The monitoring needs of the site should incorporate a risk-based approach by focusing on the major threats to the ecological components. The critical components, essential elements, and threats have been discussed in Sections 3 and 4. These components and threats are presented in Table 15, with associated monitoring needs and prioritisations.
Priorities for monitoring were established by considering the critical components and highest threats.
Table 15: Key monitoring needs for the site.
Monitoring Focus
|
Threat
|
Details (type and frequency)
|
Priority
|
Geomorphic features, with particular focus on rate of change of landforms and sedimentation impacts.
|
Sedimentation; drainage.
|
Baseline: Geomorphic mapping survey of site, incorporating information from aerial photographs and including cross-sections to determine rates of change.
Ongoing: Five yearly (and after each major flood event) review of aerial photographs and cross-sections to assess ongoing geomorphic change.
|
Very High
|
Vegetation community with emphasis on supplementing existing survey data and also rare or threatened species and communities.
|
Sedimentation; irrigated pasture encroachment; stock trampling & foraging; hydrologic changes, drainage.
|
Baseline: Undertake vegetation survey to complement and supplement DPIW 2006 non-forest veg survey. Need to include estuary and coastal zones.
Ongoing: Two yearly survey of key locations (focusing on priority areas) to assess changes in vegetation communities (cover and diversity).
Baseline: Establish baseline flora species and community data; ecological community identification and composition; ecological community mapping and extent; and threatened species population size and health.
Ongoing: Low level aerial photography taken in November/December every five years in conjunction with resurveying of transects.
|
Medium
High
|
Water quality, with particular focus on nutrients, oxygen concentrations, oxygen demand, and biological assessment.
|
Stock access to waterbodies; dairy effluent (point source and non-point source).
|
Baseline: Monthly monitoring program for at least two years, including assessment of any inputs from discharge drains and other identifiable sources.
Ongoing: continuation of baseline monitoring program, with two-five yearly review to determine options for scaling-down or scaling-up. Any new development or expansion of existing catchment activities should undergo a risk-based assessment to determine monitoring requirements.
|
Very High
|
Substrate, with focus on cattle tracks being formed within and leading to wetland habitat. Also focus on general compaction in high stock areas.
|
Stock trampling.
|
Baseline: Mapping of substrate, with representation of areas with high stock access. Measurement criteria to include colour, texture & structure, as well as measures of impacts including photographic records.
Ongoing: Two yearly review with focus on vulnerable areas (based on stock access & numbers, and substrate sensitivity).
|
Medium
|
Weed infestation, focus on general weed spread and also increase in area of exotic pasture.
|
Pasture improvement; rough grazing.
|
Baseline: As part of vegetation survey, (above) record location and abundance of all weed species encountered on site, including coverage of irrigated pasture.
Ongoing: continue as part of vegetation survey.
|
Medium
|
Hydrology, with focus on characterising relationship between flows in the Ringarooma River and water regime in freshwater zone and estuary zone.
|
Climate change; increased extractions.
|
Baseline: Remote sensing or aerial photos of wetland extent over time, followed-up with ground-truthing, cross section and depth measurements of wetlands, and analysis of flow records.
Ongoing: rates of inundation and recession of flood waters within wetland (for example 1:1 year flood events 1:2 year flood events, etc.).
|
High
|
Rare Species.
|
Habitat change.
|
Baseline: Location map of vulnerable, rare or threatened species with information on habitat preferences and tolerances.
Ongoing: Two - five yearly repeat of flora and fauna survey with focus on rare species’ locations and abundances.
|
High
|
Communication, Education and Public Awareness (CEPA) Messages
The primary message that needs to be communicated to relevant stakeholders is:
“An Ecological Character Description (ECD) of the Flood Plain Lower Ringarooma Ramsar Site has been commissioned to understand the ecological character at the time of listing in 1982. The Flood Plain Lower Ringarooma Ramsar Site is listed against criterion one (international significant wetland type), criterion two (supports threatened species) and criterion three (a site of high biological diversity) of the Ramsar Convention. This ECD has identified a fourth criterion met by the site (criterion four: supporting a species during a critical stage of its life cycle). This site is a complex wetland, a coastal and estuarine ecosystem which provides habitat for important and nationally threatened species. The ECD includes documented past and current conditions, determines approaches to assess changes in condition, identifies potential threats to the wetland’s condition, devises appropriate management actions, and identifies critical information gaps for management.”
The stakeholders of the Flood Plain Lower Ringarooma Ramsar Site are numerous and the messages required for each may be different, especially once the management plan begins (when a full communications plan should be developed). Stakeholders for the site have been separated into four groups according to their role and interest in the site (Table 16). Initially, however, a combined set of messages relevant to the ECD can be used to communicate the importance of the site, why it was listed, the threats to the site and future actions required. The combined, key communications and public education messages for the Flood Plain Lower Ringarooma Ramsar Site are displayed in Table 17.
Table 16: Stakeholder groups for the Flood Plain Lower Ringarooma Ramsar Site.
Stakeholder Group
|
Stakeholders
|
Managers and Users
|
NRM North
Parks & Wildlife, Tasmania
Dorset Council
Department of Primary Industries and Water
Mineral Resources Tasmania
Inland Fisheries Service
Mining Companies
Agricultural Companies/Landholders
|
Regulators
|
Department of Tourism, Arts and the Environment (EPA)
DPIW
SEWPaC (EPBC)
Mineral Resources Tasmania (Mining)
|
Advisors and Funders
|
Australian Government – DAFF and SEWPaC
Consultants and Contractors
Universities and Researchers:
-
Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery
-
Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute
-
University of Tasmania
|
Broader Community
|
Landholders
Environment Tasmania
Birds Tasmania
General Public
|
Table 17: Key communications and public education messages for the Flood Plain Lower Ringarooma Ramsar Site.
Message No.
|
Simple Message
|
Detailed Message
|
1
|
The Flood Plain Lower Ringarooma Ramsar Site is an internationally important wetland
|
The Flood Plain Lower Ringarooma Ramsar Site is an internationally important wetland, and is now listed under criteria one, two and three:
-
A wetland should be considered internationally important if it contains a representative, rare, or unique example of a natural or near-natural wetland type found within the appropriate biogeographic region.
-
A wetland should be considered internationally important if it supports vulnerable, endangered, or critically endangered species or threatened ecological communities.
-
A wetland should be considered internationally important if it supports populations of plant and/or animal species important for maintaining the biological diversity of a particular biogeographic region.
This ECD has identified a fourth criterion met by the site:
-
Criterion four: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it supports plant and/or animal species at a critical stage in their life cycles, or provides refuge during adverse conditions.
|
2
|
The site is a zone of high biodiversity
|
The site is a zone of high biodiversity. The surrounding area is dominated by scrub and tussock grassland vegetation, and includes substantial areas of freshwater marsh habitat in the Flood Plain. The variety of habitats support the following vegetation communities: saltmarsh, coastal grass and herbfield, lowland sedgy heathland, wet heathland, coastal heathland, coastal scrub, Acacia longifolia coastal scrub, Allocasuarina verticillata forest and Eucalyptus amygdalina coastal forest. The large area of shallow water allows the site to be a good feeding area for dabbling ducks and other waterbirds. The area provides nesting habitat for many species of waterbirds, particularly the Australasian shoveler (Anas rhynchotis). A number of migratory birds have been recorded from the site; including eleven migratory birds listed on the China - Australia Migratory Bird Agreement (CAMBA), the Japan - Australia Migratory Bird Agreement (JAMBA) the Republic of Korea - Australia Migratory Bird Agreement (ROKAMBA) and/or the Bonn Convention on Migratory Species (CMS). The lagoons, marshlands and dunes also support a rich variety of invertebrate fauna.
|
3
|
The site contains many national and Tasmanian threatened species
|
The site contains many national and Tasmanian threatened species. The Ringarooma wetland communities are considered vulnerable in Tasmania and Melaleuca ericifolia swamp forest is a rare and endangered community.
The site supports four nationally threatened wetland fauna species;
-
green and gold frog (vulnerable, EPBC Act, also TSPA)
-
dwarf galaxias (vulnerable, EPBC Act, also TSPA)
-
fairy tern ( vulnerable, IUCN Redlist)
-
Australian grayling (vulnerable, EPBC Act)
Wetland flora species threatened within Tasmania and known to occur on the site are:
-
purple loosestrife (vulnerable, TSPA)
-
ribbon weed (rare, TSPA)
-
erect marshflower (rare, TSPA), for which the Chimneys is a key site
-
native gypsywort ( endangered, TSPA), which was previously thought to be extinct in Tasmania, has recently been found at the site
|
4
|
The site provides many important services and benefits to the region
|
The site provides many important services and benefits to the region, which include:
-
Wetland products such as food and water for livestock and water for irrigated agriculture.
-
Maintenance of hydrological stability by replenishing groundwater.
-
Coastal shoreline and river bank stabilization and storm protection.
-
Sediment and nutrient retention including trapping of mining-generated sediment from up-catchment.
-
Local climate regulation.
-
Climate change mitigation through sequestering carbon.
-
Water purification though removal and dilution of wastewaters from irrigation areas, and diffuse sources (rough grazing and dairying).
-
Biological control of pests and diseases through provision of habitat for predators of agricultural pests (for example, ibis feeding on grasshoppers; eagles feeding on rabbits).
-
Recreation and tourism such as recreational fishing and hunting (duck shooting), picnics, bushwalking, touring and nature observation (including bird watching).
-
Cultural value.
-
Ecological value.
|
5
|
Understanding the ecology of the site will enhance future management of the site
|
Understanding the ecology of the site will enhance future management of the site. The ECD will provide a complete description of the wetland’s condition at the time of listing, the changes since listing, the threats likely to cause changes in the wetland’s ecological character (including the ecological benefits the site provides), the key knowledge gaps of the site’s ecology and functioning, monitoring requirements and limits of acceptable change.
|
6
|
Past and present management practices provide some threats to the site’s values such as human use, grazing, water extraction and sedimentation from past mining activities
|
Past and present management practices provide some threats to the site’s values, including
-
changes to the landforms, including infilling of wetland areas, through the deposition of sediment, particularly through the ongoing downstream progression of the fine sands generated by past mining practices
-
vegetation community loss or change through sedimentation
-
inputs of excess nutrients and other contaminants (including oxygen-demanding substances) through grazing and dairy wastes
-
changes to the hydrologic regime via either local (water extraction) or regional/global (climate change) impacts
-
drainage of the wetland from agricultural activities (either intentionally or through stock tracks)
-
loss of habitat and vegetation communities through land clearance
-
damage to riparian condition in the Flood Plain through agricultural activities, including direct stock access
-
damage to the wetland soil/sediment structure through stock trampling
-
impacts of excess sediment deposition through future land uses, including catchment land clearance and new mines
-
declines in water quality through forestry activities upstream
-
introduction of weeds and pest animals
-
damage to habitat and vegetation communities through human access and inappropriate recreation (for example trail and quad bikes)
-
damage to habitat and vegetation communities through salinisation of groundwater; and,
-
loss of habitat and vegetation communities from gravel extraction
|
7
|
The ECD project has summarised the available information on the site which describes its ecological character
|
The ECD project has:
-
collated all the available information on the site
-
begun to gain a wider understanding of the site, its biodiversity and its functions
-
brought stakeholders together in the management of the site
-
discovered that the site has substantial gaps in the information required for its management and protection indicating more research and monitoring is required
|
8
|
Landholders, managers and users should promote the wise use of wetlands
|
Landholders, managers and users should promote the wise use of wetlands:
-
The wise use of wetlands is a key concept of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands and is defined as the ‘sustainable utilisation for the benefit of humankind in a way compatible with the maintenance of the natural properties of the ecosystem’.
| |
Yüklə 4.7 Mb.