biological wealth is diminishing. As in other parts of the world, deforestation is a problem in the region, and hunting, poaching and the introduction of exotic species pose threats to some species and habitats. Natural grassland ecosystems are threatened by overgrazing and conversion to cropland, in part due to loss of traditional practices and migration patterns. More than half of Asia's wetlands have been lost and more than half of the mangroves in the Indo-Malayan region have been cleared. The region's marine areas are also under some threat from urbanisation, off-shore mining, agricultural growth, overfishing and oil pollution.

Recognition of the significance of biological diversity and the rate at which it is being lost is increasing throughout Asia. Reviews have been undertaken which identify sites of biological diversity significance in the region and other areas most in need of protection. There is also acknowledgement that the major global achievements in biological diversity conservation, including the establishment of the Global Environmental Facility and the Convention on Biological Diversity, represent important opportunities for the region.

These issues were the focus of the Second Asia-Pacific Regional Consultative Meeting on Biodiversity Conservation, held in Bangkok, Thailand, in February 1993. It was attended by about 120 representatives from governments in the region, aid agencies, regional and international non-government organisations, and bilateral and multi-lateral donor agencies.

The workshop and plenary discussions of the meeting were concerned with determining the priority actions required to address the biological diversity conservation needs of the region, and the administrative and financial mechanisms for implementing these actions. The conservation of biological diversity in sustainable agricultural development and in marine and wetland ecosystems were specifically addressed.

The following points summarise the major issues of agreement arising from the meeting:

Rapid biodiversity assessment

Taxonomy is defined as the science of describing, classifying and naming living things. Australia has a strong tradition of taxonomic study. Even so, there are vast numbers of undescribed taxa and it may take at least a century at present rates to complete the identification and description of the Australian biota.

Further, gaps in our taxonomic knowledge of groups of major ecological significance severely impede research on many biological diversity issues. New approaches for the rapid and accurate assessment of biological diversity are needed.

Priorities in such approaches include the training of personnel able to identify a broad range of organisms and the provision by taxonomists of more user-friendly identification manuals. Formal nomenclatural processes and the narrow skills of postgraduate level systematics are de-emphasised. In entomological studies, emphasis is given to the ability to sort mass samples of insects to broad categories, allowing biological diversity studies to proceed.

A project, commissioned by the Department of the Environment, Sport and Territories in 1992, and undertaken by the CSIRO Division of Entomology and the Murray-Darling Freshwater Research Centre (MDFRC) tested the validity of a rapid assessment approach in a number of aquatic environments.

The objectives of this project were:

  1. to undertake a rapid biodiversity assessment (RBA) in a freshwater system using biodiversity technicians (see box);
  2. to test the accuracy of the rapid assessment (using taxonomic expertise); and
  3. to determine how representative the groups chosen for rapid assessment are of the total biological diversity of the site, including over a longer timeframe.

Methodology

Three groups were used for the freshwater biological diversity assessment: damselflies and dragonflies (order Odonata); mayflies (order Ephemeroptera); and non-biting midges (Diptera, family Chironomidae). These groups have wide ecological tolerances, are widely distributed, are relatively easily sampled and have adequate taxonomic descriptions – all characteristics useful for RBA. In addition, specialist taxonomic expertise was available for all of these taxa, a reference collection including specimens from the study sites is held at the MDFRC, and the groups are considered to have merit as biological indicators.

These groups were sampled by biodiversity technicians, chosen for being biologically literate but without specific expertise in the particular groups being sampled. The technicians were provided with a fairly basic key to the groups and with two days training on identification of the parts of the insect, field sampling skills and the use of the laboratory.

Sampling, following a protocol outlining the suite of operations to be undertaken, occurred at three sites in Victoria, two on the Mitta Mitta River and another at Ryan's Billabong. The technicians then separated the sample collected into morphotaxa (or recognisable groups) in the laboratory. The morphotaxa were then assessed by professional taxonomists for accuracy, and assessed against total aquatic community information to determine how representative these groups are for total biological diversity.

Results

Accuracy varied between taxonomic groups, and was highest in those groups in which the taxa were differentiated at high taxonomic levels (eg, families and orders). Amongst the damselflies and dragonflies, failure by technicians to recognise larval differences led to an overestimate of species number. This was possibly due to shortcomings in sampling. The correct number of mayfly taxa was generally identified but a replacement between sites by a similar but ecologically distinctive genus was not recognised. The greatest diversity in the samples came from the midges, which represented the greatest departure from accuracy in the technicians efforts, with many more species present than the number identified. In this case, specific morphological characteristics and differences are often minor and microscopic. None of these problems negates the use of biodiversity technicians in taxonomic sorting as an indicator of biological diversity per se.

Where data were available they indicated that the samples collected by the technicians relate well to the number of species collected at the sites in previous surveys in the same month. Drift nets yielded more midge taxa than did hand nets and the drift net pupal samples were significantly quicker to sort and required little or no slide preparation for identification. The method has clear benefits in enhancing 'collecting-success' and 'collecting-efficiency'.

With regard to the estimation of biological diversity from individual taxa, major differences were found in the relative representation of major taxa between the sites. Differences in diversity also occur between macro- and microinvertebrate communities. It follows then that generalisation about relative biological diversity, based on a few taxa, risks being misleading unless the groups are carefully chosen on the basis of an ecological understanding of the habitats involved.

Conclusions

Overall, this study demonstrates that a labour force of biodiversity technicians would be a valuable aid in routine and regular sampling according to specified guidelines, and in sorting to at least ordinal, and perhaps family, taxonomic levels. The need for rapid assessment of biological diversity is evident and the use of non-specialist workers to carry out well designed, representative sampling programs from which comparative biological diversity can be estimated is an attractive proposition. This study shows that very effective field collection can take place with minimal supervision and training, given an established sampling protocol. Field collection and processing was generally efficient and accurate.The study supports the proposition that the design of biological diversity studies ought to involve reassessment of the role of traditional taxonomists. Increased dialogue must occur between taxonomists and biodiversity workers, particularly where resources are limited, on the most appropriate use of resources and useful methodologies.

For further information

Cranston, P. and Hillman, T. (1992), 'Rapid assessment of biodiversity using biological diversity technicians', Australian Biologist 5, 144-154.

Mouse

Biodiversity technicians

These are non-specialists trained in the elements of biological science and systematics. They will assist professional scientists in surveys, sort survey material, process it by means of new RBA assessment techniques and prepare it for analysis by ecologists and description by taxonomists.

Resource manual for local government

Greening Australia, with funding assistance from the Department of the Environment, Sport and Territories is producing a resource manual to help local government develop local vegetation and biological diversity management plans.

Provisionally titled Greening Plans: Vegetation and biodiversity management and care for councils and communities, the manual sets out the steps and processes which local government could use to develop a strategic plan to manage vegetation and biological diversity based on 'best practice' case studies of local councils.

As the project will be based on practical experience in the field, Greening Australia is keen to receive information from local government on case studies where local councils are using 'best practice' in vegetation management.

During July, six workshops will be held throughout Australia. Greening Australia is holding these workshops to consult with local government practitioners and other key personnel to ensure their advice and experience are reflected in the manual.The manual will be revised to take into account feedback from these workshops.

For more information on the manual or workshops contact Sylvia Gleeson in the national office of Greening Australia in Canberra on (06) 281 8585.

Poster on biological diversity

The Biodiversity Section, Department of the Environment, Sport, and Territories, has produced a beautiful colour poster showing a large range of Australian plants and animals, both terrestrial and marine. The poster is available free of charge (see address and phone number on back page).

Safeguarding Brisbane's biodiversity

Mike Ritchie, Brisbane City Council.

Brisbane's range of natural habitats is crucial to supporting many facets of the city, including the $250 million commercial and recreational fishing industry, the continued growth of the burgeoning domestic and international tourism market and ensuring the city has clean air, green buffer zones and recreational breathing spaces.

Threats to the city's environmental quality include a rapidly rising population, urban sprawl, the growing waste stream, increasing use of the car and associated air pollution, loss of bushland and pollution of our river and waterways. Brisbane City Council, in partnership with other levels of government, business and the community, is committed to facing these challenges in the pursuit of environmental protection.

The strongest focus of the Council's commitment has been the preservation of the remaining urban bushland and the wildlife ecosystems it supports. The city's green spaces form a habitat for the preservation of rare, endangered and notable endemic species of plants and animals, supporting 149 species of butterflies, 302 species of birds, 25 species of mammals, 19 species of reptiles and 32 species of amphibians.This is a wide diversity of fauna for a major Australian city. Recent studies indicate the bird diversity of the Brisbane region is on par with the north Queensland rainforests and Kakadu.

Loss of bushland has been associated with the local extinction and decline of a number of species. These include: birds such as the magpie goose, brolga, water whistling duck, black swan, chestnut teal, shoveller, hardhead, white pygmy goose, double eyed fig parrot and regent bower bird; mammals such as the eastern quoll and grey kangaroo; and reptiles such as the southern rainforest dragon and a number of frog species. This list includes species from wetland, eucalypt and rainforest habitats, as well as two species-the false water rat and Coxen's fig parrot-which are on the ANZECC list [Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council] of Australian endangered vertebrate fauna. The limited information on local wildlife strongly points to the Brisbane region being a high risk area for further decline and local extinction. A comprehensive survey of Brisbane's fauna would undoubtedly identify a greater number of rare and endangered species.

In response to community support for the protection of the city's natural assets, the Council has developed a Bushland Management Strategy to protect our significant bushlands. The major elements are:

  1. acquisition of valuable, 'at-risk' bushland;
  2. Vegetation Protection Ordinances;
  3. Conservation Zone and land-use planning;
  4. bushland rehabilitation;
  5. community Bushland Care grants;
  6. management plans for large urban bushlands; and
  7. community education and consultation.

Brisbane's Bushland Acquisition Program is the largest nature conservation initiative of any local authority in Australia. Over the past eight years, 17 per cent of the remaining bushland has been cleared, at the alarming average rate of three football fields a day. At this rate, three-quarters of the remaining 27,000 ha of bushland could be lost within the next two decades, substantially reducing the city's biological diversity. This loss has been compounded by the fragmentation of some of the most fragile and valuable habitat types. Only 600 ha of the original 6000 ha of rainforest remains; only 450 ha of the original 13,000 ha of melaleuca woodland has survived. Clearing reduces the diversity of species, changes forest structure and reduces forest integrity.

Much of the city's bushland has been zoned for development purposes by previous Councils. The only way to ensure that the most valuable bushlands are permanently protected is to purchase them for public ownership and dedicate them to long-term conservation. Almost $10 million worth of 'at-risk' bushland, totalling 325 ha, has been acquired over the past 18 months and another $12.4 million will be spent over the next year. The program is funded by a $20 annual Bushland Preservation levy paid by all ratepayers, boosted by an $11.8 million State Government loan which has allowed Council to speed up the rate of purchase.

Six of the purchased properties comprise some of Australia's finest koala habitat. This land, at Burbank on the city's south-eastern outskirts, totals 301.9 ha and is worth $4.15 million. These purchases have boosted the bushland owned by Council to 5516 ha-22 per cent of the city's total bushland. Another 25 per cent (6299 ha) is held by the State and Federal Governments but the majority-53 per cent (13,238 ha) remains in private ownership.

The Bushland Acquisition Program can never meet all the city's conservation needs, particularly for bushland on private land. The purchase of only one per cent of the City's most outstanding bushland would cost up to $100 million, well outside the capacity of the preservation levy. However, much of the remainder of Brisbane's privately-owned bushland can be protected through a combination of complementary bushland conservation initiatives. Many of these initiatives require the support and commitment of landowners, developers and the community. This support is growing as the urgency of bushland protection becomes apparent.

Vegetation Protection Ordinances (VPOs) are a key tool in the preservation of Brisbane's bushland. VPOs were placed on one per cent of the city's properties in August, 1991. Rather than adopting a blanket tree protection by-law covering all vegetation, Brisbane has chosen a flexible nomination system for the VPOs. This allows protection of the most significant natural areas, covered in five categories – individual trees, groups/stands of trees, vegetation of a particular class, vegetation of a particular species and all vegetation. There has been a ten-fold decrease in the rate of destruction since the introduction of the VPOs. All subsequent clearing has been with Council approval for appropriate development. The education and discussion involved in the application and implementation of the VPOs also have resulted in greatly improved development and land management practices.

In 1991, the Council introduced a Conservation Zone into the Town Plan to provide for the conservation of the most significant bushland across the City. Many Council-owned bushland areas have been placed into the zone and a number of residents have requested their properties be zoned for long term conservation. Town planning approaches also have included a strategic review of the Intents of Future Urban and Non Urban zones to include conservation and environmental objectives.

Brisbane's bushland rehabilitation project involves some 2000 ha of bushland. The project is being carried out with the involvement of trainees under the Commonwealth-funded Jobskills program which aims at giving work experience to the long-term unemployed. Almost $4 million is being spent under the program this financial year, with participants not only rehabilitating bushland but also providing facilities such as walking trails and picnic areas to encourage sensitive community use. The Federal Government and Council also announced on 17 November 1992 the establishment of a joint $10 million project under the banners of Jobskills, The Australian Traineeship System, and the Landcare and Environment Action Program. These projects will create training opportunities for another 1000 young unemployed Brisbane people, about 600 of which will be in the area of bushland rehabilitation, preservation and presentation for public use and enjoyment.

Community support and participation is crucial to effective environmental management. Brisbane's $70,000 Bushland Care Program is designed to encourage and support community participation in this rehabilitation work. Under this program, grants of equipment, materials and advice, worth up to $5000, are supplied to residents' groups working to protect bushland across the city. Thirty one groups have received grants to date.

The community is also taking a leading role in the development of long-term management plans for the city's largest natural reserves, the Boondall wetlands and Toohey Forest Park. Residents, conservation groups and property owners have formed management committees to take a hands-on part in these sites' rehabilitation and the decisions to ensure their long-term preservation.

Brisbane City Council is committed to community consultation and education. Its environmental projects and reforms are the subject of intense community input, reflecting the growth of green awareness and knowledge. As well as involving community groups, residents and local conservation bodies in planning and hands-on work, Council holds public meetings and education forums on green projects. Many of these are run at the Downfall Creek Bushland Centre, their headquarters for public education and participation in bushland conservation. This education process is targeted at school children, for whom a range of programs has been designed.

A Brisbane Waterway Strategy has also been developed in recognition of the need for strategic planning for our 33 creek systems, covering about 630 kilometres. Despite engineering works to prevent flooding as a result of urban development on floodplains, almost 450 kilometres – or 70 per cent – of our waterways retain significant natural characteristics. Some suburban creeks still have platypuses living in them. The Waterways Strategy sets the scene for the protection of waterways of conservation value, the rehabilitation of others which have been degraded and the appropriate management of others for flood mitigation purposes. The Strategy promotes a multi-functional approach to waterways management. A Waterways Task Force, made up of community and Council representatives, will be formed to implement the strategy.

Safeguarding Brisbane's biological diversity is the key to protecting the city's livability and ensuring a healthy future.

Australian Trust for Conservation Volunteers

John Fenton, Community Education Officer

The Australian Trust for Conservation Volunteers (ATCV) is a non-profit, community-based organisation. It is non-political and makes active use of volunteer time and effort to perform tasks to benefit the environment. ATCV is dedicated to practical conservation. Volunteers are working conservationists, considering themselves 'doers' rather than 'talkers'. ATCV aims to have a positive and non-intrusive influence on the Australian environment.

A volunteer joins ATCV for $20 per annum and is then provided with a listing of environmental restoration and protection tasks available across Australia. Volunteers normally work in teams of 10, and are led by an experienced team leader, who is a paid member of the ATCV staff.

Working across Australia

ATCV undertakes projects for individual and government organisations. ATCV also works closely with non-profit agencies such as the National Trust, Victorian Conservation Trust, Wild Mountain Education Centre and Ballarat University College, in assisting each organisation to achieve its aims.

The work projects are conducted on both public and private land and cover an enormous range of locations and conservation tasks.

What types of projects?

In terms of project activities, tree planting is still the largest single area of volunteer involvement. The emphasis of this activity has moved away from a purely land degradation focus to become a major part of ATCV's endangered species, parkland rehabilitation and habitat reconstruction programs.

A work project can be initiated by a farmer, council, park or foreshore committee. The initiator is responsible for preparing for the project volunteers, who provide the hands to complete the task.

A volunteer could join a team collecting native tree seed in the Wild Rivers area near Queenstown, Tasmania, or assist with the building of shelters for endangered animals near Murray Bridge in South Australia, or work on revegetation plots at Lake Macquarie in New South Wales. They might assist park rangers in conducting surveys of nocturnal and diurnal animals on the Rob Roy Range in the Australian Capital Territory, help construct walking tracks on Magnetic Island in Queensland or provide support for scientists undertaking surveys of the endangered Mallee fowl in the Big Desert area of North West Victoria. If a volunteer gets really lucky the project location could be Kakadu, helping staff from the Office of the Supervising Scientist to carry out aquatic surveys in parts of this majestic national park that are not otherwise accessible to the public. Volunteers also get the opportunity to balance this type of work with more routine, local conservation tasks such as removal of noxious weeds and fence construction.

Links with other groups

Community involvement is an essential part of a range of national programs such as: the One Billion Trees Program; Save the Bush Program; National Soil Conservation Program; and Landcare Program, as well as State and agency programs. ATCV resources can be devoted to delivering the community involvement component of these programs at National, State and local levels. Cooperative links have been established between the ATCV and key environmental groups and agencies, including Landcare, the Australian Koala Foundation, Federal Government Departments such as the Department of the Environment, Sport and Territories, and the Department of Primary Industries and Energy, the Australian Nature Conservation Agency and State Government Departments, such as the Department of Conservation and Environment in Victoria and the Department of Soil Conservation and Land Management in New South Wales. In addition ATCV is currently implementing a range of community education programs designed to increase public awareness and understanding of environmental issues, such as land degradation, water pollution and energy conservation. Sponsoring agencies include the Murray Darling Basin Commission, Greenhouse Unit (Victorian State Government) and Climate Change & Environmental Liaison Branch (DEST).

Over the past year ATCV operations have expanded dramatically in line with the development of new ATCV State offices. There has been an increase of over 50% in project activities. The establishment of State Offices has seen ATCV develop and implement continuous project operations in New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Victoria and Tasmania.

The development of this National Office network is vital as it enables ATCV to encourage greater project involvement through maximising community contact. Since its inception in 1982, ATCV's membership has grown to almost 3,500. This expanding membership, combined with private sponsorship and Government assistance, has meant increased capacity to undertake a vast array of environmental projects.

Conserving biodiversity

Inherent in most of ATCV's projects is the fight to preserve and maintain the natural habitats which nurture the remaining genetic pools of our indigenous flora and fauna. A powerful advantage in this struggle is the capacity of ATCV to provide urban dwellers with opportunities and assistance to venture out to rural settings and help with such activities as fencing remnant patches of indigenous vegetation, constructing protective walking tracks in our National Parks or collecting native tree seeds for storage in a community seed bank.

ATCV president Peter Hiscock believes that the protection of our flora and fauna will soon become the priority of conservationists and planners, and is very pleased to see ATCV helping to lead community efforts in this area. Overall, ATCV is now undertaking the majority of its projects in fields related to endangered species, be that survey work, vermin and weed control, planting or building walking tracks. In January of 1991, ATCV launched its 'Conserving Australia,' Green Volunteers Program as a potential blueprint for practical conservation involvement on a national scale. This program sees the ATCV model of community-based team leaders, extended to a range of organisations, which can plan and implement practical projects in their local area. ATCV acts as the lead agency for the program, establishing and acting as the national referral group for volunteers and projects alike. This program aims to establish ATCV as the first point of contact in the community for conservation initiatives, as well as being the catalyst at the local level for project activity.

1991 saw ATCV's fourth exchange with the California Conservation Corps. This project has been an outstanding success, both as a reward for volunteers and also in the personal development of our junior staff, who have led the teams to California. ATCV is devoting time to the extension of its exchange program, particularly to its sister organisation in Britain, BTCV, as well as in other countries.

ATCV's role in environmental education

A number of projects have been developed which provide primary and secondary students with experiential learning in environmental education. Projects include the participation of groups of schools in long-term revegetation activities where students collect native seed, propagate the tube stock and then plant-out and care for the young trees. Other projects cater for the professional development of teachers by organising hands-on field studies designed to give the participants the confidence to actively involve their students with the local environment, rather than just studying it from the seclusion of the classroom.

How can I get involved?

Readers wishing to join the ATCV or seeking more information can contact the following offices:

HEADQUARTERS
PO Box 423
Ballarat 3353
Phone: (053) 331 483 or (008) 032 501

SOUTH AUSTRALIA
PO Box 419
Campbelltown 5074
Phone: (08) 207 8747

ACT
PO Box 1042
Dickson 2602
Phone: (06) 247 4007

NORTHERN TERRITORY
Box 2358 - Darwin 0801
Phone: (089) 813 206

MELBOURNE
PO Box 23South Caulfield 3162
Phone: (03) 532 8446

NEW SOUTH WALES3
rd Floor-23/33 Bridge St
Sydney 2000
Phone: (02) 228 6461

QUEENSLAND
PO Box 2673
Brisbane 4001
Phone:(07) 210 0330

Whole farm planning

Whole farm planning brings together all aspects of a farm and considers their inter-relationship. Whole farm planning is a crucial requirement for managing agricultural lands for sustainability. Along with national approaches and regional planning on a catchment basis, whole farm planning will promote sustainability in agriculture and the conservation of biological diversity in agricultural lands.

Whole farm planning requires consideration of the 'total' assets of the farm-the soil, water, trees and habitat areas, stock, pastures, crops and wildlife and how to make the best use of them on the particular property. The integrated management of farm resources and their conservation values is encouraged. Whole farm planning enables farmers to plan future development of a farm in a way that avoids or minimises deterioration of the resource base, helps to minimise costs and optimises yields.

Such a plan should be consistent with, and ideally be an integral part of, a regional or catchment plan. This is because many aspects of farm planning extend beyond the property boundary; what you do may have an effect on your neighbours and the surrounding community. For example, issues such as pest plants and animals, soil erosion, fire hazard reduction and water supply will apply across property boundaries.

Whole farm planning is supported by the Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) process. The ESD Agriculture Working Group recommended 'that Governments support a whole farm planning approach to farm management which includes physical planning, financial and business planning, natural resource planning, sociological issues and marketing...'.

What are the benefits?

Protecting the natural resource base on which the farm depends makes a lot of sense. In economic terms it makes sense to protect the investment of the farm and its productive capacity. In ecological terms, it makes sense to sustain the farm environment and all the life forms that both depend on it and in turn maintain its fertility and diversity.

Preparing a whole farm plan is a valuable exercise in increasing understanding of the inter-relationship of management and development options.

For example, farmers find direct benefits from whole farm planning, particularly where it includes protection of remnant vegetation and planting trees.

Alan Edgar, voted Victoria's most productive farmer of 1990, grazes sheep on 3500 hectares. He says 'I find the biggest benefits of remnant vegetation on the property are that it's an excellent source of seed stock for the extensive planting we do each year and it's an excellent shelter for sheep in cold weather and also there's some benefit in hotter weather' (Just a Patch of Scrub).

Who's involved?

To be fully effective in preparing property plans it is useful to work with trained personnel (like extension officers or authorised private consultants). This helps consideration of land use issues which affect sustainability across farm boundaries. Ideally, the extension officers should be represented on regional committees which will ensure close adherence to regional and state plans. To really work, property plans need to be tied to a regional plan, and also need to be prepared and adhered to by all landholders.

How to make a whole farm plan

One way of making a whole farm plan is to use a series of three transparent polyester overlays laid on an aerial photograph of the property. These are used to map the features and problem areas on the farm and to decide on options for action. Other useful documents are topographic plans or maps, and parish plans. All of these can be used to plot boundaries, roads and tracks, reservoirs, buildings, trees and vegetation.

It is important to decide on a scale of plan that is useful to pick up detail but also manageable as a working document. A plan with a side width of 400 to 700 mm is recommended. Polyester overlays are available from office supply stores and can be drawn on rather than marking the aerial photographs. The latter are available from state or territory survey and mapping offices/ planning departments.

The first overlay can be used to plot general land features from the base map and concerns such as: land classes/capability/soil types (that is, for pastures, livestock, cropping); drainage lines and ridge lines; remnant vegetation and plantations, including neighbouring ones to the property; wetlands/wildlife habitats; planning restraints, eg easements; erosion/salt/access problem areas/fire direction and prevention; archaeological/ historic sites; weed problems/rabbits/vermin problem areas; and frost hollows/ run down pasture/waterlogging/rocks recharge/steep slopes.

The second overlay can be used to plot proposed improvements (assume there are none made already and go from there). Mark: fencing (pastures and remnant vegetation); water supply; buildings; access and laneways; yards; trees-production; shelter; wildlife refuges and corridors; wetlands enhancements; and vegetation management.

Some of these elements can affect or be affected by off-farm conditions and management, so ideally they need to be looked at in terms of neighbouring properties, and in terms of the whole area's planning.The third overlay can be used to mark existing improvements such as fencing, water supply, buildings, access, yards, pastures, and plantations.

It is convenient to attach each overlay to a different side of the aerial photograph. This allows each to be viewed on the aerial photograph individually or with any or all of the others. The combination of them all, along with your works programme and financial statements, becomes your whole farm plan.

Making it happen

The next step is to look at estimating the likely costs of each element, and the sources of available income or subsidy. The costs of improvements may include establishment costs, lease arrangements, contracts and labour. In most States and Territories, various types of assistance are available from government agencies, including incentives for the implementation of certain works to combat land degradation and conserve native vegetation and wildlife. These incentives can assist in the areas of soil conservation, salinity control, tree decline, control of pest plants and animals, and vegetation retention and management. The Australian Trust for Conservation Volunteers can assist with labour in carrying out various conservation works on properties, such as planting trees, erecting protective fencing and rabbit control. Generally all works undertaken to overcome land degradation problems are tax deductible in the year that the works are undertaken.

Proposed actions can be prioritised and incorporated into a works program for the farm. Priorities are set in line with what you wish you could do, what you can achieve, and what you can afford. Things to keep in mind include the long-term benefits to farm productivity, urgency, aesthetics and knowledge.

The farm work program will involve drawing up a calendar of events, pinpointing optimal times of year to carry out particular actions, cash flow problem periods, and so on. A farm plan can change as priorities are rearranged according to seasonal changes, finances,and labour etc.Whole farm planning is one way that farmers can both increase productivity and conserve biological diversity.

Further information

Boord, C.T. (1982),Your Farm Layout, Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Benalla.

Cameron, J.l., et al. (1991), Recovering Ground – a case study approach to ecologically sustainable rural land management, Australian Conservation Foundation, Melbourne.

Commonwealth of Australia (1991), Ecologically Sustainable Development Working Groups, Final Report – Agriculture, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.

Department of Arts, Environment and Heritage (1985), Think trees grow trees, Australian Government Printing Service, Canberra.

Garrett, B.K. (ed.) (1988), Whole farm planning principles and options, Department of Conservation and Environment, Benalla Region, Victoria.

Johnston, R.D., Waring, H.D. and Gorrie, I.A. (1990), Greening your own Australia – an introduction to native plant communities, Greening Australia, Canberra.

World Wide Fund for Nature (1990), Just a Patch of Scrub (video), produced by Kestrel Film and Video, Richmond. Copies from Kestrel Film and Video, 367 Bridge Road, Richmond 3121.

Giant clams and reef research

The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park is the world's largest marine reserve and the giant clam, Tridacna gigas, is one of its key features. Nine species of tridacnid clam can be found in reef waters.

Clams have special pigment cells that give them spectacular blue, green and brown colours inside. They open their shells to bathe their fleshy mantles in sunlight during the day. Their mantles provide a home for tiny single celled plants called zooxanthellae. The zooxanthellae generate food from sunlight, with tiny 'eyes' in the mantle concentrating light to boost the production of the zooxanthellae. The clams close up when a shadow falls on these light-sensitive organs.

Photosynthetically produced carbohydrates leak from the zooxanthellae into the clam's tissues, while special blood cells also 'harvest' zooxanthellae and take them away to be digested. In turn, the clam tissues provide a protected environment, and their waste products are a major source of nutrients for the zooxanthellae. While all other bivalve species feed by filtering plankton from water, clams get almost all their nutritional requirements from the zooxanthellae and can even grow in filtered seawater.

Human uses of clams

Clams are used for mariculture (or artificial rearing), for which they are ideal. They are easily bred in nurseries, grow fast, can be raised intertidally and need no feeding. Clams have been harvested by islanders of the Indo-Pacific region for centuries. Their meat is a valuable source of protein and their shells have many uses. In the Philippines, the value of the shells far exceeds that of the meat, and international markets have been established for ornaments and bowls made of the shells. In Indonesia, since the 1960s, huge numbers of shells have been used to make terrazzo floor tiles.

Clam flesh is eaten widely in the Pacific. The adductor muscle, which the clam uses to open and close its shells, is highly prized in South-East Asia for its taste and purported aphrodisiac properties. The small clam, T.crocea, is the largest selling food clam, especially for Japanese sushi. Clams are now being farmed in Queensland for meat for local and export markets, and for the aquarium trade. The small clam, T.crocea, is popular on aquarium markets in Australia and worldwide, especially in the USA, as it filters nitrates and ammonia from water.

Threats and research work

Because of fishing pressure in the Pacific Islands in the 1960s and 1970s, clams have been over-exploited – so much so, that two of the largest of the nine known species (T.gigas and T.derasa) have virtually disappeared from many reefs. In some areas, such as in Fiji, clams are locally extinct.

In the mid-1970s, marine biologists in Fiji and Palau first showed that giant clams could be reared artificially, and that they grow very fast (up to 10 cm per year for the first 5-7 years). This led to the idea that they could be farmed, both for commercial purposes and for restocking coral reefs.

Encouraged by the possibility of producing an estimated 60 tonnes of clam meat per hectare per year (and the high commercial value of this meat), researchers at the US-funded Micronesian Mariculture Demonstration Centre in Palau have taken the mariculture of giant clams (mainly T.derasa) from the laboratory stage to the stage of near commercial production.

In addition, a multinational giant clam mariculture project, funded by the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research and coordinated through James Cook University in Townsville, Queensland, has advanced mariculture methods significantly, especially for the largest and fastest growing species, T.gigas. One of this project's aims was to save the giant clam from extinction in parts of the Western Pacific.

The project involved experimenting with the breeding of giant clams. The success of this work has led to the production of juvenile giant clams to reseed depleted reefs.

Clams are usually hermaphrodites, and have ripe gonads containing eggs and sperm in close proximity. Clams can spurt out water both to frighten off intruders and to disperse eggs and sperm into the water. The eggs and sperm float in clouds where, luck permitting, fertilisation takes place. The fertilised eggs develop into tiny shelled larvae which swim for a week in the open ocean before settling onto a suitable surface to grow. In the shallows of the project research station at Orpheus Island clams were stimulated to spawn on demand in a confined space using hormones and temperature shocks, achieving a reproductive success rate many times higher than the natural rate.

The experiment nearly went wrong because the clams quickly outgrew their temporary holding space at Orpheus Island, and started to deform from overcrowding.

Operation Clamsaver

A fortunate resolution to the overcrowding problem was found. It was realised the clams could be used to test the new theory of reef ecology, which is that life throughout the reef is sustained by 'source reefs' which disperse breeding matter. Source reefs are reefs that have a good range of water currents flowing across them, so aiding the wide distribution of reproductive material of reef fauna and flora.This 'source reefs' theory has been put forward by the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) after analysing information from years of monitoring the spread of the crown of thorns starfish on the reefs.

GBRMPA, in co-operation with James Cook University and the Royal Australian Navy, organised 'Operation Clamsaver' to move the clams. The juvenile giant clams were moved to secret destinations around the Great Barrier Reef by Navy divers. Just over 7,500 clams have already been distributed, and a further 9,000 have still to be moved. This may be the largest relocation of a single marine species to date. Shipping them is delicate and dangerous. The clams, at seven and eight years old, weigh 20 to 30 kilos, and will grow to more than half a tonne. They quickly die if they get either too much sun, not enough sun or insufficient water. A navy heavy landing craft, HMAS Tarakan, was equipped with large containers of seawater to allow the transportation of the clams with minimum stress.

A project manager for GBRMPA, Mr Mike Bugler, said, "The clams are unique because the different groups are all from the same parentage. When they reproduce their reproductive material can be identified. In a couple of years we will go and look at the juvenile clams and test their genetic structure. By tracing the juvenile tissue back to its parentage it should be possible to detect patterns of dispersal in the reef system.

"This exercise and the information it produces may hold the key to the long-term survival of the reef. If the theory is proved correct, it may be possible to preserve the Great Barrier Reef by protecting the source reefs while allowing the sustainable use of the receiving reefs for fishing and tourism.

References

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (1990), 'Giant clam farming', Research Notes No. 3, ACIAR, Canberra.

Crawford, C., Lucas, J., and Munro. J. (1987), 'The mariculture of giant clams', Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 12, 330-340.

Information for local government

A Local Government Environmental Information Exchange Scheme has been established by the Environmental Education and Information Unit, Department of the Environment, Sport and Territories (DEST).

The aim of the scheme is to confront many of the problems which have been identified by local government officers and councillors in meeting their needs for environmental information and expertise on environmental management.

The overall goal is to encourage councils to include environmental considerations in their decision-making process and in the long term to improve the quality of environmental management at the local government level.

Major projects include CouncilNet, the funding of resource workers and the production of resource guides.

CouncilNet

CouncilNet is an electronic medium to communicate environmental information between local councils and other levels of government. CouncilNet offers local governments across Australia the opportunity to talk to one another about environmental and planning issues.

The need for a communication exchange network was identified in the survey Acting locally: environmental information needs of local government. This 1991 study was funded by DEST and run by the Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies (CRES) at the Australian National University.

Acting locally identified local government as having several areas of concern, including household waste management, urban development, water quality, salinity and greenhouse issues. CouncilNet offers information categories designed specifically to cater for these concerns. Many additional categories have also been added at the request of local government users during the pilot phase.

Communication via CouncilNet is faster than mail and cheaper than ISD, STD, fax and telex. Through computer conferences, individuals can share information, present papers, develop strategies, plan joint projects and research, as well as access key information. Private conferences can also be arranged for special interest groups.

CouncilNet also gives users access to the Environmental Information and Support Service. This is run by CRES, with funding from the Federal Office of Local Government. The service provides free assistance to help councils locate and use appropriate information for good environmental management.

Resource workers

CouncilNet is facilitated in each State by the Environment Resource Officers, whose role is to provide information, contacts and answers to environment-related queries to assist local government officers, departments and associated professions. These are based with the State local government associations in Queensland, Victoria, New South Wales, Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania.

Resource guides

Two resource guides will be produced to provide concrete examples and working models of environmental management. One will focus on ESD in action and how the balance between economics and the environment can be achieved. The other will focus on energy management. Both are being produced by the Municipal Conservation Association.

For further information, contact:

Maria Simonelli
Greenhouse Environmental Education and Information Unit
DEST
GPO Box 787
Canberra ACT 2601
Telephone (06) 274 1906 Facsimile (06) 274 1439.

News and Conferences

Newsletters

The Save the Bush newsletter is produced four times a year. It profiles regional and local actions to protect bushland, to combat weeds, and promote nature conservation on farms.Contact:

Gillian Lee
Australian Nature Conservation Agency
GPO Box 636
Canberra ACT 2601

On the brink is produced twice a year. It gives updates on implementation of Endangered Species legislation, news on State and local actions and detail on threatening processes, the development of threat abatement and species recovery plans and actions on particular species under the Endangered Species Program.

Contact:

Endangered Species Unit
Australian Nature Conservation Agency
(Address as above)

The role of networks

An international conference on the role of networks among people involved in conservation is being organised by the CSIRO Division of Wildlife & Ecology, the Centre for Conservation Biology at Auckland University, World Wide Fund for Nature and the Department of Conservation and Land Management, Western Australia.

It will be held in Geraldton, Western Australia, from Sunday 15 to Friday 20 May 1994. The conference will cover such subjects as: community involvement in conservation; the link between scientists and community groups; conservation biology as a discipline and as a force for change; current understanding of landscape linkages in conservation with production and development; the role of Landcare groups; integrating conservation with production and development; and the role of mining companies.

Contact:

Dr Denis Saunders
CSIRO Division of Wildlife & Ecology
LMB No 4PO
MidlandWestern Australia 6056
Telephone (09) 252 0111 Facsimile (09) 252 0134

Wilderness: The Future

A Fourth National Wilderness Conference will be held at the Australian Museum, Sydney, from 8-10 October, 1993.

Contact:

Fourth National Wilderness Conference
Colong Foundation for Wilderness
88 Cumberland St
Sydney NSW 2000
Telephone (02) 252 4975 Facsimile (02) 241 1289

Biodiversity tidbits

Unwelcome Visitors

Each year about 58 million tonnes of foreign water are discharged into Australian waters from the ballast tanks of ships that come to Australia to load our export cargoes. Most bulk carriers arrive in ports with ballast and leave carrying export products such as wheat, coal, iron ore, minerals and woodchips. At least 40 Australian ports around the continent receive ships which discharge ballast water.Over one hundred different animals and plants have been found in these ballast tanks, and at least fourteen species of exotic organisms introduced into Australia in this way have established self-reproducing populations, including fish, crustaceans, molluscs, worms and seaweed.

Two species, (the toxic dinoflagellate Gymnodinium catenatum and the Japanese kelp Undaria pinnatifida) are already causing serious environmental problems for commercial fisheries in Tasmania. The toxic dinoflagellate releases toxins which are taken up by shellfish. The introduced seaweed attaches to rocks which are abalone feeding sites, and also covers the abalone making it more difficult for divers to locate them.

Present measures to control the problem include: trying to ensure that ballast water taken on is free of organisms; re-ballasting at sea; non-discharge of ballast, or on shore ballast treatment.

Frog Futures

Professor Mike Tyler of the Department of Zoology at the University of Adelaide is a world expert on frogs. He is involved in research, with organic chemist Professor John Bowie, on antibiotic properties in frogs' skins. Frogs secrete chemicals called peptides-chains of amino acids and Australian frog peptides could be useful in controlling Staphylococcus aureus (golden staph), the infectious scourge of hospitals; and Herpes simplex (cold sores).

His other research into the mysteries of the two Australian gastric brooding frogs, which could gestate their young in their stomachs without digesting them, resulted in the discovery of Prostaglandin E2, to treat stomach ulcers in humans. It seems the tadpoles and the jelly around the eggs produced a compound which could switch off acids.

Sadly, one of these frogs is now extinct, while the other has not been seen for some years. At least thirty other species of Australian frogs are threatened.

In fact, frogs are in trouble the world over. In Europe, many frog species are declining. Mike Tyler thinks that frogs in hot countries like Australia are being killed by crop pesticides developed and tested in cooler climates. Frogs in Northern Australia exist in weather as hot as 45°C. Pesticides are usually tested in water at 20°C. Water diffuses readily across a frog's skin, so toxins dissolved in the water enter the frog's body easily.

Pesticides washed from farms and gardens are one of the factors responsible for the disappearance of frogs from suburban creeks and ponds throughout Australia. Even at concentrations as small as 25 parts per billion, the pesticide DDT prevents frogs from regenerating damaged legs, which they can normally do. In 1963 at Kunanurra in Western Australia where tests on the results of the use of DDT were made, 97 per cent of the frogs in samples taken were deformed. More modern insecticides, such as pyrethroids, which break down rapidly, are not the answer either, as they are highly toxic to frogs. Pesticides are not the only cause of frog destruction - there are many, including engineering works and pollution.

(Tidbit information: National Science and Technology Centre (1992), Questacon magazine, vol.2, No 1.)

Biolinks is published by the Department of the Environment, Sport, and Territories. The views expressed are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Commonwealth Government or the Department.

Before you download

Some documents are available as PDF files. You will need a PDF reader to view PDF files.
List of PDF readers 

If you are unable to access a publication, please contact us to organise a suitable alternative format.

Key

   Links to another web site
   Opens a pop-up window