Conservation decisions using the Atlas of Living Australia:a case study in the Queensland Brigalow Belt
LAND & WATER
Dr Rocio Ponce-Reyes
12 May 2016
Tara MartinDanial Stratford Stuart Whitten Josie Carwardine
Jennifer Firn Iadine ChadèsSam NicolRocio Ponce-Reyes
Australia’s biodiversity is incredibly diverse, unique, and imperilled by human-induced threatening processes
We can’t manage all threats everywhere – we need costed and prioritised strategies to guide decision making
This enables decisions made using the best available estimates of outcomes for biodiversity per dollar spent
4 |
Why prioritise threat management?
Priority Threat Management is a participatory, decision-science approach for identifying feasibleand cost-effective strategies for abating threats to nature.
Threat management prioritisation process
Threatened native fauna
Threatened native flora
Biodiversity of concern
Threats Benefits
Actions
Strategies[goal]
Likelihood of uptake
Probability of success
Costs
Photo: Sally Cripps (www.abc.net.au)
Photo: Rocio Ponce-Reyes
Photo: Rocio Ponce-Reyes
Photo: Rocio Ponce-Reyes
www.qhatlas.com.au
77
102
Photo: Eric Vanderduys
Photo: Eric Vanderduys
Listed species:
• EPBC• NCA Qld • Experts
Experts and stakeholders
• Stakeholders and expert participants
• 43 participants in total (of 63 contacted)
• 29 participated in the three day workshop in Brisbane (October 2014)
• 14 additional participants in follow-up discussion via email, phone and in person
• Landholders
• Park managers
• Non-government organisations (e.g. WWF)
• Universities (UQ, QUT, GU,CQU, USQ)
• CSIRO scientists
• Federal and State Government – NRM managers and threatened species experts
• Resources industry (Origin Energy)
• Private environmental consultants
• Traditional Owners
Management strategies
STRATEGY(in order of CE ranking)
AVERAGE BENEFIT/ SPECIES (n=179)
FEASIBILITYFEASIBILITY WITH COMMON VISION
ANNUALISED AVERAGE COST
($/YEAR)
1.Manage Fire regimes 4.1 0.62 0.68 $0.5m
2.Manage Invasive plants 3.8 0.66 0.74 $1.5m
3. Manage Hydrology 2.0 0.53 0.61 $1.2m
4. Establish Key biodiversity areas 6.2 0.50 0.67 $3m
5. Manage Grazing 5.2 0.54 0.65 $4.1m
6. Restore key habitats 4.9 0.54 0.63 $3.7m
7. Protect regrowth 3.7 0.40 0.61 $4.0m
8. Protect remnants 6.2 0.47 0.62 $12.4m
9. Manage Pest animals 4.0 0.46 0.59 $12.7m
10.Manage Pollution 2.5 0.56 0.61 $18.2m
All combined 12.3 0.66 0.74 $57.3m
Build a Common vision $0.2m
CE= Benefit x Feasibility/ Cost
A common vision
( Carnarvon Gorge - Rocío Ponce-Reyes)
Overarching strategy to build a shared stakeholder vision with a set of goals to align disparate values within the region
The vision would be used to guide on-ground management to protect nature while balancing social, economic and development needs
It could be used to strategically allocate off-set and other conservation funds
Key results
• Management of key threats in the Queensland Brigalow Belt bioregion at $1.60/ha can benefit 179 species and save 12 from likely extinction from the region
• Threat management strategies alone sometimes may be insufficient to secure all species:
9 species are not predicted to reach 50% probability of persistence
• Managing fire is the most CE strategy in the Brigalow
• The common vision is a great investment – for a low cost, it makes on-ground management strategies more cost-effective by improving their feasibility (5-21%)
Take home messages
• Databases like ALA are crucial for conservation projects – the 1st
step is knowing what needs protection…
• The complementarity analysis can advise on the best investments under different budgets
• A community driven, holistic management approach, which builds broad stakeholder support for the program will also be required for maximising outcomes = Common Vision
Special thanks to all the experts!• Lee Allen - Qld DAF
• Graeme Bartrim - Origin
• Stephen Balcome - Griffith University
• Don Butler - Qld Herbarium
• Mike Bent - Fitzroy NRM
• Brett Campbell - OriginEnergy
• Rob Coulson - Origin Energy
• Steve Cupitt - RPS
• Wes Davidson - Qld EHP
• John Dwyer - UQ
• Craig Eddie - BooBook Ecological Consulting
• Peter Elsworth - Qld DAF
• Teresa Eyre - Qld Herbarium
• Rod Fensham - UQ +Qld Herbarium
• Damian Ferguson - AgForce
• Clive McAlpine - UQ
• Juliana McCosker - Qld EHP
• Alistair Melzer - USQ
• Paula Peeters - Qld EHP
• Kate Reardon-Smith - USQ
• Andy Reeson - CSIRO
• Chris Robson - QUT
• Claire Rodgers - CHRRUP
• Leonie Seabrook - UQ
• Hugo Spooner - Avocet Nature Reserve
• Martin Taylor - WWF
• Eric Vanderduys - CSIRO
• Ken Waterton - Yukenbulla Services
• Bruce Wilson - EcoLogical Australia
• Peter Thompson - QMDC
• Matt Gentle - Qld DAF
• Mike Gregory - Qld EHP
• Craig Hempel - Qld EHP
• Michael Herring - Qld EHP
• Rod Hobson - Qld National Parks
• John Hodgon - NPRSR
• Lindsey Jones - Qld EHP
• Shane Joyce - Landholder
• Mark Cant - NPRSR
• Brett King - NRM North Queensland Dry Tropics
• Mark Kennard - Griffith University
• Alex Kutt - University of Melbourne
• Martine Maron - UQ
Priority Threat Management for Nature Conservation workshop
5 July 2016 - University of Queensland
http://brisbane2016.scboceania.org/
Estimating benefits: species persistence
Estimate the probability that species will persist at levels high enough to achieve their ecological function in 50 years under:
• The baseline scenario, no strategy
• The successful implementation of each strategy, assuming that all other threats are still operating
Future with
implementation of
the strategy
Current situation
Future under minimum
management scenario
Species prob.
persistence
1
0
Time (yrs)2050
no strategy
with strategy
Top Related