State of the Environment 2011 (SoE 2011)
State of the Environment 2011 Committee. Australia state of the environment 2011.
Independent report to
the Australian Government Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities.
Canberra: DSEWPaC, 2011.
8 Biodiversity
2.7 Assessing the State and trends of biodiversity
For most groups of organisms, there appear to be substantial proportions of Australia where species and populations are in a good to very good state. However, in the assessment summary, in these cases, if there is also a substantial proportion where the state is considered to be poor or very poor, one of these grades is assigned. The presence of half circles in the confidence in grade and confidence in trend columns in the summary table usually indicates that direct data on grade or trend are limited, but that consensus is high or moderately high. This consensus comes about because the limited grade or trend data for a sample of species is complemented by data on pressures and ecological research on the likely effects of those pressures. The period over which assessments of trends is made varies depending on the data available—it is at least a decade in most cases.
| Component | Summary | Assessment grade | Confidence in grade | Confidence in trend | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Very poor | Poor | Good | Very good | ||||
| Terrestrial ecosystem (native vegetation) extent | Northern and central Australia: Native vegetation largely intact throughout much of this area (with a degree of modification in rangelands and high levels of clearing 1997–2005 in some parts of north-east Queensland and the Northern Territory) |
 |
 |
 |
|||
| Southern, eastern and south-western Australia: Historical losses most apparent in these areas (especially eucalypt woodlands, eucalypt open forest, and mallee woodlands and shrublands). Rates of loss are declining but loss still exceeds gains in many areas |
 |
|
|
||||
| Terrestrial ecosystem (native vegetation) quality | Remote areas and areas where agricultural and urban development have been minimal: Even in areas where vegetation is largely intact there are suggestions of some declining quality |
|
|
|
|||
| Agricultural regions and around urban development: Very limited wide-scale data in all states and nationally, but strong evidence of decline from case studies in agricultural regions and around urban development |
|
|
|
||||
| Terrestrial plant species | High-altitude, remote and/or very dry parts of Australia: Plants species appear to be largely secure (although all have been affected to some degree by human-induced pressures and most are potentially susceptible to effects of climate change), but there are examples of threatened or declining communities and species |
|
|
|
|||
| Areas most suitable for urban development and/or agriculture: There have been substantial historical effects of human activities on plant species. Some pressures are ongoing and the legacies of land clearing will cause declines for some decades. Woodland and grassland species are most at risk |
|
|
|
||||
| Species other than plants and animals (e.g. fungi, algae, some microorganisms) | Areas where vegetation remains largely intact: It is likely that fungi, soil microorganisms and other species are minimally degraded but there is very little information and the possibility exists that fungal communities might be impacted by declines in animals that play a role in dispersal of fungal spores |
 |
 |
|
|||
| Agricultural lands: Information is limited, but research results on fungi raise major concerns in agricultural lands |
|
|
|
||||
| Terrestrial animals—mammals | Declines in a large proportion of species across taxa in all states. Particular concern about mammals in northern Australia. Data collection is still too inadequate in all states and nationally to make a confident statement about which groups are secure and which are not | |
|
|
|||
| Terrestrial animals—birds | Relatively resilient historically but threatened species make up a large proportion of known species in some areas. Large fluctuations in numbers over the past decade due to climate variation. Several states raise concerns about recent declines, especially in forests and woodlands, and the potential for legacy effects from past pressures that have not yet been seen | |
|
|
|||
| Terrestrial animals—reptiles | Very limited data, but concerns have been raised about ongoing decline, including in grasslands and woodlands | |
|
|
|||
| Terrestrial animals—amphibians | Survey information is very limited but research consistently points towards major declines in many areas | |
|
|
|||
| Terrestrial animals—invertebrates | Survey data are very limited. Research suggests that some groups are likely to be thriving while others decline | |
|
|
|||
| Aquatic species and ecosystems (see also Chapter 4: Inland water) | Much of northern and central Australian freshwater ecosystems appear to be in good condition | |
|
|
|||
| Information on wetlands is limited but there is good evidence of losses and poor health of rivers in large areas of south-eastern and south-western Australia. Freshwater ecosystems appear to be in a poor and declining state in areas that have been heavily developed for agriculture | |
|
|
||||
| Marine species and ecosystems (see Chapter 6: Marine environment) | Overall: Marine biodiversity overall is in good condition |
|
|
|
|||
| In a few areas: Nationally there are a number of coastal places and areas on the continental shelf and upper slope where the condition of some biodiversity is very poor, as a result of the effects of specific human activities |
|
|
|
||||
| Recent trends | Improving | Stable | Confidence | Adequate high-quality evidence and high level of consensus |
| Deteriorating | Unclear | Limited evidence or limited consensus | ||
| Evidence and consensus too low to make an assessment | ||||
| Grades | Very good: The vast majority of taxa appear to have good prospects for long-term survival and any declines are limited in spatial extent and severity and are unlikely to threaten future viability of taxa | |||
| Good: Most taxa appear to have good prospects for long-term survival, although a small proportion have suffered declines that might threaten long-term survival | ||||
| Poor: A significant proportion of taxa have suffered declines across most or all of Australia that potentially threaten their long-term persistence | ||||
| Very poor: A large proportion of taxa have suffered declines across most or all of Australia | ||||
Search within SoE 
SoE 2011 - Reader Survey
What do you think of SoE 2011? Please provide your feedback through the reader survey.
SoE 2011 - Reader Survey
