Tender for the Programme - South West Catchments Council

Consultancy Number 201010-001NRMS 

DRAFT 

South West Regional NRM 

Strategy – Ancillary information 

Prepared by: 

IDEAS Pty Ltd 

PO Box 576, Bridgetown WA 6255 

Ph/Fax: (08) 9764 3821 

Mobile: 0428 222 405 

E-mail: info@leadingideas.com.au 

ABN: 96 127 090 859 

in 

collaboration 

with 

March 2012 

Ecosystem Solutions Pty Ltd 

PO Box 685, Dunsborough WA 6281 

Ph: (08) 9759 1960 

Fax: (08) 9759 1920 

Mobile: 0427 591 960 

Email: info@ecosystemsolutions.com.au 

ABN: 19 115 287 593

DRAFT 

South West Regional NRM Strategy – Ancillary Document 

CONTENTS 

1. Project Planning Matrices for the various theme areas .................................... 1 

2. Strategy development – the process .................................................................. 2 

2.1 The principles of developing an effective strategy ...................................................... 2 

2.2 How the strategy was developed ............................................................................... 4 

2.3 Choosing the assets requiring management action .................................................... 4 

2.4 The need to add landscape-scale NRM ..................................................................... 4 

2.5 The Consultation Process .......................................................................................... 5 

2.5.1 Stakeholders consulted..................................................................................................... 5 

2.6 Participants in Community Workshops ....................................................................... 6 

2.6.1 Cape to Capes Catchment Group (CCCG) workshop ...................................................... 6 

2.6.2 Leschenault Catchments Council (LCC) workshop .......................................................... 6 

2.6.3 GeoCatch workshop ......................................................................................................... 6 

2.6.4 Warren Catchment Council workshop .............................................................................. 7 

2.6.5 Blackwood Basin Group workshops ................................................................................. 7 

2.6.6 Peel-Harvey Catchment Group (PHCG) workshop .......................................................... 7 

3. SWCC NRM Strategy – List of reviewed documents ......................................... 8 

3.1 Key documents .......................................................................................................... 8 

3.2 Useful NRM documents ........................................................................................... 20 

3.3 Other key documents ............................................................................................... 35 

4. Historical perspective ......................................................................................... 40 

4.1 Biodiversity .............................................................................................................. 40 

4.1.1 Previously identified priority biodiversity assets ............................................................. 40 

4.1.2 Previously identified threats to the region’s terrestrial biodiversity ................................. 41 

4.2 Water resources ...................................................................................................... 42 

4.2.1 Previously identified priority water resources ................................................................. 42 

4.2.2 Previously identified threats to the region’s water resources ......................................... 44 

4.3 Land resources ........................................................................................................ 44 

4.3.1 Previously identified priority land assets ......................................................................... 44 

4.3.2 Previously identified threats to the region’s land resources ........................................... 45 

4.4 Coasts and the marine environment ........................................................................ 46 

4.4.1 Previously identified priority coastal assets .................................................................... 46 

4.4.2 Previously identified threats to the region’s coastal assets ............................................ 46 

4.5 People and Culture of the South West ..................................................................... 47 

4.5.1 Previously identified priority socio-cultural assets .......................................................... 47 

4.5.2 Previously identified threats to the region’s socio-cultural assets .................................. 47 

4.6 Air and Climate ........................................................................................................ 47 

5. Results of Community Consultation ................................................................. 49 

5.1 Potential to refine scores allocated to assets ........................................................... 49 

5.1 Workshop with Cape to Capes Catchment Group .................................................... 49 

5.1.1 Exceptional Assets .......................................................................................................... 49 

5.1.2 Very High Value Assets .................................................................................................. 53 

i

DRAFT 


5.1.3 High Value Assets ........................................................................................................... 59 

5.2 Workshop with Leschenault Catchment Group ........................................................ 63 



5.2.3 High Value Assets ........................................................................................................... 77 

5.3 Workshop with GeoCatch ........................................................................................ 83 



5.3.3 High Value Assets ......................................................................................................... 104 

5.4 Workshop with Warren Catchment Group .............................................................. 110 

5.4.1 Exceptional Assets ........................................................................................................ 111 

5.4.2 Very High Value Assets ................................................................................................ 120 


5.5 Workshops with Blackwood Basin Group ............................................................... 126 




5.6 Workshop with Peel-Harvey Catchment Group ...................................................... 149 




5.7 Individual Submissions .......................................................................................... 169 


5.7.2 Very High value assets ................................................................................................. 184 

5.7.3 High value assets .......................................................................................................... 192 

6. The online survey ............................................................................................. 196 

6.1 The 7-page online survey ...................................................................................... 196 

6.2 Results of the online survey ................................................................................... 203 

7. Further discussion on emerging threats ........................................................ 206 

7.1 Human denial of long-term threats ......................................................................... 206 

7.2 Decreasing rainfall ................................................................................................. 206 

7.3 Tree decline ........................................................................................................... 207 

7.4 Emissions trading, carbon tax and related issues ................................................. 208 

7.5 Changes in approaches to prioritizing assets and threats ...................................... 211 

7.6 The emergence of citizen science .......................................................................... 211 

7.7 Land use change and development ....................................................................... 213 

7.8 Decreasing resilience in the community ................................................................. 213 

7.9 Genetic resilience at the edges of range ................................................................ 214 

7.10 Globalisation and the environment ......................................................................... 214 

7.11 Intensifying use of marine resources...................................................................... 216 

7.12 Groundwater contamination ................................................................................... 217 

7.13 New invasive species ............................................................................................ 217 

7.14 Global financial instability ....................................................................................... 217 

7.15 Eco-label fatigue .................................................................................................... 218 

ii

DRAFT 


7. Funding Opportunities ..................................................................................... 219 

7.1 Revolving Fund for securing conservation properties ............................................. 219 

iii

DRAFT 


1. Project Planning Matrices for the various theme areas 

The project planning matrices will be placed here in the final document, but have been included as a 

separate document for the review and consultation phase, as they are in landscape format and this has 

caused some difficulties for readers. 

1

DRAFT 


2. Strategy development – the process 

2.1 The principles of developing an effective strategy 

The following principles lie at the heart of how the author’s developed this strategy, and the text is taken in 

full from Mark’s website. 

Five Essentials of an Effective Strategy 

Mark Rhodes (2010) 

http://managementhelp.org/blogs/strategic-planning/2010/06/07/five-essentials-of-an-effective-strategy/ 

The principles of strategy are timeless. The following notes on the essentials of strategy are drawn from 

the great works of strategy… Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, Napoleon’s Maxims, Clausewitz’ On War. Though 

dating up to 2,500 years ago, the advice of these strategists is helpful today no matter your competitive 

landscape, from high tech to agriculture, from manufacturing to government. 

1. An effective strategy is deeply understood and shared by the organization. 

Genghis Khan’s Mongols defeated far larger armies because they were able to make adjustments on the 

battlefield despite ancient systems of communication that limited the way orders could be delivered to 

warriors already in action. The secret was instilling battle strategy in the hearts and minds of all soldiers 

so that they could make correct tactical decisions without direct supervision or intervention. 

Like the mission statement published in your annual report or guiding principles framed in your lobby, a 

strategic plan itself accomplishes nothing. What matters is whether the people of your organization 

understand and internalize the strategic direction you have articulated and can make tactical choices on 

their own. Strategic plans must be articulated in a manner such that operational and tactical decisionmaking 

can follow suit. 

As a strategist, you must count on the employees or members of your organization to make sound tactical 

and operational decisions that are aligned with your desired strategic direction. To ensure that these 

decisions are well made, your articulated strategic direction and strategic plans must be applicable and 

clearly related to the issues that people face. 

Remember that an effective strategy provides a picture of the desired long-term future. In order to make 

sound day to day decisions, all members of the organization must be able to begin with the end in mind. 

All steps must ultimately keep the company on course toward the long-term objective. 

2. An effective strategy allows flexibility so that the direction of the organization can be adapted to 

changing circumstances. 

Watching the rise of Napoleon’s French empire in the first decade of the 19th century, the Prussian 

generals were anxious to do battle with Napoleon’s army because their soldiers were highly trained and 

disciplined in battle tactics that had succeeded for Frederick the Great fifty years before. It turned out, 

though, that the Prussian army was designed to fight “the last war” while Napoleon’s innovations, including 

soldiers carrying their own provisions instead of the supply train of impedimenta typical of the traditional 

European armies, allowed Napoleon’s troops to react and adapt to conditions far faster than could the 

Prussians. When the Battle of Jena-Auersted occurred in 1806, Napoleon’s army out-manoeuvred their 

slow and plodding enemy and destroyed the Prussians in that pivotal confrontation. 

A rigid strategic direction seldom turns out to have been the best course of action. To assure that your 

business is nimble and able to react to changes in the marketplace, it is essential that your strategy is 

flexible and adaptable. As a strategist, you will count on timely and accurate information about market 

2

DRAFT 


conditions. It is essential to build and employ effective mechanisms for observing and listening to what is 

going on in the competitive environment. Real-time information, in turn must feed on-going strategic and 

operational shifts and deployments. 

3. Effective strategy results from the varied input of a diverse group of thinkers. 

Moreover, participants in strategic decision-making must be unafraid to state contrary opinions. In Doris 

Kearns Goodwin’s excellent book Team of Rivals, she explains how instead of bringing in a cadre of 

leaders whose thinking closely matched his own, Lincoln made a point of surrounding himself with his 

political rivals, naming William H. Seward, Salmon P. Chase, Edwin M. Stanton, and Edward Bates – all of 

whom had opposed Lincoln in a bitterly fought presidential race – as members of his cabinet. Despite 

initial misgivings, this unlikely team learned that Lincoln valued their opinions, would consider and reflect 

on their disagreements and challenges, and would not stick unnecessarily to preconceived notions. 

Though the mix of personalities and opinions inevitably led to debate and verbal conflict, Lincoln was able 

to facilitate and mediate, tapping into a rich variety of ideas in order to find the optimal solution to political 

and military issues. Goodwin attributes this ability to manage disagreement and lead an effective 

decision-making process as perhaps Lincoln’s greatest strength as he led a troubled nation. 

To ensure that your strategic team is ready to make effective decisions, look carefully in the mirror. Do 

you encourage debate, even argument, among your team about key decisions, or do you encourage 

toeing the company line Remember that the well documented occurrences of groupthink – Kennedy’s illfated 

bay of Pigs invasion, NASA’s decision to launch the Challenger space shuttle, Bush’s reaction to 

presumed weapons of mass destruction in Iraq – occur not because of oppressive or stifling leaders. 

Rather, groupthink tends to occur when leadership groups enjoy collegial and fond relationships, leaving 

deliberants unwilling to rock the boat, or to voice contrary opinions. 

4. An effective strategy follows a thorough and deep analysis of both the external environment 

and the internal capabilities of the organization. 

This is the essence of the famous SWOT model (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats). 

The strategist must understand the effects and dynamics of external entities such as competitors, 

suppliers, regulators and strategic partners. A sound assessment of these external factors leads to a rich 

understanding of threats to ward off and opportunities to pursue. The strategist must also understand the 

internal capabilities of his or her organization. A realistic self-assessment enables the organization to 

leverage the strengths of the organization and to shore up areas of weakness. 

To take advantage of intelligence gained through a SWOT analysis, the strategist must ensure that 

intelligence does not sit idle, but is immediately mined for insight that can be used in strategic and 

operational decision-making. All historical stories of the great strategic achievements of history – from D- 

Day and the Normandy invasion to Napoleon’s greatest campaigns – include anecdotes of decisionmakers 

poring over maps and data and striving to find the optimal course of direction and events. 

5. An effective strategy identifies areas of Competitive Advantage 

Writing in The Art of Wart of War some 2,500 years ago, Sun Tzu postulated two dialectic forces: Zheng 

is the “ordinary” element that fixes the enemy in place. Qi is the unexpected and devastating blow. Qi is 

indirect, unorthodox, and extraordinary. Qi does not work, though, unless Zheng is able to hold the 

opponent in place until the decisive blow is struck. 

To put this in the context of today’s competitive dynamics, understand that many aspects of business must 

be held at parity across a wide swipe of the competitive landscape. In business, this is called the 

“business essential” elements of organizational design. You don’t need to be world class at mundane 

business practices that are not your distinctive competence, but you must maintain standards of work 

3

DRAFT 


equal to that of your competitors. That is, the organization must maintain parity with competitors in the 

ordinary and mundane matters. 

But at the same time, every successful organization is able to explicate an audacious Qi or extraordinary 

force. You must be world calls at something that differentiates you from the competition. Moreover, all 

members of the organization must keep the uniqueness of their company in the forefront, always keeping 

competitive advantages unharnessed in order to compete in a vigorous manner. In short, every strategic 

plan must educate the full organizational team how it must use carefully identified competitive advantages 

in order to compete and win. 

2.2 How the strategy was developed 

As a first step in developing the strategy, NRM documentation provided by SWCC, its partners and 

sourced independently was reviewed and relevant information extracted (see Section 3 for full details). 

Subsequently key stakeholders were consulted through the following processes: 

Community workshops 

Online survey 

Interviews with specialists 

Direct feedback from the community 

Stakeholder workshops to define RCTs, MATs, conduct horizon planning and review results 

The review data and the information gathered from stakeholders was then used to develop a first draft of 

the strategy, which was submitted to SWCC’s Board and staff for initial review and comment. Their 

valuable inputs were used to develop the strategy further, resulting in a second draft that was put out to 

public review. Input from this was then used to finalise the strategy. 

2.3 Choosing the assets requiring management action 

Assets described in the strategy were identified using the following approach: The previous strategy listed 

a broad range of NRM assets that require management action and these were combined with current 

knowledge obtained from individuals, groups and relevant literature to prepare draft lists of priority assets 

for the above resource theme areas. Specialists then reviewed and proposed changes where appropriate. 

These changes were incorporated and then subjected to peer review through a public comment process. 

2.4 The need to add landscape-scale NRM 

The need to approach NRM at the level of landscapes has been widely recognised in the literature over 

the past decade (see Liu and Taylor 2002 for an overview). The approach is rapidly becoming a keystone 

of conservation programs as it has been recognised that successful conservation requires that isolated 

populations of animals and plants be able to move across the landscape to ensure genetic mixing of these 

populations and to allow movements in response to the effects of climate change. The term “biodiversity 

conservation corridors” has been coined to describe this and is even being applied trans-nationally, as 

with the Tiger and Jaguar Corridor Initiatives (http://www.panthera.org/programs/tiger/tiger-corridorinitiative 

and http://www.panthera.org/programs/jaguar/jaguar-corridor-initiative). 

At the international level, many of conservation non-governmental organisations, including WWF, the 

Nature Conservancy and Conservation International, have adopted this approach to conservation. The 

UK government has done the same in its recent biodiversity strategy (UK 2011). 

The Australian Government has recognised this by incorporating this philosophy into its Caring for our 

Country program, for example by regularly identifying “landscape-scale conservation targets” as priorities 

and stating that “priority will be given to projects that build resilience and connectivity in the landscape” 

(AG 2012). The Gondwana Link project is an example of a landscape-scale approach to restoring and 

4

DRAFT 


maintaining entire ecosystems in the South West NRM region (http://www.gondwanalink.org/), while the 

Great Eastern Ranges Initiative in eastern Australia spans three States 

(http://www.greateasternranges.org.au/). 

Benefits of the landscape approach extend far beyond conservation, however, with substantial positive 

economic spin-offs, e.g. in protecting water supplies and significant nature-based tourism assets. The 

maintenance of ecosystem functions and connectivity across landscapes is also recognised as being 

essential for sustaining the health and wellbeing of our rapidly growing human population, particularly with 

the rapid onset of climate change. 

The landscape approach is complex, however, and will require the support and participation of individuals, 

landholders, communities, industry and government. It will also require better integration and coordination 

and management of knowledge, tools, science, planning and funding, as well as increasing awareness 

and improving NRM management across all land tenures, all of which requires extensive partnerships. 

That said, it should be noted that the complexity and size/scale of landscapes can make it difficult to 

define them well, resulting in inappropriate management recommendations (Brennan et al 2002). All of 

SWCC’s resources will thus need to be coordinated carefully to identify, plan and implement programs 

and projects if a landscape-scale approach is to be successfully incorporated into SWCC’s work as a 

preferred option for achieving lasting change in the South West NRM region. 

As a first step, it is therefore proposed that SWCC consider setting up a new program to oversee the 

introduction of this approach. This would require human resources with cross-sectoral skills and it might 

therefore be useful to combine this with the realisation of the funding and business model described in 

Section 5.4, as both require alternative thinking and new funding streams. The following eight guidelines 

for building successful integrated NRM programs were developed by Frost et al (2006) and they could 

form a useful foundation for all landscape-scale interventions undertaken by SWCC: 

focus on multi-scale analysis and intervention; 

develop partnerships and engage in action research; 

facilitate change rather than dictating it; 

promote visioning and the development of scenarios; 

recognize the importance of local knowledge; 

foster social learning and adaptive management; 

concentrate on both people and their natural resources, including biodiversity; and 

embrace complexity. 

2.5 The Consultation Process 

2.5.1 Stakeholders consulted 

The following organisations and people have contributed to the evaluation through direct consultation: 

Australian Government NRM office – Neil Riches 

South West Catchments Council – David Gardner (Chair), Damien Postma, Bill Bennell, Leonie Offer 

Blackwood Basin Group – Kathe Purvis, Felicity Willett 

Cape to Cape Catchments Group – Rod Whittle, Hayley Rolfe, Cassandra Jury 

GeoCatch – Robin Flowers (Chair), Bernie Masters, Sally Clifton-Parks 

Leschenault Catchments Council – Mike Whitehead (Chair), Joanna Hugues-Dit-Ciles 

Peel-Harvey Catchments Council – Jan Star (Chair), Jane O’Malley, Kim Wilson, xxxx 

Warren Catchment Council – Paul Owens, Lee Fontanini, Andy Russell 

South West Development Commission – Alan Cross 

Peel Development Commission – Colleen Yates 

WA Local Government Association – Jessica Sheppard 

Department of Food and Agriculture WA – Heather Percy, xxxx 

Department of Environment and Conservation – Kim Williams, xxxx 

5

DRAFT 


Department of Fisheries – Laurie Caporn 

Department of Water – Felicity Bunny, xxxx 

Murdoch University – Prof Giles Hardy, State Centre of Excellence on Climate Change, Woodland and 

Forest Health 

Non-affiliated persons – xxxx 

In addition, the following organisations and people have contributed information to the strategy review 

through the online survey or through direct feedback: 

• xxx 

• xxx 

2.6 Participants in Community Workshops 

2.6.1 Cape to Capes Catchment Group (CCCG) workshop 

Margaret River, 31 st March 2011 

Janet Dufall, community member 

Jann Lane, community member 

Ken Colyns, community member 

Peter Lane, community member 

Peter Wren, community member 

Rod Whittle, community member 

Cassandra Jury, CCCG 

Facilitators: Mike Christensen & Gary McMahon 

Drew McKenzie, CCCG 

Hayley Rolfe, CCCG 

Lyndsey Cox, CCCG 

John McKinney, Margaret River shire 

Mathilde Breton, Busselton shire 

Damien Postma, SWCC 

Iszaac Webb, SWCC 

2.6.2 Leschenault Catchments Council (LCC) workshop 

Bunbury, 4 th April 2011 

David Tupp, community member 

John Kalbfell, community member 

Kevin Martin,, community member 

Des Wallace, community member 

Paul Sannerson, community member 

Peter Ashton, community member 

Peter Murphy, community member 

Steve Newbey, community member 

Joanna Hugues-Dit-Ciles, LCC 

Max Ewen, LandCare 

Michelle Gooding, LandCare 

Andrew Reeves, DAFWA 


Jilwin Westrup, DAFWA 

Beren Spencer, DoW 

Cathie Derrington, DoW 

Debbie Brace, Donnybrook-Balingup shire 

Georgie Colebrook, Dardanup shire 

Peter Kay, Harvey shire 

Rachael Reed, Bunbury City 

Rae McPherson, Capel shire 

Ron van Delft, Collie shire 


Wendy Wilkins, SWCC 

2.6.3 GeoCatch workshop 

Busselton, 5 th April 2011 

Alan Howe, community member 

Alison Cassanet, community member 

Bernie Masters, community member 

Beth Howe, community member 

Ken Orr, community member 

Michael Cassanet, community member 

Mike Chartres, community member 

Peter Howe, community member 

6

DRAFT 


Chris Adams, community member 

Chris Willmott, community member / GeoCatch 

David Kemp, community member / GeoCatch 

Elizabeht Orr, community member 

Jeff Falconer, community member / GeoCatch 

Kerry-Ann Italiano, community member & student 

Robin Flowers, community member / GeoCatch 

Facilitators: Gary McMahon & Mike Christensen 

Gene Hardy, GeoCatch 

Sally Clifton-Parks, GeoCatch 

Mathilde Breton, Busselton shire 

Rae McPherson, Capel shire 

Will Oldfield, Busselton shire 


Kate Brown, SWCC 

2.6.4 Warren Catchment Council workshop 

Manjimup, 8 th April 2011 

Bill Bickerton, community member 

Carole Perry, community member 

Edna Vyner, community member 

Glenn Simcock, community member 

Helen Tuckett, community member 

Jan & Murray Muir, community members 

Jan Sillence, community member 

Keith Liddelow, community member 

Michael Gill, community member 

Paddy Pemberton, community member 


Peter Taylor, community member 

Tim Brokenshire, community member 

Wendy Eiby, community member 

Andy Russell, Warren Catchment Council 

Greg O’Reilly, DoW 

Ian Wilson, DEC 

Kathy Dawson, DoW 

Lee Fontanini, Warren Catchment Council 

Mark Sewell, DoW 

2.6.5 Blackwood Basin Group workshops 

Narrogin, 15 th April 2011 and Boyup Brook, 18 th April 2011 

Janette Liddelow, community member 

Maree Heenan, Facey Group 

Cara Badger, LCDC 

Julie Palmer, DAFWA 

Danielle Perrie, LCDC 


Ella Maesepp, Katanning LCDC 

David Gardner, SWCC - Chair 

Jill Richardson, Katanning LCDC 

Rebecca Walker, SWCC 

Felicity Willett, BBG 

Wendy Wilkins, SWCC 

Kathe Purvis, BBG 


2.6.6 Peel-Harvey Catchment Group (PHCG) workshop 

Waroona, 20 th April 2011 

Hilary Wheaton, community member 

Laurie Snell, community member 

Jennie Stringer, teacher 

Francis Smit, LCDC 

Johanne Garvey, LCDC 

Tony Hiscock, Alcoa 


Colleen Archibald, PHCG 

Jan Star, PHCG – Chair 

Jane O’Malley, PHCG 

Jane Towensend, PHCG 

Kim Wilson, PHCG 

7

DRAFT 


3. SWCC NRM Strategy – List of reviewed documents 

A wide range of documents have been reviewed during the preparation of the Regional NRM Strategy and 

these are presented below in two groups: 

1. Key documents: These provided varying amounts of information relevant to the preparation of 

the strategy. 

2. Other documents: Provided by SWCC and other stakeholders for review, or sourced by the 

authors, but of no direct relevance to the preparation of the strategy. 

The documents are listed alphabetically in these three groups. A full bibliographic reference is provided 

for each document, as well as a brief description of its contents, particularly with regards to its relevance 

to the strategy. All documents are included on the enclosed DVD, unless marked as being unavailable in 

electronic format. 

3.1 Key documents 

Beatty, SJ, F McAleer and DL Morgan 2009 Migration patterns of fishes of the Blackwood River and 

relationships to groundwater intrusion. Report to the Department of Water. 

The Blackwood River catchment is one of two in the SW Coast Drainage Division to house all eight freshwater fishes endemic 

to the region and is therefore of high conservation importance. However, salinisation of the upper catchment has led to 

substantial range reductions of freshwater species downstream to the largely forested region where fresh groundwater intrusion 

by the Yarragadee and Leederville aquifers is greatest. This study represents the only long‐ term and comprehensive monitoring 

of freshwater fish populations in the SW of WA. The study demonstrates, for the first time, that groundwater plays an important 

role in maintaining relictual fish fauna in a major river system of this region. The study specifically identifies Milyeannup Brook 

as being of key conservation importance as it houses the only breeding population of the EPBC listed (Vulnerable) Balston’s 

Pygmy Perch Nannatherina balstoni, and also housed all the other freshwater fishes of the river. 

BBG 2004 Strategic action plan and investment programme for the Blackwood River Basin, Western 

Australia 2004-2007. Blackwood Basin Group, Boyup Brook, WA. 24 pp. 

Key strategy produced by one of six sub-regional catchment management groups, listing key assets, threats and priority actions 

to address these. Both resources (assets) and key threats are discussed and prioritised under the headings land and water 

management, biodiversity conservation of sites and species, biodiversity conservation of landscapes and the marine and 

coastal environment. 

BBG 2006 Tweed River – A Preliminary Assessment of In-Stream Salinity. Blackwood Basin Group 

Inc., Boyup Brook, WA, 27 pp. 

Report shows that salinity increasing in the Tweed catchment, major effect on landholders. No specific information on whether 

affecting any other asset other than land. Management options given in recommendations section. 

BBG 2006 Gnowergerup/Scott’s Brook Preliminary Assessment of In-Stream Salinity. Blackwood Basin 

Group Inc., Boyup Brook, WA, 29 pp. 

Report shows that salinity increasing in parts of the Gnowergerup/Scott’s Brook catchment, major effect on landholders. No 

specific information on whether affecting any other asset other than land. Management options given in recommendations 

section. 

Bennell, B 2010 Aboriginal Consultation and Engagement Guidelines (On-Ground Works). South West 

Catchments Council, Bunbury, WA. 21pp. 

Title describes content. Adapted from a Department of Water document. The guidelines were developed to assist Natural 

Resource Managers in assessing and meeting SWCC requirements under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. 

Budd, AF and JM Pandolfi 2010 Evolutionary Novelty Is Concentrated at the Edge of Coral Species 

Distributions. Science 328(5985):1558-61 

Conservation priorities are calculated on the basis of species richness, endemism, and threats. However, areas ranked highly 

for these factors may not represent regions of maximal evolutionary potential. The relationship between geography and 

evolutionary innovation was analysed in a dominant complex of Caribbean reef corals, in which morphological and genetic data 

concur on species differences. Based on geometric morphometrics of Pleistocene corals and genetically characterized modern 

colonies, we found that morphological disparity varies from the centre to the edge of the Caribbean, and we show that lineages 

are static at well-connected central locations but split or fuse in edge zones where gene flow is limited. Thus, conservation 

efforts in corals should focus not only on the centres of diversity but also on peripheral areas of species ranges and population 

connectivity. 

8

DRAFT 


CCCG 2007 Capes Catchment Management Strategy. Cape to Cape Catchments Group, Margaret 

River, WA. 62 pp. 

CCCG 2008 Boodjidup Brook Action Plan. Cape to Cape Catchments Group, Margaret River, WA. 72 

pp. 

This river action plan (RAP) contains a detailed description of the current health of the Boodjidup waterways in terms of fringing 

vegetation condition, weeds and erosion. It provides information on current management issues, and recommends strategies to 

address these issues. The report can be used to assist in prioritising actions in the catchment to protect and enhance the brook 

and provides background information to aid decision-making for landholders, land managers and the community. Sections 1 

and 2 provide an introduction to the report and describe the study area. Section 3 discusses stream ecology. Section 4 outlines 

the methodology used in developing this action plan. Sections 5 and 6 detail the management issues identified and actions that 

can be taken to address these issues. Section 7 contains maps of the study area showing foreshore condition rating, fencing 

status, weeds, erosion and other features. Specific management recommendations are detailed for each map in this section. 

This section may be a good starting point for landholders to identify management issues on their property. Section 8 

summarises the key actions and recommendations in the report. Appendices provide further information: 

List of local native plants species suitable for revegetation. 

List of local native plant species identified in the study area. 

Common weeds in the study area. 

Useful contacts for further information and assistance.. 

CCCG 2011 2011-12 Action plan – Draft. Cape to Cape Catchments Group, Margaret River, WA. 7 pp. 

Sub-regional catchment group’s action plan for the year. Has useful information, but no prioritisation of assets/threats etc. that 

would be of high relevance to strategy development. 

Commonwealth of Australia 2007 National Environmental Health Strategy 2007–2012. Department of 

Health and Ageing, Commonwealth Government, Canberra, ACT. 14 pp. 

Not of direct relevance to the strategy, but is cited as an example of the “risk assessment and management” approach used 

by the Commonwealth Government for strategy development. Being cited, it is included here. 

Cribb, J 2011 We ignore a deadly invader at our peril. From the web on 16 March 2011 on 

http://www.sciencealert.com.au/opinions/20112102-21868-2.html 

The invader in this case is the Java strain of the Asian bee, Apis cerana. At present the invading Asian bees are thought to 

occupy a foothold in a smallish region around Cairns, in far north Queensland. Compared with the well-established European 

honeybee (Apis mellifera), the Asian bee is a poor honey maker, swarms prolifically, and is capable of outcompeting and 

destroying colonies of both the European bee and native Australian bees. In the Solomon Islands recently it almost annihilated 

the honeybee industry, reducing it from 2000 hives to just five. On February 2, 2011, a decision was taken by a majority of 

State governments to end control efforts. 

Curtis, AL and EC Lefroy 2010 Beyond threat- and asset-based approaches to natural resource 

management in Australia. Australasian J Env Management 17(3):134-141 

Natural resource management (NRM) in Australia began as a series of campaigns against specific threats to agricultural and 

pastoral production, with war progressively declared on soil erosion, introduced pests and dryland salinity. Critiques of NRM 

programs in the 1990s coincided with a shift towards an asset-based approach. This approach emphasises the need for public 

investment to be focused on those parts of the landscape of high value, rather than defending large areas against broad-scale 

threats. The asset-based approach is more strategic, but runs the risk of sacrificing effectiveness for efficiency by overlooking 

the large-scale biophysical and social processes that underpin the viability of discrete assets. Further, the asset-based 

approach fails to sufficiently acknowledge the importance of engaging and building the human, social and cultural capital 

required to underpin longterm environmental management. A condition-based approach to NRM is proposed that builds on the 

best of the threat-based and asset-based approaches by setting targets based on environmental processes rather than 

perceptions of ideal states; borrowing systematic approaches to assessing value and condition from conservation planning; and 

investing in the social, economic, human and cultural capital required to support lasting change. 

Davis, MA, MK Chew, RJ Hobbs, AE Lugo, JJ Ewel, GJ Vermeij, JH Brown, ML Rosenzweig, MR 

Gardener, SP Carroll, K Thompson, STA Pickett, JC Stromberg, P Del Tredici, KN Suding, JG 

Ehrenfeld, JP Grime, J Mascaro and JC Briggs 2011 Don't judge species on their origins. Nature 

474:153-4 

The authors argue against the nativism perspective -- native species equals good, non-native species equals bad – which 

dominates conservation efforts. Many ecologists now believe it is time to rethink this, i.e. need to consider outcomes and 

impacts of an organism on an environment rather than focus on native origins. Scientific studies show that while some 

introduced species have negative impacts, it is not always the case, and “We need to consider the impact of these terms”. 

Electronic version not available. 

DEC and Water and Rivers Commission 1997, Wetlands conservation policy for Western Australia / 

Government of Western Australia The Government, [Perth, W.A.] : 23pp. 

9

DRAFT 


DoE 2003 Preliminary Agency Statement of Natural Resource Management Priorities in Western 

Australia. Unpublished Report prepared by Department of Agriculture, Department of Conservation 

and Land Management, Department of Environment and Department of Fisheries, WA. 80 pp. 

Key preliminary document for discussion that states the State Government’s position on NRM assets of WA (See also the 

primary document State NRM Office 2007). 

DoW 2009 A draft water quality improvement plan for the Vasse Wonnerup Wetlands and Geographe 

Bay. Department of Water, Perth, 805 pp. 

17 recommendations addressing the management of nutrients (diffuse agricultural, point agricultural, diffuse urban, urban point) 

and environmental flows, as well as identifying R&D needs for these two priority assets. Describes: 

the ecological values; 

issues (water quality linked to fish kills, algal blooms (in wetlands and the bay), noxious odours, decrease in seagrass beds, 

mosquitoes and nutrients); and 

water quality objectives & identifies which waterways require Protection, Intervention or Recovery work. 

The plan’s five most important management directions are to focus on diffuse agricultural sources of nutrients as a first priority 

for remedial nutrient management action and investment; further improve effluent management at dairies and feedlots; prevent 

further increases to current nutrient loads from new urban developments (critically important); reduce nutrient export from 

existing urban areas in some reporting catchments where there are significant nutrient contributions from diffuse urban sources; 

and reduce contributions from septic systems in some reporting catchments to address local-level water quality problems. 

Document included several other reports as annexes: 

DoW – Nutrient modelling in the Vasse Geographe catchment; 

DAFWA - Landuse Nutrient Model Framework Development Report; 

Wetland Research & Management - Ecological Character Description Vasse-Wonnerup Wetlands Ramsar Site in South-west 

Western Australia; 

Ecotones & Associates - Support System for Phosphorus & Nitrogen Decisions – BMP Scenarios for the Vasse-Geographe; 

and 

DoW – Water Quality Monitoring Programme for the Vasse-Geographe Catchment. 

DoW 2011 Leschenault Estuary water quality improvement plan – Draft for public comment. 

Department of Water, Perth, WA xx, 181 pp. + DVD 

Detailed description of the estuary as an asset, the key threats impacting on it, and what needs to be done about it. Key 

management actions are given in detail – management of diffuse & point source agricultural nutrients; management of diffuse & 

point source urban nutrients; environmental water management; and assess condition and measure progress. 

Driscoll, DA, A Felton, P Gibbons, AM Felton, NT Munro and DB Lindenmayer 2011 Priorities in policy 

and management when existing biodiversity stressors interact with climate-change. Climatic Change 

Online at DOI: 10.1007/s10584-011-0170-1. 

There are 3 key drivers of the biodiversity crisis: (1) well-known existing threats, e.g. habitat loss, invasive pest species and 

resource exploitation; (2) direct effects of climate change, e.g. on coastal and high elevation communities and coral reefs; and 

(3) interaction between existing threats and climate change. The third is set to accelerate the biodiversity crisis beyond the 

impacts of the first and second drivers in isolation. Management and policy action that address known threats to biodiversity 

could substantially diminish the impacts of future climate change. An appropriate response to climate change will include a 

reduction of land clearing, increased habitat restoration using indigenous species, a reduction in the number of exotic species 

transported between continents or between major regions of endemism, and a reduction in the unsustainable use of natural 

resources. Achieving these measures requires substantial reform of policy, and development of new or more effective alliances 

between scientists, government agencies, NGOs and land managers. Furthermore, new management practices and policy are 

needed that consider shifts in the geographic range of species, and are responsive to new information acquired from improved 

research and monitoring programs. 

EPA 2007 Community Consultation Document for the draft Water Quality Improvement Plan for the 

Rivers and Estuary of the Peel-Harvey System. Environmental Protection Authority, Perth, WA, 16 pp. 

An important document that lists the key actions that need to be undertaken to improve the state of a key asset, the Peel- 

Harvey Inlet. The 12 actions include: 

Use a slow-release, low water soluble fertiliser, applied after the break of season, preferably in spring and at reduced rates, 

on sandy soils in rural areas 

Undertake soil amendment on sandy soils in rural areas 

Use low water soluble fertiliser in urban areas 

Connect all existing homes to infill sewerage 

Zero discharge from licensed agricultural premises 

Improve other agricultural practices to reduce phosphorus discharges 

Undertake strategic reafforestation of agricultural land 

Connect to sewerage all homes and properties for new urban developments 

Undertake soil remediation in all new urban developments with sandy soil 

Implement Local Planning Policies, Strategies and Planning Conditions that incorporate Best Management Practices where 

applicable 

10

DRAFT 


Incorporate water sensitive urban design in all new developments 

Improve the agricultural and urban drainage system 

EPA 2008 Water Quality Improvement Plan for the rivers and estuary of the Peel-Harvey System – 

Phosphorus management. Environmental Protection Authority, Perth, Western Australia, 78 pp. 

This WQIP identifies the current status of phosphorus loads; identifies the environmental values (EVs) of water bodies, and the 

water quality objectives (WQOs) that will protect the EVs and identifies a set of management measures and control actions to 

achieve and maintain those EVs and WQOs. 

Evans, MC, JEM Watson, RA Fuller, O Venter, SC Bennett, PR Marsack and HP Possingham 2011 

The Spatial Distribution of Threats to Species in Australia. BioScience 61(4):281-289 

Conservation is ultimately about safeguarding biodiversity by arresting and reversing the impacts of threatening processes. 

Although data on the distributions of species are increasingly well resolved, the spatial distributions of threats to species are 

poorly understood. We mapped the distributions of eight major threats to Australia's threatened plants, vertebrates, and 

invertebrates using the geographic ranges of species affected by particular threats as surrogates for their spatial occurrence. 

Our results indicate that simply quantifying the proportion of species affected by particular threatening processes does not 

adequately capture the variation in the spatial extent, prevalence, or predominance of threats to species. Conservation planning 

is an inherently spatial process; therefore, explicitly considering the spatial dimension of threats could significantly enhance our 

ability to direct efforts to areas where the greatest conservation outcomes can be delivered. 

http://conservationbytes.com/2011/06/09/know-thy-threat/#more-5802 

Finning, S, A Hams and J Steele 2008 Lower Harvey River Rehabilitation Plan. Technical report 

prepared for the Harvey River Restoration Trust, Harvey, WA. 24 pp. 

The report describes the Harvey River, which has undergone severe alteration from its natural state in terms of channel 

morphology and regional hydrology. The loss of riparian vegetation has had enormous ramifications on water quality and 

stream morphological processes (extensive sedimentation and eutrophication) leading to a loss of ecological diversity. Report 

discusses rehabilitation, showing it should focus on preserving the remaining vegetation and allowing the river to continue to 

evolve, with the addition of large woody debris to increase turbulence, re-oxygenate the flow and create fauna habitat. Small 

deconstruction of levee banks in places where steepness is excessive and contributing to erosion should also be carried out, 

and in the short-term banks should be stabilised with matting until native vegetation is well established. Current drainage 

management practices of manually clearing sediment from the River and increasing the heights of the levee banks should 

cease so as to enable the reconnection of the floodplain and bank stabilisation to continue. 

Froend, R and R Loomes 2006 Determination of ecological water requirements for wetland and 

terrestrial vegetation – southern Blackwood and eastern Scott coastal plain. Report to Department of 

Water, Centre for Ecosystem Management, Joondalup, WA. 147 pp. 

This study is useful for managers and builds on a previous URS study and establishes site-specific water regime criteria for 

selected wetlands and representative phreatophytic vegetation within the eastern Scott and southern Blackwood area. The 

study covers 1) Identification of phreatophytic vegetation criteria sites; 2) Establishment of wetland and terrestrial vegetation 

transects and baseline monitoring; 3) Proposal of ecological management objectives; 4) Determination of ecological water 

requirements; 5) Description of possible impacts due to water level decline; and 6) Proposal of monitoring regimes. 

GAO 2011 Climate engineering – Technical status, future directions, and potential responses. Report 

to Congressional Requester, Center for Science, Technology, and Engineering, United States 

Government Accountability Office GAO. 135 pp. 

Reports of rising global temperatures have raised questions about responses to climate change, including efforts to (1) reduce 

carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, (2) adapt to climate change, and (3) design and develop climate engineering technologies for 

deliberate, large-scale intervention in Earth's climate. Reporting earlier that the nation lacks a coordinated climate-change 

strategy that includes climate engineering, this report assesses climate engineering technologies, focusing on their technical 

status, future directions for research on them, and potential responses. To perform this technology assessment, GAO reviewed 

the peer-reviewed scientific literature and government reports, consulted experts with a wide variety of backgrounds and 

viewpoints, and surveyed 1,006 adults across the United States. The conclusion was that climate engineering technologies do 

not now offer a viable response to global climate change. Experts advocating research to develop and evaluate the technologies 

believe that research on these technologies is urgently needed or would provide an insurance policy against worst-case climate 

scenarios - but caution that the misuse of research could bring new risks. The technologies being proposed have been 

categorized as carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and solar radiation management (SRM). GAO found these technologies to be 

currently immature, many with potentially negative consequences. 

Geocatch 2008 Geographe catchment management strategy – 2008. Geographe Catchment Council, 

Busselton, WA. 46 pp. 

Key strategy produced by one of six sub-regional catchment management groups, listing key threats and priority actions to 

address these. Only key threats (issues) are discussed under the headings water, land, biodiversity, marine & coast, people 

and climate. The major assets of the region are also described in the text but not prioritised. 

GHD 2007 Status of State Salinity Framework – Report. Report to SWCC, GHD Consultants, Perth 

WA. 40 pp. 

11

DRAFT 


Title describes content – report describes history and current status (in 2007) of SIF3. 

GHD 2008 Review and Application of Financial and Planning Instruments in Managing Dryland Salinity 

in the South West of Western Australia. Report to SWCC, GHD Consultants, Perth WA. 52 pp. 

The study identified existing or new options that encourage management of salinity by communities and individuals in response 

to rising salinity levels in their environment. This involved a desktop review of the financial, planning and other instruments used 

by National, State and Local governments in Australia and internationally to assist local communities manage and/or adapt. 

Recommendations for their use were also developed. 

Gozlan, RE 2008 Introduction of non-native freshwater fish: is it all bad Fish and Fisheries 9:106–115. 

doi: 10.1111/j.1467-2979.2007.00267.x 

Hall, J 2008 DRAFT: Vasse-Geographe Hydrologic & Nutrient Modelling – Coastal Catchment Initiative 

Project, 2008. Department of Water, Perth, WA. 152 pp. 

The Streamflow Quality Affecting Rivers and Estuaries model (SQUARE) was used as the tool to deliver the catchment 

modelling. It is a model driven by meteorological and land cover inputs, and was developed specifically to model management 

scenarios in large scale catchments, and can deal with the unique hydrological characteristics of the Swan-Coastal Plain. The 

WQIP requires load targets and load reduction targets for all catchments. The catchment was divided into 15 ‘Reporting 

Subcatchments’ and the model was used to derive Current average annual loads and winter median concentrations; Predicted 

future loads and winter median concentrations; Maximum acceptable loads and load reduction targets; Source Separation of 

loads into the land use components; Contribution of point source and diffuse source loads; and the possible affect of climate 

change on catchment loads. The model was also used to calculate the total quantity of load delivered to Geographe Bay and to 

the Vasse Wonnerup Wetlands, and to determine the catchment ‘hot-spots’, where large exports of load were coming from. 

Catchment remediation scenarios, management scenarios, and climate change scenarios have been developed in conjunction 

with other CCI project managers. 

Hams, AB 2008a South Dandalup River Action Plan. Technical report prepared for Peel-Harvey 

Catchment Council, Mandurah, WA. 76 pp. 

This action plan provides information about the current health of the South Dandalup Catchment and recommendations on how 

to manage it better. Issues of concern include: 

Stock Access to Riparian Areas 

Loss of Riparian Vegetation 

Weed Invasion – particularly Watsonia, Cotton Bush, Blackberry and Apple of Sodom 

Erosion and Siltation 

Feral Animal Invasion – Pigs, Foxes and Rabbits 

Indigenous Heritage Issues 

Recommendations are included in response to the above issues. 

Hams, AB 2008b Middle Murray River Action Plan. Technical report prepared for Peel-Harvey 

Catchment Council, Mandurah, WA. 94 pp. 

This action plan provides information about the current health of the Middle Murray Catchment and recommendations on how to 

manage it better. Issues of concern include: 

Loss of Riparian Vegetation 

Weed Invasion – particularly Watsonia, Cotton Bush, Blackberry and Apple of Sodom 

Erosion and Siltation 

Stock Access to Riparian Areas 

Feral Animal Invasion – Pigs, Foxes and Rabbits 

Indigenous Heritage Issues 

Recommendations are included in response to the above issues. 

Heath, R, SM White and J Bowyer 2009 Evaluation Report – Resource condition target setting, 

monitoring & evaluation systems for dryland salinity (L7-G2 & DS.01d projects). Report to SWCC, 

Department of Food and Agriculture, South Perth, WA. 39 pp. 

This report details findings from an evaluation, conducted by the DAFWA ‘Extension and Communication’ team, of SWCC’s 

‘Resource condition target setting, monitoring and evaluation systems for dryland salinity’ projects (L7-G2 and DS.01d)1. The 

report is divided into three key sections: 1) Introduction – purpose of the evaluation; and background information about the 

Salinity Target Setting project. 2) Evaluation part 1 – methodology and findings from the assessment of delivery of project 

contractual obligations. 3) Evaluation part 2 – methodology and findings from the evaluation of the impact of the consultative 

process used by the project. Provides useful information about the target setting process and the targets developed. 

Hill, AL, CA S, V S and A Del Marco 1996a Wetlands of the Swan Coastal Plain. Vol 2a: Wetland 

mapping, classification and evaluation, main report. Water & Rivers Commission, Perth, WA. 352 

pp. 

A very comprehensive report on the wetlands of the Swan Coastal Plain, detailing much of the methodology etc behind wetland 

classification, BUT only prioritises those from Perth down to Mandurah, and so misses all the major wetlands important to the 

SW region. Does list them, but no real discussion. 

12

DRAFT 


Hill, AL, CA S, V S and A Del Marco 1996b Wetlands of the Swan Coastal Plain. Vol 2b: Wetland 

mapping, classification and evaluation – wetland atlas. Water & Rivers Commission, Perth, WA. 194 

pp. 

The accompanying atlas to report vol.2a – shows locations of ALL wetlands from Perth to Dunsborough, so very useful resource 

to managers. 

Jury, C, G Hanran-Smith and D Rooks 2008 Cowaramup Creeks action plan. Technical report prepared 

for the Cape to Cape Catchments Group, Margaret River, WA. 85 pp. 

This action plan provides information about the current health of the Cowaramup Catchment and recommendations on how to 

manage it better. Issues of concern identified during the foreshore surveys and community consultation were: 

Loss of native fringing vegetation and degradation of remaining vegetation by stock grazing and trampling. 

The effect of altered hydrology including declining rainfall, on-stream dams and bores on the timing and quantity of flow and 

the ecology of the creeks. 

Environmental and agricultural weeds threatening good vegetation. 

The planting of invasive non-local plants including deciduous trees which threaten the character of the area and have the 

potential to impact on creek ecology. 

Concerns regarding water quality and the impact on marine life in Cowaramup Bay. 

The potential impact on remnant vegetation from the spread of dieback particularly on the unnamed creek. 

On-going erosion in areas where all creekline vegetation has been removed and grazing is occurring. 

The fragmentation of habitats through the loss of creekline vegetation connectivity. 

In response to these issues, recommendations have been made in this report to protect and improve the condition of the creeks. 

Kavanagh, R, B Law, F Lemckert, M Stanton, M Chidel, T Brassil, A Towerton and T Penman 2010 

Conservation value of eucalypt plantations established for wood production and multiple 

environmental benefits in agricultural landscapes. Final report for NAP/NHT2 eucalypt plantations 

project SLA 0013 R3 NAP, Forest & Rangeland Ecosystems Research, NSW Industry and 

Investment, NSW. 112 pp. 

Report documenting capacity of young eucalypt plantations to restore habitat for fauna within highly fragmented and ecologically 

degraded agricultural landscapes re birds, reptiles, bats and terrestrial mammals. 

Kingsford, RT, JEM Watson, CJ Lundquist, O Venter, L Hughes, EL Johnston, J Atherton, M Gawel, DA 

Keith, BG Mackey, C Morley, HP Possingham, B Raynor, HF Recher and KA Wilson 2009 Major 

Conservation Policy Issues for Biodiversity in Oceania. Conservation Biology, 23: 834–840 

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS ARE SO RELEVANT THAT THEY HAVE BEEN GIVEN HERE IN FULL 

Habitat loss and degradation 

Implement legislation, education, and community outreach to stop or reduce land clearing, mining, and unsustainable logging 

through education, incentives, and compensation for landowners that will encourage private conservation 

Establish new protected areas for habitats that are absent or poorly represented 

In threatened ecosystems (e.g., wetlands), establish large-scale restoration projects with local communities that incorporate 

conservation and connectivity 

Establish transparent and evidence-based state of environment reporting on biodiversity and manage threats within and 

outside protected areas. 

Protect free-flowing river systems (largely unregulated by dams, levees, and diversions) within the framework of the entire 

river basin and increase environmental flows on regulated rivers 

Invasive species 

Avoid deliberate introduction of exotic species, unless suitable analyses of benefits outweigh risk-weighted costs 

Implement control of invasive species by assessing effectiveness of control programs and determining invasion potential 

Establish regulations and enforcement for exchange or treatment of ocean ballast and regularly implement antifouling 

procedures 

Climate change 

Reduce global greenhouse gas emissions 

Identify, assess, and protect important climate refugia 

Ameliorate the impacts of climate change through strategic management of other threatening processes 

Develop strategic plans for priority translocations and implement when needed 

Overexploitation 

Implement restrictions on harvest of overexploited species to maintain sustainability 

Implement an ecosystem-based approach for fisheries, based on scientific data, that includes zoning the ocean; banning 

destructive fishing; adopting precautionary fishing principles that include size limits, quotas, and regulation with sufficient 

resources based on scientific assessments of stocks and; reducing bycatch through regulation and education 

Implement international mechanisms to increase sustainability of fisheries by supporting international treaties for fisheries 

protection in the high seas; avoiding perverse subsidies and improve labelling of sustainable fisheries; and licensing exports 

of aquarium fish 

Control unsustainable illegal logging and wildlife harvesting through local incentives and cessation of international trade 

Pollution 

13

DRAFT 


Decrease pollution through incentives and education; reduce and improve treatment of domestic, industrial, and agriculture 

waste; and rehabilitate polluted areas 

Strengthen government regulations to stop generation of toxic material from mining efforts that affects freshwater and marine 

environments 

Establish legislation and regulations and financial bonds (international) to reinforce polluter-pays principles 

Establish regulations, education programs, clean ups, labelling, and use of biodegradable packaging to reduce discarded 

fishing gear and plastics 

Disease 

Establish early-detection programs for pathological diseases and biosecurity controls to reduce translocation 

Identify causes, risk-assessment methods, and preventative methods for diseases 

Establish remote communities of organisms (captive) not exposed to disease in severe outbreaks 

Implementation 

Establish regional population policies based on ecologically sustainable human population levels and consumption 

Ensure that all developments affecting the environment are adequately analysed for impacts over the long term 

Promote economic and societal benefits from conservation through education 

Determine biodiversity status and trends with indicators that diagnose and manage declines 

Invest in taxonomic understanding and provision of resources (scientific and conservation) to increase capacity for 

conservation 

Increase the capacity of government conservation agencies 

Focus efforts of nongovernmental organisations on small island states on building indigenous capacity for conservation 

Base conservation on risk assessment and decision support 

Establish the effectiveness of conservation instruments (national and international) and their implementation and approaches 

and how they affect scientific perception, public perception, and in turn, decision-making in conservation and restoration 

management. 

Laurance, WF, B Dell, SM Turton, MJ Lawes, LB Hutley, H McCallum, P Dale, M Bird, G Hardy, G 

Prideaux, B Gawne, CR McMahon, R Yu, J-M Hero, L Schwarzkopf, A Krockenberger, M Douglas, E 

Silvester, M Mahony, K Vellam, U Saikia, C-H Wahren, Z Xu, B Smith, C Cocklin In Press The 10 

Australian ecosystems most vulnerable to tipping points. Biol. Conserv. 9 pp. 

The paper identifies the 10 major terrestrial and marine ecosystems in Australia most vulnerable to tipping points, in which 

modest environmental changes can cause disproportionately large changes in ecosystem properties. The list includes the 

Mediterranean ecosystems of southwestern Australia. For each ecosystem the paper considers the intrinsic features and 

external drivers that render each ecosystem susceptible to tipping points, and identify subtypes of the ecosystem that we deem 

to be especially vulnerable. 

LCC 2007 Leschenault NRM Sub-region Catchment management strategy. Prepared by Land 

Assessment Pty Ltd for the Leschenault Catchment Council (LCC), Bunbury, WA. 133 pp. 


to address these. Resources (assets) are discussed under the headings land resources, water resources, biodiversity, coastal 

& marine, climate & air quality, and cultural heritage. Importantly, only issues (threats) and appropriate actions are specifically 

listed and discussed in this document, whereas assets are only identified (spread randomly through text), but are not prioritised. 

Electronic version not available. 

McElhinny, C 2002 Forest and woodland structure as an index of biodiversity: A review. A literature 

review commissioned by NSW NPWS, 84 pp. 

This report reviews the ecological literature concerning the relationship between forest and woodland structure and biodiversity, 

at the scale of an individual stand. Part one provides a definition of “forest structure”. Part two concludes that relatively few 

international studies contain extensive sets of structural attributes, and that no single study is likely to provide a definitive suite 

of attributes. Part three reviews Australian studies that have associated the presence, abundance or richness of different faunal 

groups with various structural attributes. 

McInnis, T and S Wicks 2011 Enhanced reporting on industry specific land management practices. 

ABARES, Canberra, ACT. ABARES Res.Report 11.1:1-48 

This report collates results from ABARE (now ABARES) surveys on NRM into a summary for policymakers working on the 

Australian Government’s Caring for our Country (CfoC) initiative; assesses the capacity of existing ABARE survey data to inform 

CfoC targets and the associated CfoC MERI strategy; and provides a framework from which a new NRM survey can be 

developed. In the period 1991-2010, ABARE conducted 16 surveys that collected information on land management practices 

and NRM issues. These surveys identified some meaningful trends, e.g. the uptake of farm planning has declined since the 

early 1990s, and that Landcare membership has generally increased over the same time period. A draft survey instrument is 

also described which could be used to specifically inform CfoC and the MERI strategy. 

MacGregor, C 2008 Innovation in Community Engagement. Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource 

Management, UWA, Perth, WA. CENRM Report 074 139 pp. 

Innovative community engagement, as promoted by the Government of Victoria’s (2005) Community Engagement Planning 

Key, was tested and trialled in two SWCC projects. The Planning Key approach was found to be flexible, innovative and 

14

DRAFT 


systematic; however, it did not necessarily encourage early stakeholder involvement. In the trials the Planning Key and its 

associated free software were found to be particularly useful in assisting with the development of Community Engagement 

Plans (CEPs). Especially useful was the CLIP (Collaboration, Conflict, Interest and Power) method for profiling stakeholders 

principally because it helped identify the engagement type (inform, consult, involve, collaborate, empower) needed to meet the 

different needs and expectations of stakeholders. However, future users of the Planning Key (Project Officers) should 

understand that they still need to make decisions about which specific engagement tools (e.g. interviews, focus groups, 

workshops etc) they will use in their engagements. The IAP2 spectrum (2006), which is an integral component of the Planning 

Key, can assist in identifying appropriate tools according to budgetary and/or other limiting factors. Importantly, the Planning 

Key also encouraged the development of evaluation strategies (to help determine the effectiveness of the engagement) and 

learning strategies (to help build human and institutional capital during the engagement), both of which are easily neglected 

during time-constrained projects as practitioners seek to meet broader project objectives. Future research with the Planing Key 

should consider how well the emergent CEPs align with or can be integrated into broader NRM project planning. 

Mincherton, G 2008 Buayanyup River Action Plan. Technical report prepared for Geographe 

Catchment Council, Busselton and Department of Water, Perth. 110pp. 

This action plan provides information about the current health of the Buayanyup Catchment and recommendations on how to 

manage it better. The Pen-Scott Foreshore Condition Assessment Method was used to undertake assessments of the 

foreshore with local landholders and community members and a summary of the foreshore condition ratings of the river is 

presented. 

NTNU 2012 New quantitative method enables researchers to assess environmental risks posed by nonnative 

species. The Norwegian University of Science and Technology in ScienceDaily. Retrieved Dec 

29, 2011, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111226093008.htm 

Emerging technology: A coalition of researchers from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) and staff 

from the Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre have created a unique quantitative method that enables researchers and 

others to assess the environmental risks posed by non-native species (unfortunately currently only available in Norwegian, but 

planned for translation). While the method is tailored to the Norwegian environment, it can easily be adapted to other countries, 

and fills a vital need internationally for a quantifiable, uniform approach to classifying and assessing alien species, the 

developers say. "This provides an objective classification of these species' potential impact on the Norwegian environment. We 

relied on much of the same principles as are used in the preparation of the 'Red List' of endangered and threatened species," 

says Professor Bernt-Erik Saether at NTNU's Center for Conservation Biology (CCB), who has spearheaded the development of 

the new methodology along with a coalition of other Norwegian biologists and staff from the Biodiversity Information Centre. 

The method classifies species according to their reproductive ability, growth rate, individual densities, population densities, 

prevalence and their effect. This information allows the researchers to plot the risks posed by each species on two axes, one 

which shows the likelihood of the species' dispersal and ability to establish itself in the environment (along with its rate of 

establishment, if applicable) and the other shows the degree to which the alien species will affect native species and habitats. 

Based on the combined values of the two axes, the species can be placed in one of five risk categories: 

Very high risk species that can have a strong negative effect on the Norwegian environment; 

High risk species that have spread widely with some ecological impact, or those that have a major ecological effect but have 

only limited distribution; 

Potentially high risk species that have very limited dispersal ability, but a substantial ecological impact or vice versa; 

Low risk species, with low or moderate dispersion and moderate to limited ecological effect; 

Species with no known risk factors that are not known to have spread and have no known ecological effects. 

Pen, LJ, HS Gill, P Humphries and IC Potter 1993 Biology of the black-stripe minnow Galaxiella 

nigrostriata, including comparisons with the other two Galaxiella species. J.Fish Biol. 43(6): 847-63. 

The growth, age composition, reproductive biology and diet of Galaxiella nigrostriata in seasonal water bodies in south-western 

Australia are described and compared with G. munda and G. pusilla. Like the other two Galaxiella species, G. nigrostriata has a 

1-year life cycle. The mean length attained by female G. nigrostriata at sexual maturity is approximately 37 mm, compared with 

about 47 and 28 mm for G. munda and G. pusilla, respectively. Like G. munda, G. nigrostriata is a multiple spawner. Although 

all three Galaxiella species breed mainly in winter and early spring, spawning occurs earlier in G. nigrostriata than in the other 

two species. An early production of offspring enables the young females and males of this species to reach approximately 78 

and 88%, respectively, of their ultimate body length by early summer. Such a prolonged period of early and relatively rapid 

growth is advantageous to G. nigrostriata, since this species lives in water bodies that often dry up during the summer and early 

autumn and thus cannot grow during this period. The gonads start to undergo rapid development in autumn, when the pools 

begin to fill with water following the onset of the seasonal rains. All three Galaxiella species are carnivores. Galaxiella 

nigrostriata mainly takes prey from the water column and the water surface, G. pusilla focuses on prey in the water column and 

benthos, and G. munda feeds widely on prey on the water surface, throughout the water column and from the benthos. The 

prevalence of small prey, such as cladocera and calanoid copepods, is greater in the diets of G. nigrostriata and G. pusilla than 

in that of G. munda. Electronic version not available. 

PHCC 2005 Peel-Harvey Catchment natural resource management plan. Prepared by Land 

Assessment Pty Ltd for the Peel-Harvey Catchment Council (PHCC), Mandurah, WA. 114 pp. 


to address these. Resources (assets) are discussed under the headings land resources, water resources, biodiversity, coastal 

environment, marine environment, air, climate, and people & culture. Importantly, only issues (threats) and appropriate actions 

15

DRAFT 


are specifically listed and discussed in this document, whereas assets are identified, but not prioritised in any real way, e.g. all 

53 regionally significant wetlands are listed. 

PHCC 2008 Peel-Harvey Water sensitive urban design tour – site descriptions. Peel-Harvey 

Catchment Group, Mandurah, WA. 16 pp. 

Ten sites are described in detail with regards to the water sensitive design features, including description of the site’s objectives, 

what best management practices have been implemented and other objectives relevant to water sensitive design. A map is 

also included of each site showing where the BMPs have been implemented. 

PHCC 2008 Draft Peel-Yalgorup Ramsar Site Management Plan. Peel-Harvey Catchment Council, 

Mandurah, WA. 89 pp. 

The management plan sets out a framework for coordinated and collaborative management that: 

works towards protecting and/or restoring the ecological character of the Peel-Yalgorup System, and 

promotes the wise use of the wetlands in the System by fostering the roles and responsibilities of local stewards. 

It outlines the three (long-term) general objectives for managing the System, under which five-year management outcomes are 

prescribed: 

GENERAL OBJECTIVE 1: The Peel-Yalgorup System will be managed in accordance with the principle of wise use, that is, 

the conservation of the wetlands and human uses that are compatible with maintenance of the natural properties of the 

ecosystem. 

GENERAL OBJECTIVE 2: Community stakeholders will be engaged and supported in active environmental stewardship. 

GENERAL OBJECTIVE 3: The ecological character of the Peel-Yalgorup System, including services and values, will be 

maintained or enhanced to achieve long-term positive outcomes 

Rees, W 2011 What’s blocking sustainability Human nature, cognition, and denial. Sustainability: 

Science, Practice, & Policy 6(2):13-25 

The modern world remains mired in a swamp of cognitive dissonance and collective denial seemingly dedicated to maintaining 

the status quo. The working hypothesis is that modern H. sapiens is unsustainable by nature—unsustainability is an inevitable 

emergent property of the systemic interaction between contemporary techno-industrial society and the ecosphere. This 

conundrum is traced to humanity’s once-adaptive, sub-conscious, genetic predisposition to expand (shared with all other 

species), a tendency reinforced by the socially-constructed economic narrative of continuous material growth. Unfortunately, 

these qualities have become maladaptive. The current co-evolutionary pathway of the human enterprise and the ecosphere 

therefore puts civilization at risk – both defective genes and malicious “memes” can be “selected out” by a changing physical 

environment. To achieve sustainability, the world community must write a new cultural narrative that is explicitly designed for 

living on a finite planet, a narrative that overrides humanity’s outdated innate expansionist tendencies. 

Robins, L and Kanowski, P 2011 Crying for our Country: eight ways in which 'Caring for our Country' 

has undermined Australia's regional model for natural resource management Australasian J Env Man 

21 pp. 

Very good and broad overview of how the CfoC program evolved out of NHT, and a discussion of many of the problems 

associated with it. States that “the Australian Government’s CfoC program has undermined Australia’s ‘regional model’ for 

natural resource management, and eroded gains made under the precursor Natural Heritage Trust and related programs in 8 

significant ways. CfoC has adopted a narrower agenda, increased central government control, and compromised buy-in by state 

and territory governments. Priority has been given to discrete projects capable of demonstrating short-term, measurable 

outputs. Implementation of CfoC has failed to realise the aspirations of regional organisations for core funding, substantially 

increased transaction costs and diminished success rates under competitive funding arrangements, and prejudiced the goodwill 

of many in the natural resource management community. Commitment to local community natural resource management 

movements like Landcare has been inconsistent, and largely unsuccessful. Retracting investment in relevant research and 

development (e.g. termination of Land and Water Australia), has severely limited knowledge creation and sharing to inform and 

strengthen the regional model.” 

Semeniuk, V & C, Research Group 1997 Mapping and classification of wetlands from Augusta to 

Walpole in the South West of Western Australia. Water & Rivers Commission, Water Resource 

Techn. Series WRT 12:76 pp. 

Report presents wetland mapping and classification for 3 regions: the Augusta to Donnelly River area, the Meerup to Walpole 

area and the Muir-Unicup area. Wetlands are mapped at 1:25 000. The area between Northcliffe and Windy Harbour is 

regionally significant as it contains ten consanguineous suites, indicating richness in diversity of wetland types. Much of the 

wetland resource in the report’s study area is relatively undisturbed and so are of outstanding value. 

Spatial Vision Innovations 2008a Waterway Health Sub-Strategy – Final Report. Spatial Vision 

Innovations, Melbourne, VIC, 204 pp + 5 App (174 pp). 

An important document that identifies all inland water assets of the region, their values and the threats to them, and the actions 

required, all prioritised. Unfortunately, the quality of data that went into the system means that the identified assets may or may 

not be correct and few people have used the report. 

Spatial Vision Innovations 2008b SWCC IDSS and BIOIDSS – Investment Decision Support System 

and User Documentation. Spatial Vision Innovations, Melbourne, VIC, 126 pp. 

16

DRAFT 


This document presents the System Documentation and User Guide for the South West Catchments Council (SWCC) 

Investment Decision Support System (a key component of the Waterway Health Sub-Strategy and Biodiversity Sub-Strategy. 

As such, it has no specifically useful information, but is needed when consulting the sub-strategies. 

State NRM Office 2007 Agency Statement of important Natural Resource Management Assets in 

Western Australia. Unpublished Report prepared for NRM Senior Officers Group, Government of 

Western Australia. 107 pp. 

Key document that states the State Government’s position on NRM assets of WA. The report presents the views of each 

Department on the respective NRM assets for which it has primary responsibility. A limitation is that the report presents differing 

levels of detail on information and therefore comparisons between asset classes are not recommended without further 

information from each section’s respective authors. It focuses primarily on biophysical or tangible assets and has not addressed 

the social and socio-economic asset class. Highest priority assets included: 6 IBRA sub bioregions, 6 marine conservation 

reserve regions, 2 terrestrial IBRA subregions, 7 marine conservation reserves, 343 flora species (terrestrial), 58 fauna species 

(terrestrial), 54 TECs (terrestrial), 5 marine fauna species, 24 proposed and existing natural diversity recovery catchments, 7 

target landscapes, 13 IBRA provinces with species hotspots, 62 water supplies and 34 waterscapes, 5 aquatic assets and 1 

soil-landscape zone (See also the secondary document DoE 2003). 

Steele, J.J. 2006 Management of diffuse water quality issues in the Peel-Harvey coastal drainage 

system – A literature review. 

The review considers Best Management Practice options for water quality improvement along watercourses in a format relevant 

to the Peel-Harvey catchment. The drainage system is a highly degraded and modified system where works along drainage 

lines need to be prioritized due to limited funding, where institutional change in drainage management practices is needed and 

where the downstream receiving water bodies are of international ecological significance. The need for drainage maintenance 

in the Peel-Harvey catchment has not been disputed in this review. What has been disputed is the method in which these works 

are scheduled and implemented. Recommendations include the need to determine the conveyance requirements of waterways 

so that stable, vegetated drains with adequate drainage capacity can be able to be designed and implemented. 

Stuart-Street, A 2003 Natural resource management issues in the agricultural zone of Western Australia 

– South West Region. Department of Agriculture, Government of Western Australia, Perth, WA. 56 

pp. 

The document provides an analysis of current pressures on agricultural resources of the SW Region. Data were not presented 

on the actual areas of land affected by the various forms of degradation as these weren’t then available and regional land 

resource surveys were interpreted to estimate these areas. These estimations are based on characteristics of the soils and 

landscapes within the region. Differing ranges of risk are shown for different issues because of varying impacts. Each natural 

resource management issue is covered in four sections: 1) Extent; 2) Impacts; 3) Management options; and 4) Effectiveness. 

SWCC 2005 South West Regional Strategy for Natural Resource Management. South West 

Catchments Council, Bunbury, 164 pp. + CD 

Previous strategy and a key document guiding the development of the strategy. 

SWCC 2010 Community Engagement Strategy – Planning for 2010 and Beyond (v.7). Prepared by the 

Community Engagement Team, SWCC for the South West Catchments Council, Bunbury, WA. 59pp. 

Title describes content. The community engagement strategy has been developed to assist SWCC to undertake community 

engagement for improved Natural Resource Management (NRM) outcomes and strategic organisational development, now and 

into the future. The strategy has two main themes: 

SWCC’s overarching engagement approach – i.e. guiding principles for how SWCC as an organisation works with-its 

stakeholders and a long-term objective for how to achieve this; and 

SWCC’s operational approach – i.e. practical information for SWCC staff to ensure that they are using the most effective and 

appropriate tools to engage their relevant stakeholder groups. 

Syrinx Environmental PL 2008 Scott Coastal Plain – Best Management Practices. Prepared for the 

BBG by Syrinx Environmental PL, Perth, WA. 103 pp. 

This report is intended to provide technical information to landholders and others on the best available means of minimising the 

environmental impacts of on-farm activities on the Scott Coastal Plain. The report broadly outlines the background information 

on the selected best management practices and is accompanied by a self-assessment checklist. Landholders using the 

checklist will be able to undertake an initial self-assessment to create a personal benchmark for their own environmental 

performance and while undertaking this process determine where improvements would be beneficial. The Best Management 

Practices (BMP’s) included in this document are applicable across a wide range of agricultural industries to improve 

environmental management and include Environmental Best Practice measures for water management, irrigation management, 

drain management, nutrient management; soil management; effluent management, and timber plantation management. 

Unmack, P 2011 Freshwater ecoregions of the world – 801: Southwestern Australia. Accessed on Dec 

04 2011 on: http://www.feow.org/ecoregion_details.phpeco=801 

Description of the freshwater habitats and its fauna in SW Australia. 

17

DRAFT 


URS 2010 An independent feasibility study of treating large saline reserves east of the Darling 

Escarpment – Final Report. URS Australia Pty Ltd, Perth, WA. 143 pp. 

This study has found that there are logistical and technological challenges to the treatment and use of major saline water 

resources in the dryland agricultural areas. It is unlikely that the major ‘sea-water equivalent’ resources can be exploited 

economically for use within the agricultural areas, and it is even less likely that exporting this water out of the region will be 

economically viable. The over-arching recommendation is that further research and investigation of the feasibility of treating 

saline water resources in the dryland agricultural areas should focus on matching local supply and demand scenarios within the 

region, where the technical issues and costs of treatment can be met by the economic value of supplementing or replacing 

imported water resources. 

Van Looij, E and T Storer 2009a Framework of the assessment of river and wetland health trials in 

south-west Western Australia – Inception report Vol 1. Department of Water, Western Australia. 84 

pp. 

This document outlines the south-west Western Australia FARWH project “Development and implementation of the framework 

for the assessment of river and wetland health (FARWH) to rivers in the south west of Western Australia (with the exception of 

rivers in the Rangelands region). This first volume incorporates the project details, including the budget and schedule, required 

outputs, identified risks, overall approach and detailed information regarding site selection strategies and the approach to 

assessing the six key indices. 

Van Looij, E and T Storer 2009b Framework of the assessment of river and wetland health trials in 

south-west Western Australia – Inception report Vol 2 – Methods. Department of Water, Western 

Australia. 51 pp. 

This second volume describes the methodology for the field-sampling component of the SWWA FARWH project, incorporating 

water quality, biota (macroinvertebrates and fish/crayfish) and general site descriptions. Information for the remaining FARWH 

indicator themes (hydrology, physical form and fringing vegetation) will be collected through desktop analysis, described in 

Volume 1 of inception report. 

Van Looij, E, T Storer, G White, K O’Neill, L Galvin, and D Heald 2009 Report on the Framework of the 

assessment of river and wetland health trials in south-west Western Australia: first round. Department 

of Water, Western Australia. 142 pp. 

Useful resource for managers as provides an assessment of the effectiveness of the Framework for the assessment of river and 

wetland health (FARWH) in the flowing waters of the south-west of Western Australia. This report gives results of the first trial 

conducted in spring 2008, and the second will be conducted in the spring of 2009.As there was no existing river health program 

across the south-west of Western Australia which could be used for the FARWH, the first round of trials focused on indicator 

development. The second round of field trials will concentrate on refining indicators. 

van Wyk, L and P Raper 2008a Setting targets for resource condition in Doradine catchment. 

Department of Food and Agriculture, South Perth, WA. Resource Management Techn. Rep 334: 21pp. 

This is one of the reports prepared by DAFWA, commissioned by SWCC to set resource condition targets for land salinity and 

native vegetation in the portion of the SW NRM Region with less than 600 mm mean annual rainfall. The following resource 

condition targets were set: 

Use deep drainage as a primary means to contain salinity to 7 per cent of the catchment and retain and improve current 

farmland, infrastructure and industry. 

Utilise oil mallees to lower watertable and produce energy. 

Protect existing (priority) reserves and remnant vegetation. 

van Wyk, L and P Raper 2008b Setting targets for resource condition in Upper Crossman catchment. 





Manage salinity so that no more than 6 per cent of the Upper Crossman catchment is affected by salinity in 2028. 

Protect the assets of productive farmland, remnant vegetation and water resources to ensure no net loss in production. 

van Wyk, L and P Raper 2008c Setting targets for resource condition in Yilliminning catchment. 





No more than 10% of the Yilliminning catchment affected by salinity in 2028. 

No further degradation or loss of natural assets by 2028. 

van Wyk, L and P Raper 2008d Setting targets for resource condition in Lake Towerrinning catchment. 


18

DRAFT 





Salinity contained to 15 per cent of the catchment in 2028. 

Maintain water quality in Lake Towerrinning < 1200 mS/m during winter. 

Increase productive use from salt-affected land with no net loss in profitability. 

Capercup Nature Reserve stabilised and area affected by salinity to increase by no more than an additional 10 per cent 

(currently 30-40 per cent affected). 

van Wyk, L and P Raper 2008e Setting targets for resource condition in Narrakine Gully and Highbury 

catchments. Department of Food and Agriculture, South Perth, WA. Resource Management Techn. 

Rep 336: 34pp. 



condition targets for Narrakine Gully were set as: 

Contain salinity coverage across the catchment to 8 per cent of the catchment area with no net loss of production by 2028. 

Those for Highbury were set as: 

Contain salinity coverage across the catchment to 15 per cent of the catchment area with no net loss of production by 2028. 

Increase productivity from currently affected land. 

van Wyk, L and P Raper 2008f Setting targets for resource condition in Date Creek catchment. 




condition targets were set as: 

Salinity contained to 10% of the catchment in 2028. 

Increase productivity from salt-affected land. 

Recover condition of remnant vegetation stands. 

Vitule, JRS, CA Freire and D Simberloff 2009 Introduction of non-native freshwater fish can certainly be 

bad. Fish and Fisheries 10: 98–108. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-2979.2008.00312.x 

In this paper, we respond to Gozlan’s views of the introduction of freshwater fish, as we strongly disagree with his view and 

approach. We demonstrate that many real-world examples of freshwater fish introductions have catastrophic ecological 

consequences. We detail a few noteworthy examples, such as those of the Nile perch, carp, tilapias, catfishes, and the zebra 

mussel. We discuss within-nation introductions, and we explore several related problems, such as hybridization and spread of 

pathogens and parasites. We propose that Gozlan’s analysis is biased, as more reliable data on impacts that are already 

widespread are urgently needed, mainly in the biologically richest areas of the world. Thus, we continue to advocate the 

precautionary principle, because species introductions, once established, are largely irreversible. 

WCC 2011 Warren Catchments Council Strategic Plan 2011-2015. Warren Catchments Council, 

Manjimup, WA. 24 pp. 


to address these. Specific identified assets are discussed under the headings waterways, water resources, productive land, 

lakes & wetlands, coast, marine, biodiversity, forests, recreation/tourism and culture. 

Wernberg, T, BD Russell, MS Thomsen, CFD Gurgel, CJA Bradshaw, ES Poloczanska and SD Connell 

2011 Seaweed Communities in Retreat from Ocean Warming. Current Biology 21(21):1828-1832 

In recent decades, global climate change has caused profound biological changes – these have been well documented through 

long-term studies on land, but similar direct evidence for impacts of warming is virtually absent from the oceans. This is 

important for biological conservation as the marine environment plays a critical role in regulating the Earth's environmental and 

ecological functions, as well as the associated socioeconomic well-being of humans. This paper reports on a database of 

>20,000 herbarium records of macroalgae collected in Australia since the 1940s to document changes in communities and 

geographical distribution limits in both the Indian and Pacific Oceans. It shows that continued warming may drive species 

beyond the edge of the Australian continent so that the potential for global extinctions is profound as many seaweeds and 

seaweed-dependent marine organisms are endemic. Available on http://www.cell.com/currentbiology/retrieve/pii/S096098221101030X. 

Zeckoski, R, B Benham, C Lunsford 2007 Streamside livestock exclusion: A tool for increasing farm 

income and improving water quality. Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Petersburg, USA. Virginia 

Cooperative Extension Report VCE 442-766: 20 pp. 

A very useful report. Documents firstly a literature review that compiles data related to restricted livestock stream access; 

including production, herd health, economic, and water quality benefits. The review provided info on both complete livestock 

exclusion and partial restriction through the use of off-stream waterers to lure cattle from the stream. Secondly, report 

documents results of interviews with 20 producers who had restricted livestock stream access on their farms. During the 

interviews, producers provided information related to their positive as well as some negative experiences with livestock 

19

DRAFT 


exclusion systems. Several watersheds in Virginia are highlighted in this publication where livestock exclusion from streams 

has resulted in significant water quality improvements. 

3.2 Useful NRM documents 

Anonymous 2009 Fox control for Woylie management. Appendix 1 to Final report to SWCC on 2006- 

2008 INVESTMENT PLAN COMPONENTS- PW.01B, 8 pp. 

Title adequately describes content. 

Avril, H. 2011 Eco-labels “greenwashing” forest exploitation. IPS, Paris, France. 2 pp. 

Article describing how eco-label fatigue is starting to occur and some of the reasons behind it – an emerging issue. 

Barnes, PB, MB Westera, GA Kendrick and ML Cambridge 2008 Establishing benchmarks of seagrass 

communities and water quality in Geographe Bay, Western Australia. Final technical report prepared 

for South West Catchments Council. University of Western Australia, Perth, WA. 113 pp. 

Report on two surveys done between 2006 and 2008 to determine patterns of distribution of benthic habitats, seagrasses, 

epiphytes, fishes, invertebrates and water quality at 22 sites in Geographe Bay to establish benchmarks for future management 

of impacts on these seagrass meadows. 

Bateman, IJ, GM Mace, C Fezzi, G Atkinson and K Turner 2010 Economic Analysis for Ecosystem 

Service Assessments. Environ. Resource Econ. 48(2):177-218 

This is not a conventional economics journal paper, but is intended as a means of introducing both economists and noneconomists 

(and in particular natural scientists) to the UK NEA and through that to the wider principles involved in the 

application of economic analysis techniques to ecosystem service assessments. 

Beatty, SJ and M Allen 2008 Preliminary assessment of the functioning of the bypass fishway on 

Wilyabrup Brook. Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical 

report to Cape to Cape Catchments Group, 6 pp. 


Beatty, SJ, B Molony, M Rhodes and DL Morgan 2003 A methodology to mitigate the negative impacts 

of dam refurbishment on fish and crayfish values in a south-western Australian reservoir. Ecological 

Management and Restoration 4: 147-149. 

Title adequately describes content. Electronic version not available. 

Beatty, SJ and DL Morgan 2005 Monitoring the adequacy of Environmental Water Provisions for fish 

and crayfish communities of Samson Brook, Harvey River and Harris River. Centre for Fish & 

Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to the Department of Water. 


Beatty, SJ and DL Morgan 2007 Monitoring the Margaret River Fishways – 2007. Centre for Fish & 

Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to Cape to Cape Catchments 

Group & Department of Water, 14 pp. 


Beatty, SJ and DL Morgan 2008 Fishway assessment for the Pinjarra Weir. Centre for Fish & Fisheries 

Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to the Peel Harvey Catchment Council, 28 

pp. 


Beatty, SJ and DL Morgan 2009 Goldfish control in the Vasse River: summary of the 2008 programme. 

Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to Geocatch, 9 

pp. 


Beatty, SJ, DL Morgan and M Allen 2008 Freshwater fish and crayfish communities of the tributaries of 

the Margaret River. Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical 

report to Cape to Cape Catchments Group, 25 pp. 


20

DRAFT 


Beatty, SJ, DL Morgan and M Allen 2009a Freshwater fish and crayfish communities of the Carbunup 

and Buayanyup Rivers: conservation significance and management considerations. Centre for Fish & 

Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to GeoCatch, 36 pp. 

This study addressed major knowledge gaps on the distribution of freshwater fishes in south-western Australia. It is the first to 

examine the fish and freshwater crayfish of the Carbunup and Buayanyup Rivers and contains some notable information that 

have conservation and management implications for these rivers. 

Beatty, SJ, DL Morgan and T Fazeldean 2008 McLeod Creek (Blackwood River) fish survey: December 

2007. Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to 

Lower Blackwood Land Conservation District Committee, 20 pp. 


Beatty, SJ, DL Morgan and HS Gill 2003a Fish resource survey of Churchman Brook Reservoir. Centre 

for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to the Water 

Corporation of Western Australia. 


Beatty, SJ, DL Morgan and HS Gill 2003b Fish resource survey of Phillips Creek Reservoir. Centre for 

Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to the Water Corporation 

of Western Australia. 


Beatty, SJ, DL Morgan and HS Gill 2003c Reproductive biology of the large freshwater crayfish Cherax 

tenuimanus in south-western Australia. Marine and Freshwater Research 54: 597-608. 


Beatty, SJ, DL Morgan and HS Gill 2005a Role of life history strategy in the colonisation of Western 

Australian aquatic systems by the introduced crayfish Cherax destructor Clark, 1936. Hydrobiologia 

549: 219-237. 


Beatty, SJ, DL Morgan and HS Gill 2005b Life history and reproductive biology of the gilgie, Cherax 

quinquecarinatus, a freshwater crayfish endemic to south-western Australia. Journal of Crustacean 

Biology 25(2): 251-262. 


Beatty, SJ, DL Morgan and HS Gill 2005c Biology of a translocated population of the large freshwater 

crayfish, Cherax cainii (Austin and Ryan, 2002) in a Western Australian river. Crustaceana 77: 1329- 

1351. 


Beatty, SJ, DL Morgan, M Klunzinger and AJ Lymbery 2010 Aquatic macrofauna of Ellen Brook and the 

Brockman River: fresh water refuges in a salinised catchment. Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, 

Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to Ellen Brockman Integrated Catchment Group. 


Bell, C and BA Cook 2008 Hillman River South Groundwater Drainage Demonstration Project: 

Benchmark ecological data for assessing impacts of drainage discharge on water quality and the 

environment. Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management, University of Western Australia, 

Perth, WA. Report CENRM066 17 pp. 

In order to determine what impacts the groundwater drainage might have on the Hillman River South catchment, benchmark 

data on water quality and biodiversity values were collected prior to the construction and operation of the proposed drain. 

Monitoring of the project will include regular salinity and pH sampling of the drain throughout the downstream catchment, as well 

as annual ecological surveys at four locations near the end of the drain site. This report details the results of the initial 

benchmark ecological survey. 

BBG 2008 Saline aquaculture case studies 1-3. Blackwood Basin Group, Boyup Brook, WA. 3 pp. 

Saline aquaculture case studies (3 information sheets). 

Brockman, H 2008 Supporting the development of alternative industries for saline land. Report to 

SWCC by DAFWA, Albany, WA. 42 pp. 

Three plant species were tested for suitability as bio-fuel and latex/rubber producers. A report “Life Cycle Assessment of 

Biodiesel Production from Moringa Oleifera Oilseeds” was included as an appendix. 

21

DRAFT 


CCWFH 2011 Marri decline. Brochure produced by the Centre of Excellence for climate change, 

woodland and forest health, Murdoch, WA. 2 pp. 

Gives a brief description of marri decline and what the centre is trying to achieve. 

CFFR 2008 Progress Report – The feral Rosy Barb in Jingarmup Brook: biology, assessment and 

control program development. Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. 

Technical report to GeoCatch and SWCC, 10 pp. 

City of Mandurah, STT and PHCC 2009 Groundwater conservation plan – Operating Strategy. 

Technical report prepared by the City of Mandurah, Sports Turf Technology and the Peel-Harvey 

Catchment Council for the City Of Mandurah, WA. 49 pp. 

Summary of the responsibilities for the use and management of the water resource being accessed by the local government 

authority, the plan also incorporates major water conservation and efficiency commitments derived from the Groundwater 

Conservation Plan. The Operating Strategy includes a series of licensee’s ‘commitments’ that specify the water source, water 

abstraction regime and methods, environmental impacts of abstraction, contingency plans and major water efficiency measures. 

It becomes part of the licensee’s obligations under their groundwater license. The Groundwater Conservation Plan is a tool that 

aims to assist local government in devising strategies and actions that will achieve the requirements of the water licence and the 

groundwater conservation/efficiency goals of the council. 

Davis, JA, RS Rosich, JS Bradley, JE Growns, LG Schmidt and F Cheal 1993 Wetlands of the Swan 

Coastal Plain. Vol 6: Wetland classification on the basis of water quality and invertebrate community 

data. Water & Rivers Commission, Perth, WA. 245 pp. 

A very comprehensive report on the wetlands of the Swan Coastal Plain, but only around Perth. Gives details on the 

methodology behind wetland classification based on water quality and invertebrates, so from that perspective is useful to 

wetland specialists. 

DAFWA 2008 Property Planning Manual for Western Australia. Department of Agriculture, Perth, WA. 

Bulletin 4734, 71 pp. 

This manual aims to support the process of property planning, in particular by guiding you through a workshop process. It also 

provides you with pointers on the type of technical information you will need in order to maximise the outcomes, and directs you 

to places where you can find the most relevant information for your circumstances. 

DAFWA 2008 Technical Information to Support Property Planning for Western Australia. Department of 

Agriculture, Perth, WA. Bulletin 4734, 63 pp. 

This manual provides support information to the manual. 

DAFWA 2008 Managing seasonal variability - important now, essential in the future. Department of 

Agriculture, Perth, WA. 106 pp. 

The report provides the presentations for the “AcCLIMATise managing seasonal variability workshops”, which were designed to 

provide farmers and farm advisors with a better understanding of WA weather systems, climate, soils and yield forecasting tools 

and how each can be integrated into a versatile management approach that allows for better management of seasonal risk. 

The document gives a useful overview of these. 

DEFRA 2002 Working with the grain of nature – A biodiversity strategy for England. Department for 

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London, UK. 180 pp. 

Strategy recognises that UK can only secure the long-term health of biodiversity that is needed to bring a truly sustainable future 

by also achieving fundamental changes to public policy and in the behaviour of people across society as a whole, i.e. by 

ensuring that biodiversity considerations become embedded in all the main sectors of economic activity, public and private. Has 

some good content, e.g. discussion of web-based Biodiversity Action Reporting System (BARS – see http://ukbars.defra.gov.uk/ 

for details) and interesting indicators. 

DEFRA 2011a The Natural Choice: securing the value of nature. Department for Environment, Food 

and Rural Affairs, London, UK. 84 pp. 

A key document in the UK’s bid to secure a sustainable future in the UK and the EU, with some innovative approaches to 

community engagement, policy and valuing nature, particularly by devolving NRM to local groups – very relevant to Australia. 

Three supporting documents are also on the disk. 

DEFRA 2011b Government response to the Making Space for Nature review. Department for 

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London, UK. 13 pp. 

Another key document in the UK’s bid to secure a sustainable future, with some interesting observations on LGs, policy and the 

increased push for a devolved way of doing NRM (see also Lawton et al 2010). 

DoF 2005 Fish ruler. Department of Fisheries, Perth, WA. 1pp. 


DoF 2008 Factsheet No.9 – Common Blowfish. Department of Fisheries, Perth, WA. 4pp. 

22

DRAFT 



DoF 2008 Factsheet No.10 – Western Blue Groper. Department of Fisheries, Perth, WA. 4pp. 


DoF 2008 Fish nursery areas - poster. Department of Fisheries, Busselton, WA. 1pp. 


DoF 2008 Fish identification guide – Busselton Jetty. Department of Fisheries, Busselton, WA. 2+2pp. 


Doupé, RG, AJ Lymbery and ND Pettit 2006 Stream salinisation is associated with reduced taxonomic, 

but not functional diversity in a riparian plant community. Austral Ecology 32: 388-393. 


Doupé, RG, AJ Lymbery and MR Starcevich 2003 Rethinking the land: the development of inland saline 

aquaculture in Western Australia. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 1: 30-37. 


DoW 2008 Peel Harvey Modelling Analysis and Scenarios. Department of Water, Water Modelling 

Branch, Perth, WA. 11 pp. 

Description of the proposed modelling for Peel-Harvey catchment. As such, it has no specifically useful information. 

Ecker, S D Burnside 2008 South West Region Sustainable Agriculture Change Issues – Findings from 

Consultation with Industry and Sub-regional Representatives, South West, Western Australia. SE 

Consulting, Murrumbateman, NSW & URS Australia, East Perth, WA, Australia. 39 pp. 


Ecker, S, V Brown and I Kininmonth 2008 Components of a Behaviour Change Framework to underpin 

Sustainable Agriculture in the South West Region of Western Australia – Literature review. SE 

Consulting, Murrumbateman, NSW, Australia. 89 pp. 


Ecker, S, V Brown and I Kininmonth 2008 Behaviour Change Framework to underpin Sustainable 

Agriculture in the South West Region of Western Australia – Summary report. SE Consulting, 

Murrumbateman, NSW, Australia. 10 pp. 

The report provides a summary of the South West Sustainable Agriculture Behaviour Change Framework – should be read with 

associated literature review, workbook and CD Rom toolkit. The Behaviour Change Framework is based on a rigorous analysis 

of what affects people’s behaviour in the context of sustainable agriculture in the SW region of WA. Behavioural theory and 

findings on what actually works in the context of agriculture in the SW were used to develop the framework. The behaviour 

change framework is based on information, which demonstrates that there are preferred methods to achieving change towards 

more socially, economically and environmentally sustainable agriculture. 

Erol, C 2007 Increasing landholder adoption of improved surface water management practices – 

Literature review of relevant Australian studies. DAFWA, Perth, WA. Resource Management 

Technical Report 325: 37 pp. 

Useful report, title describes content. This is a review of studies related to surface water best management practices mainly in 

WA, to identify key findings and possible barriers to adoption applicable to the South West Catchment area. Thirteen studies 

were reviewed, six from Western Australia, three from Queensland, two from New South Wales and two Australia-wide general 

reviews. The most frequently identified barriers to adoption were motivational, technical, financial and biophysical: 

Motivational and other barriers included lack of direction from government, the wrong extension model, lack of confidence, 

lack of support and cultural resistance to change. 

Technical barriers included limited knowledge, advice and information, lack of clearly written materials, lack of access to 

adequately skilled and trusted NRM advisers. 

Financial barriers included lack of money and incentive grants, the perception that the costs outweigh benefits, lack of 

equipment and time. 

Biophysical barriers included variable seasons, poor productivity (because of salinity, acidity, and lack of trace elements), 

poor off-farm drainage and lack of suitable productive land. These barriers are very region-specific and vary according to 

production system. 

Future studies aimed at identifying specific barriers to adoption should pay particular attention to the specificity of biophysical 

barriers and their effect on land conservation management adoption. 

Essential Environmental Services 2007 Draft model Local Planning Policy Water Sensitive Urban 

Design for the Leschenault Catchment. Essential Environmental Services, WA, 15 pp. 

This document provides a methodology for action, but is not relevant to the strategy, gives a template for Local Governments to 

use and adapt to their respective needs. 

23

DRAFT 


Fox, NJ and LE Beckley 2004 Hotspots, biogeography, complementarity and pragmatism: Priority areas 

for conservation of western Australian coastal fishes. Australian Marine Science Association 

Conference, Hobart, Australia. 


Fox, NJ and LE Beckley 2005a Priority areas for conservation of Western Australian coastal fishes: a 

comparison of hotspot, biogeographical and complementarity approaches. Biological Conservation 

125: 399-410. 


Fox, NJ and LE Beckley 2005b Marine conservation in Western Australia: Efficiency, stakeholders and 

the problem of the remote north. International Marine Protected Areas Congress, Geelong, Australia. 


FPC 2008 Strategic tree farming – creating social, environmental and economic solutions for WA 

farmers. Brochure produced by the Forest Products Commission, Perth, WA. 8 pp. 


Fugro 2008 Dumbleyung SWCC Core Area, Western Australia – Airborne Magnetic, Gamma-ray and 

Elevation Survey for Geoscience Australia: Acquisition and Processing Report. Fugro Airborne 

Surveys, Perth, WA. 83 pp. 


Gaynor, A, GA Kendrick and MB Westera 2008 An Oral History of Fishing and Diving in the Capes 

Region of South-West Western Australia. Technical report prepared for South West Catchments 

Council. University of Western Australia, Perth, WA. 56 pp. 

Report on interviews with fifteen fishers and a dive operator, each with at least 20 years’ experience, to obtain local knowledge 

of change and continuity in the marine and coastal environments of the SW Capes region. 

GEM 2007 Seagrass mapping – Geographe Bay 2004. Technical report prepared for Geographe 

Catchment Council. Geographical Ecological Modelling (GEM) Group, School of Earth and 

Geographical Sciences, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA. 18 pp. 


GHD 2008a Report on Preliminary Salinity Situation Statement – Hotham Williams Murray Catchment. 

Part 1: Conceptual Hydogeological Analysis. GHD Consultants, Perth. 53pp. 

Report commissioned by Peel-Harvey, documenting the outcome of a Conceptual Hydrogeological Investigation into the 

Hotham Williams Murray (HWM) catchment. Also looked at defining the extent of salinity within the catchment, developing a 

better understand and document hydrogeological processes resulting in dryland salinity within the catchment, identifying areas a 

further risk of salinity development within the catchment & potential areas where further investigation may be required, or where 

specific action may result in improved management to control the spread of salinity, and assisting with interpreting outputs from 

numeric hydrogeological modeling.. No really important info. 

GHD 2008b Report on Preliminary Salinity Situation Statement – Hotham Williams Murray Catchment. 

Part 2: LUCICAT Model. GHD Consultants, Perth. 53pp. 

Report commissioned by Peel-Harvey, documenting the development and calibration of a numeric model (LUCICAT) for stream 

flow and salt load in the Hotham Williams Murray (HWM) catchment. Also looked at preliminary scenario modelling to 

determine the effects of potential climate change on river flows and salt concentrations at selected calibration points (gauging 

stations) within the catchment, and determined the overall affect of potential rainfall changes on stream salinity. No really 

important info. 

GHD 2008c Report on an online salinity and vegetation survey. GHD Consultants, Perth, WA. 31 pp. 

Title adequately describes content – of very little use, as only details how few respondents there were, but gave no results. 

Gill, HS, SJ Hambleton and DL Morgan 1999 Gambusia holbrooki a major threat to the native 

freshwater fishes of south-western Australia In: Seret, B and J-Y Sire (eds), Proceedings 5th Indo- 

Pacific Fish Conference (Noumea, 3-8 November1997), Societe Francaise d’Ichtyologie and Institut 

de Recherche pour le Development, Paris, pp. 79-87. 


Green Iguana 2007 Lower Vasse river reed raft trial. Green Iguana, Dunsborough, WA. Report 

prepared for GeoCatch, 56 pp. 

This report describes the successful results of seeding and growth trials using four species of sedges. 

Hales, G 2008 Yornanning Catchment plan. Blackwood Basin Group, Boyup Brook, WA. 51 pp. 

24

DRAFT 


Title adequately describes content – catchment is 20km north of Narrogin. 

Hales, G and N Reichelt 2008 Daping Creek Catchment plan. Blackwood Basin Group, Boyup Brook, 

WA. 47 pp. 

Title adequately describes content – catchment is 10km north of Katanning. 

Hale, J, M McGuire, SJ Hambleton, DL Morgan, J Davis, HS Gill and E Paling 2000 Water quality, 

aquatic macroinvertebrate and fish monitoring of the Worsley Freshwater Lake and Brunswick River 

catchment (March to December 1999). Report to Worsley Alumina Pty Ltd. 


Hambleton, SJ, HS Gill, DL Morgan and IC Potter 1996a Interactions of the introduced mosquitofish 

(Gambusia holbrooki) with native fish species in the RGC Wetlands, Capel, Western Australia. 

Technical Report No. 33. Capel: RGC Mineral Sands Ltd. 


Hambleton, SJ, HS Gill, DL Morgan and IC Potter 1996b The distribution of freshwater fish in the RGC 

Wetlands, Capel, Western Australia. Technical Report No. 34. Capel: RGC Mineral Sands Ltd. 


Heal, G and S Molloy 2008 City of Mandurah Stormwater Management Plan. Technical report prepared 

for the City of Mandurah, WA. 39 pp. 


Healthy Waterways 2007 South East Queensland – Healthy waterways strategy 2007-2012. 

Queensland Government, Brisbane, QLD. 8 pp. 

Very succinct strategy. Describes the Water Quality Objectives established for Moreton Bay, all SEQ estuaries and some 

freshwater systems and how the Strategy aims to achieve these by: 

Significant reductions in both urban and non-urban diffuse source pollution. 

Significant decreases in point source pollution. 

Protection and conservation of High Ecological Value waterways. 

Improvements in catchment health. 

Effective strategies to combat coastal algal blooms. 

Increased commitment and capacity of the general community. 

Improved management via better modelling and evaluation. 

Refinements to the Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program. 

Jenkins, GI, DJW French, IC Potter, S de Lestang, NG Hall, GJ Partridge, SA Hesp and GA Sarre 2006 

Restocking the Blackwood River Estuary with the black bream Acanthopagrus butcheri. FRDC Final 

Report No. 2000/180. 

The study shows that hatchery-reared Black Bream can be used to enhance the stock of this commercially and recreationallyimportant 

species in the Blackwood River Estuary in which it is depleted. The ease and relatively low cost of culture of Black 

Bream and its hardiness and restriction to its natal estuary make the restocking of Black Bream a feasible and economicallyviable 

proposition. 

Kelsey, P 2009 Nutrient Export Modelling of the Leschenault catchment. Department of Water, Perth, 

WA. Water Science Techn.Ser. Rep 9:66 pp. 

This report describes the model used by Kelsey & Hall (2009). As such, it has no specifically useful information. 

Kelsey, P and J Hall 2009 Nutrient Loads, Status and Trends in the Leschenault Catchment. 

Department of Water, Perth, WA. Water Science Techn.Ser. Rep 9:172 pp. 

This report discusses the catchment monitoring undertaken by the Department of Water on behalf of the Leschenault 

Catchment Council. The objectives of the monitoring program were two-fold: 1) to determine the nutrient status of the 

waterways and whether there have been significant changes in the nutrient status; and 2) to provide nutrient data to support 

numerical modelling of catchment exports. As such, it has no specifically useful information. 

Kendrick, GA, ES Harvey, J Meeuwig, MB Westera, NA Goldberg and D Watson 2009 Primary 

producers, benthic invertebrates and demersal finfish as indicators of resource condition – A review. 

Technical report prepared for South West Catchments Council. University of Western Australia, Perth, 

WA. 61 pp. 

The review presents the present state of knowledge for indicators from primary producers (seagrass, algae), benthic 

invertebrates and fish, then tests the existing datasets on macroalgae, benthic invertebrates and fish from SWCC’s projects and 

then makes recommendations specific to the marine resource monitoring programs in the SW region. 

25

DRAFT 


Lam, A and MB Westera 2006 An annotated bibliography on reef communities of the South West of 

Western Australia. Technical report prepared for South West Catchments Council. University of 

Western Australia, Perth, WA. 29 pp. 


Land insights 2008 Local Environmental Planning Strategy for the Shire of Busselton. Report 1 – 

Environmental Profile. Technical report prepared for the Shire of Busselton. Land insights, Damara 

WA and Shore Coastal, WA. 191 pp. 

Very detailed report with lots of detail, maps and other useful legal & policy information. 

Larsen, KS, LC Andresen, C Beier, S Jonasson, KR Albert, P Ambus, MF Arndal, MS Carter, S 

Christensen, M Holmstrup, A Ibrom, J Kongstad, L Van Der Linden, K Maraldo, A Michelsen, TN 

Mikkelsen, K Pilegaard, A Priemé, H Ro-Poulsen, IK Schmidt, MB Selsted, K Stevnbak 2011 

Reduced N cycling in response to elevated CO2, warming, and drought in a Danish heathland: 

Synthesizing results of the CLIMAITE project after two years of treatments. Global Change Biol. 

17(5):1884-99 

Field-scale experiments simulating realistic future climate scenarios are important tools for investigating the effects of current 

and future climate changes on ecosystem functioning and biogeochemical cycling. We exposed a seminatural Danish heathland 

ecosystem to elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), warming, and extended summer drought in all combinations. Here, 

we report on the short-term responses of the nitrogen (N) cycle after 2 years of treatments. Elevated CO2 significantly affected 

aboveground stoichiometry by increasing the carbon to nitrogen (C/N) ratios in the leaves of both co-dominant species (Calluna 

vulgaris and Deschampsia flexuosa), as well as the C/N ratios of Calluna flowers and by reducing the N concentration of 

Deschampsia litter. Belowground, elevated CO2 had only minor effects, whereas warming increased N turnover, as indicated by 

increased rates of microbial NH4+ consumption, gross mineralization, potential nitrification, denitrification and N2O emissions. 

Drought reduced belowground gross N mineralization and decreased fauna N mass and fauna N mineralization. Leaching was 

unaffected by treatments but was significantly higher across all treatments in the second year than in the much drier first year 

indicating that ecosystem N loss is highly sensitive to changes and variability in amount and timing of precipitation. Interactions 

between treatments were common and although some synergistic effects were observed, antagonism dominated the interactive 

responses in treatment combinations, i.e. responses were smaller in combinations than in single treatments. Nonetheless, 

increased C/N ratios of photosynthetic tissue in response to elevated CO2, as well as drought-induced decreases in litter N 

production and fauna N mineralization prevailed in the full treatment combination. Overall, the simulated future climate scenario 

therefore lead to reduced N turnover, which could act to reduce the potential growth response of plants to elevated atmospheric 

CO2 concentration. Electronic version not available. 

Lawton, JH, Brotherton, PNM, Brown, VK, Elphick, C, Fitter, AH, Forshaw, J, Haddow, RW, Hilborne, S, 

Leafe, RN, Mace, GM, Southgate, MP, Sutherland, WJ, Tew, TE, Varley, J, & Wynne, GR 2010 

Making Space for Nature: a review of England’s wildlife sites and ecological network. Report to 

DEFRA. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London, UK. 119 pp. 

The report sets out to show if England’s wildlife sites comprise a coherent and resilient ecological network and if not, what 

needs to be done The report considers why these questions are important in the context of past, current and future pressures 

on the environment, and describes what ecological networks are and the benefits they bring; then goes on to consider the 

strengths and weaknesses of current wildlife sites, before setting out a prioritised set of ecological solutions to improve the 

network; and finally makes 24 recommendations for practical action to Make Space for Nature and achieve a coherent and 

resilient ecological network. The approach is one of step-change in nature conservation, which requires strong leadership from 

government, but also effective and positive engagement with the landowners and land managers, as well as improved 

collaboration between local authorities, local communities, statutory agencies, the voluntary and private sectors, farmers, other 

land-managers and individual citizens. 

Leprieur F, Beauchard O, Blanchet S, Oberdorff T and Brosse S 2008 Fish invasions in the world’s river 

systems: When natural processes are blurred by human activities. PLoS Biol 6(2):404-10 

Describes the global patterns of freshwater fish invasion in 1,055 river basins covering more than 80% of Earth’s continental 

surface and identifies six major invasion hotspots where non-native species represent more than a quarter of the total number of 

species, including South Australia. The SW is also on their map as a hotspot, but not named specifically. 

Limbourn, AJ and MB Westera 2006 A review, gap analysis and assessment of current information 

relating to marine and coastal environments in the SW region. Technical report prepared for South 

West Catchments Council. University of Western Australia, Perth, WA. 91 pp. 


Lymbery, AJ, RG Doupé, and NE Pettit 2003 Effects of salinisation on riparian plant communities in 

experimental catchments on the Collie River, Western Australia. Australian Journal of Botany 51: 667- 

672. 


26

DRAFT 


Lymbery, AJ, RG Doupé, T Bennett and MR Starcevich 2006 Efficacy of a subsurface-flow wetland 

using the estuarine sedge Juncus kraussii to treat effluent from inland saline aquaculture. Aquacultural 

Engineering 34: 1-6. 


Maddern, MG, HS Gill and DL Morgan 2005 More invasive than Gambusia holbrooki The biology and 

potential environmental impacts of the introduced freshwater fish Phalloceros caudimaculatus 

(Poeciliidae) in Western Australia. Australian Society for Fish Biology, Annual Meeting, Darwin, 

Australia. 


Marillier, B, J Hall and D Shakya 2009 Water Balance Modelling of the Leschenault Catchment. 

Department of Water, Perth, WA. Water Science Techn.Ser. Rep 10:72 pp. 

This modelling project was aimed at quantifying monthly flows for the major rivers located in the Leschenault catchment for the 

period 1998 – 2007. A new monthly water balance model was developed driven by rainfall and potential evaporation, 

incorporated the modified drainage on the coastal plain and irrigation supply in the summer months and was modified to include 

additional parameters (deep-rooted vegetation and transpiration from the groundwater store). The flow model provides the 

basis for nutrient modelling work in 2009, which will involve scenario assessment based on land use changes, improved riparian 

vegetation management, climate change and in-stream interventions. 

Marketforce 2009 Adoption of Surface Water Best Management Practices in the Medium to Low 

Rainfall Areas (less than 600mm) of the South West Region of WA – An investigation of factors 

impacting on adoption levels. Report prepared for DAFWA. Marketforce Consulting, East Perth WA. 

62 pp. 

Title describes content. Results were based on telephone survey from four “soil landscape mapping units” and focus group 

discussions in Cuballing, Wagin, Kojonup, Nyabing and Katanning. A key insight was that changes in farming systems over 

time, in combination with lower rainfall are perceived to have reduced surface water issues across the project area. Nine 

recommendations were made on: Simplifying Best Practice; Understanding Key Issues; Documenting Examples; Industry 

Relationships and Training; Financial Incentives; Water Movement; Communications Channels; Government Roles; and a 

Communication Plan. 

Mincherton, G 2008 Sabina River Revegetation Site – Site Preparation Trial. Report prepared for 

GeoCatch. 6 pp. 

Title adequately describes content; reports on a trial to determine if varying site preparation techniques aided in seedling 

survival at the Sabina River Restoration Site, showing that the addition of Terracottem to the hole prior to planting resulted in an 

increased overall seedling survival rate, whereas burying the seedlings 2/3 of their length also increased seedling survival. 

Molony, B, S Beatty, C Bird and V Nguyen 2005 Mitigation of the negative impacts on biodiversity and 

fisheries values of the refurbishment of Waroona Dam, south-western Australia. Report to the Water 

Corporation of Western Australia. Fisheries Research Contract Report No. 12. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2003a Fish fauna of Margaret River Western Australia. Report to the 

Margaret River Regional Environment Centre. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2003b Fish fauna of the Hotham River (including the impact of the Lion’s 

Weir on fish migration). Report to the Water and Rivers Commission of Western Australia and 

Boddington Rivers Action Group. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2003c Freshwater fishes of the Walpole River and impact of the weir to fish 

and lamprey migrations. Report to Department of Fisheries Western Australia. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2003d Fish and decapod fauna of Bancell Brook (Harvey River) and the 

impacts of irrigation slot boards on migrations. Report to the Southern Peel Partnership Landcare 

Group. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2004a Fish fauna of the Vasse River and the colonisation by feral goldfish 

(Carassius auratus). Report to Fishcare WA and Geocatch. 


27

DRAFT 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2004b Fish utilisation of the Goodga River Fishway conserving the Western 

Australian trout minnow (Galaxias truttaceus). Report to Fisheries Western Australia. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2004c The aquatic macrofauna of Pinwernying Dam (Katanning). Report to 

the Water Corporation of Western Australia. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2004d Margaret River Fishway. Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, 

Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to the Margaret River Regional Environment Centre. 


Morgan, D. and S.J.Beatty 2004e Fish fauna of the Vasse River and the colonisation by feral goldfish 

(Carassius auratus). Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical 

report to Fishcare WA and Geocatch. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2005a Baseline study on the fish and freshwater crayfish fauna in the 

Blackwood River and its tributaries receiving discharge from the Yarragadee Aquifer. Centre for Fish & 

Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to the Department of 

Environment, Government of Western Australia. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2005b The Goodga River Fishway – two years of monitoring the Western 

Australian trout minnow (Galaxias truttaceus). Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch 

University, Perth, WA. Technical report to the Department of Fisheries Western Australia. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2005c Control of feral Goldfish (Carassius auratus) in the Vasse River. 

Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to the Vasse- 

Wonnerup LCDC. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2005d Fish and crayfish fauna of Ellen Brook, Cowaramup Brook and 

Gunyulgup Brook in the Cape to Cape Region of Western Australia. Centre for Fish & Fisheries 

Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to Ribbons of Blue/Waterwatch WA. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2006a Use of a vertical-slot fishway by galaxiids in Western Australila. 

Ecology of Freshwater Fish 15: 500-509. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2006b Overview of the feral Goldfish Control Programme in the Vasse River, 

Western Australia: 2004-2006. Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. 

Technical report to Geocatch. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2006c Fish and freshwater crayfish communities of the Brunswick and 

Preston Rivers. Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical 

report to the Leschenault Catchment Council. 


Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2007 Feral Goldfish (Carassius auratus) in Western Australia: a case study 

from the Vasse River. J.Roy.Soc.WA 90(3): 151-156. 

Title adequately describes content. Electronic version not available but copy is included in Morgan, Beatty & Kurata (2009). 

Morgan, DL and SJ Beatty 2008 Fish and freshwater crayfish of Boodjidup Brook, south-western 

Australia. Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to 

Cape to Cape Catchments Group, 20 pp. 


Morgan, DL, SJ Beatty, HS Gill, D Thorburn and A Rowland 2004 Assessment of groundwater 

discharge from the Yarragadee Aquifer on the fish and decapod fauna of Rosa Brook. Centre for Fish 

28

DRAFT 


& Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to the Water Corporation of 

Western Australia. 


Morgan, DL, S Beatty, FJ McAleer and T Fazeldean 2008 Survey of Rainbow Trout in Bancell Brook: 

following the cessation of a stocking programme. Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch 

University, Perth, WA. Technical report to Warren Catchments Council, 5 pp. 


Morgan, DL, S Beatty and K Kurata 2009 Feral Goldfish (Carassius auratus) in the Warren River 

catchment. Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to 

Warren Catchments Council, 9 pp. 

Report on a fish sampling survey. Includes copy of paper DL Morgan & SJ Beatty 2007 Feral Goldfish (Carassius auratus) in 

Western Australia: a case study from the Vasse River. J Royal Soc of WA 90:151–156 

Morgan, DL and HS Gill 2000 Fish associations within the different inland habitats of lower southwestern 

Australia. Records of the Western Australian Museum 20: 31-37. 


Morgan, DL and HS Gill 1996 The effect of Big Brook dam during drought on the fish communities of 

the Lefroy and Big Brooks. Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. 

Unpublished Technical report to the Water and Rivers Commission of Western Australia. 


Morgan, DL, HS Gill , MG Maddern and SJ Beatty 2004 Distribution and impacts of introduced 

freshwater fishes in Western Australia. NZ J.Mar.Freshwater Res. 38: 511–523 

This paper presents comprehensive distributional data, from over 1300 sites, on introduced freshwater fishes in Western 

Australia. 

Morgan, DL, HS Gill and IC Potter 1995a Life cycle, growth and diet of Balston's pygmy perch in its 

natural habitat of acidic pools. Journal of Fish Biology 47: 808-825. 


Morgan, DL, HS Gill and IC Potter 1995b The distribution of freshwater fish in the south-western corner 

of Western Australia (Busselton to Walpole). Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, Murdoch 

University, Perth, WA. Technical report to the Water Authority of Western Australia. 

311 sites in 19 major watersheds in SW corner of Australia were sampled for freshwater fish. The report concluded that the 

most important actions that should be taken to ensure the conservation of the unique freshwater fish fauna is the maintenance 

of natural flow regimes in rivers and the preservation of the lentic water bodies of the peat flats. To ensure this, buffer zones 

should be maintained in areas used for farming and/or forestry and the effects of water usage on stream flow should be 

minimised (A). . Electronic version not available. 

Morgan, DL, HS Gill and IC Potter 1996a The distribution of freshwater fish in the south-western corner 

of Western Australia. Water Resource Technical Series, Water and Rivers Commission Report WRT4. 


Morgan, DL, HS Gill and IC Potter 1996b Supplement to the distribution of freshwater fish in the southwestern 

corner of Western Australia (Walpole to Albany). Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, 

Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to the Water and Rivers Commission. 


Morgan, DL, HS Gill and IC Potter 1998 Distribution, identification and biology of freshwater fishes in 

south-western Australia. Rec. West. Aust. Mus. Suppl. No. 56, 97 pp. 


Morgan, DL, HS Gill and IC Potter 2000 Age composition, growth and reproductive biology of the 

salamanderfish Lepidogalaxias salamandroides: a re-examination. Environmental Biology of Fishes 

57: 191-204. 


Morgan, DL, SJ Hambleton, HS Gill and SJ Beatty 2002 Distribution, biology and likely impacts of the 

introduced redfin perch (Perca fluviatilis) (Percidae) in Western Australia. Marine and Freshwater 

Research 53: 1211-1221. 

29

DRAFT 


In WA, Perca fluviatilis is restricted to the south-western corner and is found in the Swan, Murray, Harvey, Collie, Capel, 

Carbunup, Margaret, Blackwood, Donnelly and Warren river systems. Released into Big Brook Dam, it has since played a role 

in eliminating the native teleosts. Its success here is attributed to a young age at maturity, rapid growth (compared with 

populations elsewhere), predatory nature, large size (compared with native fish), broad environmental and habitat tolerances, 

and absence of predators. Diets of fish 50–200 mm TL comprised mainly small aquatic invertebrates, whereas larger fish 

preyed almost exclusively on decapods, mainly marron (Cherax tenuimanus), and teleosts. Electronic version not available. 

Morgan, DL, IC Potter and HS Gill 1995 The freshwater fish fauna of the pools of the south branch of 

the Collie River, during a period of extremely low water levels. Centre for Fish & Fisheries Research, 

Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Technical report to the Water Authority of Western Australia. 


Morgan, DL, DC Thorburn and HS Gill 2000 The distribution and habitat associations of fish in the 

Blackwood River catchment. Report to the Blackwood Basin Group. 


Morgan, DL, DC Thorburn and HS Gill 2003 Salinization of south-western Western Australian rivers and 

the implications for the inland fish fauna – the Blackwood River, a case study. Pacific Conservation 

Biology 9: 161-171. 


Nankervis, L 2007 ICLEI water campaign - corporate and community local action plan. Technical report 

prepared for the Shire of Augusta – Margaret River, WA. 41 pp. 

Plan describes series of actions needed to reduce water consumption by the corporate sector and the community. 

Onton, K 2009 Augusta Microbial Threatened Ecological Community Monitoring Report 2007-2008, 

South West Region. Department of Environment and Conservation, Bunbury, WA. 17 pp. 

Monitoring report on tufa – a TEC (threatened ecological community). Report provides info on Ecological Water Requirements 

(EWR’s) of the tufa; the biological composition of the various tufa formations and occurrences seasonally; the lithological 

parameters of the tufa (element and mineral composition); the growth of tufa between seasons and over time; and identifies 

threats to tufa occurrences. 

Onton, K 2009 South West Island Survey Report, South West Region. Department of Environment and 

Conservation, Bunbury, WA. 17 pp. 

Survey report on islands off coast at Augusta. Report provides info on the number of New Zealand Fur Seals utilizing the 

islands and rocks; the diversity and density of seabirds breeding on and utilizing the islands, particularly monitoring observations 

of tropical seabirds that have been observed extending their range south (Dunlop, 2008); a general inspection of the nature 

reserves; the flora species diversity of the larger islands (St Alouarn, Seal and Hamelin); and the amount of rubbish on the 

islands. 

Onton, K 2009 Capes’ Hooded Plover Report 2007-2009, South West Region. Department of 

Environment and Conservation, Bunbury, WA. 14 pp. 

Survey report on monitoring program of the Hooded Plover that focused on the Naturaliste-Augusta Hooded Plover 

Management Region encompassing the coastline from Dunsborough to Augusta. Provides info the distribution and abundance 

of Hooded Plover in the Capes region; their breeding success; the level of disturbance to Hooded Plover nesting in the Capes 

region; the tolerance of Hooded Plover to disturbance; the effectiveness of management techniques in reducing disturbance to 

Hooded Plover; and engagement of the local community in coastal bird conservation through participation and education. 

Onton, K 2009 South West Coast Action Grant Summary Report, South West Region. Department of 

Environment and Conservation, Bunbury, WA. 16 pp. 

Title describes content. 

Overheu, T 2002 Cranbrook-Toolbrunup catchment appraisal report. DAFWA Resource Management 

Techn Rep 235: 87 pp. 

Title adequately describes content – research area is in South Coast NRM region. 

Peel-Harvey Catchment Council 2008 Stormwater retrofitting: Products available in the Peel for 

stormwater management. Peel-Harvey Catchment Council, Mandurah, WA, 46 pp. 

Useful report but not relevant to development of the strategy. 

Peel-Harvey Catchment Council 2008 Development of a stormwater monitoring program: Guidelines for 

local government. Peel-Harvey Catchment Council, Mandurah, WA, 25 pp. 

Useful report but not relevant to development of the strategy. 

30

DRAFT 


Perkins, S 2011 Beyond the “California condor” approach to adaptation. Climate Feedback – the 

climate change blog. Viewed 22.March 2011 on 

http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2011/02/aaas_2011_beyond_the_californi.html 

Although no one knows the ultimate effects of climate change on … ecosystems, scientists know enough … to proceed with 

adaptation… And while many previous studies have focused on minimizing detriments to single species of economic 

importance, future efforts should shift to preserving ecosystems and their capacity to adapt. Indeed, a wide variety of holes 

exist in scientists’ knowledge about when —and how — ecosystems will respond to climate change. While many studies have 

assessed the individual effects of (warming), … the combined effects of multiple stressors are largely unknown. Looking to 

save ecosystems by preserving a single species of importance probably won’t work … Such a “California condor” approach – a 

massive effort dedicated to preserving just one, usually charismatic species – ignores the fact that ecosystems are finely-tuned 

biological networks composed of numerous interacting species. A far better approach than saving a few keystone species would 

be to preserve an entire ecosystem’s ability to adapt. While long-term efforts to mitigate climate change might address carbon 

dioxide emissions, the root cause of climate change, in the short term people can preserve the ocean’s biodiversity at local 

levels by reducing overfishing, nutrient runoff and pollution. 

Postma, D 2008 ICLEI water campaign - corporate and community local action plan. Technical report 

prepared for the City of Mandurah, WA. 30 pp. 

Plan describes series of actions needed to reduce water consumption by the corporate sector and the community. 

Potter, IC, PN Chalmer, DJ Tiivel, RA Steckis, ME Platell and RCJ Lenanton 2000 The fish fauna and 

finfish fishery of the Leschenault Estuary in south-western Australia. Journal of the Royal Society of 

W.A. 83: 481-501. 


Prior, SP and LE Beckley 2005 What do fishermen really think A case study from the Blackwood 

Estuary. 3rd WA State Coastal Conference, Busselton, Australia. 


Raines, Julie. & Royal Australasian Ornithologists' Union. 1994, Wetlands of outstanding ornithological 

importance for the Register of the National Estate in south-west Western Australia : interim report / by 

Julie Raines Royal Australasian Ornitologists Union, [Adelaide : 

Reid, J and R Eade 2009 SkyTEM Field processed data – Darkan-Wagin (Dardadine Palaeochannel) 

survey. SkyTEM, Perth WA. 40 pp. 

Title adequately describes content – presents data on the palaeochannel. 

Rockwater 2008 Wagin townsite borefield – results of drilling and test pumping production bores. 

Department of Food and Agriculture WA, Rockwater P/L, Jolimont, WA. 130 pp. 


SEConsulting 2008 Behaviour Change Framework to underpin Sustainable Agriculture in the South 

West Region of Western Australia. SE Consulting, Melbourne, Australia. 7 pp. 

This Behaviour Change workbook help to guide the reader through the process of creating a behaviour change action plan for a 

project. It has been designed to assist planners and deliverers of sustainable agriculture projects to achieve long-term change. 

Seewraj, K 2007 Governance Arrangements for the Fence Road Drainage Scheme. Department of 

Water, Bunbury, WA. 36 pp. 


Seewraj, K 2008a Fence Rd construction drawings. Department of Water, Bunbury, WA. 15 pp. 


Seewraj, K 2008b Analysis of Monitoring Data from the Fence Road Drainage Scheme. Department of 

Water, Bunbury, WA. 24 pp. 


Seewraj, K 2008c Technical Review of the Implementation of the Fence Road Drainage Scheme. 

Department of Water, Bunbury, WA. 3 pp. 

Title adequately describes content. Very useful document. 

Seewraj, K 2008d Aboriginal Heritage and Native Title Guidelines for On-Ground Works – Pilot 

Document. Department of Water, Bunbury, WA. 37 pp. 

Title adequately describes content. Very useful document. 

31

DRAFT 


Seewraj, K 2009 Aboriginal Consultation and Engagement in Natural Resource Management. 

Department of Water, Bunbury, WA. 11 pp. 


Semeniuk Research Group 1997 Mapping and classification of wetlands from Augusta to Walpole in the 

South-West of Western Australia. Report to the Water and Rivers Commission, Policy and Planning 

Division, East Perth, WA Water Resource Techn. Series 12:1-68 

SKM 2007 Sediment sampling plan. Sinclair Knight Merz, Perth, WA. 31 pp. 

The aim of this document is to provide a sediment sampling plan for the Peel-Harvey catchment that addresses both the 

strategic selection of an appropriate sampling regime and a set of work instructions that can be used by personnel in the field. 

Has no information of direct relevance to strategy development. 

SMEC 2008 Environmental Study – Mundijong/Whitby District Structure Plan (Draft Report). Technical 

report prepared for the Shire of Serpentine Jarrahdale. SMEC Australia, WA. 279 pp. 

Very detailed report with lots of detail, maps and other useful legal & policy information. 

Sommer B, P Horwitz and P Hewitt 2008 Assessment of wetland invertebrate and fish biodiversity for 

the Gnangara Sustainability Strategy (GSS). Report to Department of Water. Centre for Ecosystem 

Management, Joondalup, WA. 123 pp. 

This report is not too useful as it is from another region, yet provides some relevant information on methods by reviewing 

existing sources of information for aquatic fauna on the Gnangara Mound in order to provide a synthesis of the richness, 

endemism, rarity and habitat specificity of aquatic invertebrates in wetlands; identify gaps in aquatic invertebrate data on the 

Gnangara Mound; provide a synthesis of the status of freshwater fishes on the Gnangara Mound; and assess the management 

options for the conservation of wetlands and wetland invertebrates. 

Spatial Vision Innovations 2008c Workshop Notes – Investment DSS Post-Deployment Training Sept 

2008. Spatial Vision Innovations, Melbourne, VIC, 25 pp. 

This document presents the notes for a workshop on the Investment Decision Support System (a key component of the 

Waterway Health Sub-Strategy and Biodiversity Sub-Strategy. As such, it has no specifically useful information. 

Starcevich, MR, AJ Lymbery and RG Doupé 2003 Potential environmental impacts from farming 

rainbow trout using inland saline water in Western Australia. Australasian Journal of Environmental 

Management 10: 15-24. 


Steele, JJ 2008 Management of diffuse water quality pollution in the Peel-Harvey Coastal Drainage 

System – A strategic approach to implementation of best management practices. Peel-Harvey 

Catchment Council, Mandurah, 193 pp. 

Not directly relevant to the strategy, the document describes five aspects of work in the Peel-Harvey: 

Development of a classification scheme for the coastal drainage system to document differences channel character and 

functioning 

Characterisation of sediment as a pollutant, channel forming material and important transport and storage mechanism for 

nitrogen and phosphorus 

Creation of a catalogue Best Management Practices available and the appropriateness of these BMPs to different channel 

classes 

Evaluation of riparian buffers as a Best Management Practice 

Investigations into the role of in-channel sediment in controlling nutrient fluxes 

Storer, C and J Trendall 2007 Marketing Strategy for The Saltwater Aquaculture Alliance Inc. – 2007 to 

2010. Report to Blackwood Basin Group. Muresk Institute, Northam, WA. 17 pp. 

Very useful to those involved in saline aquaculture. The Marketing Plan has three parts. Stage 1. The product, consumers and 

potential market segments are detailed and reviewed. Stage 2. The target consumers and markets are used as the basis for 

specific promotion and marketing programs. Stage 3. The promotion and marketing of the product is concentrated on those 

customers and market segments that deliver the best performance. 

Strawbridge, M. & Western Australia. Water and Rivers Commission. & Natural Heritage Trust (Australia) 

& Western Australia. Water and Rivers Commission. Catchment and Salinity Investigations Section. 

1999 The extent, condition and management of remnant vegetation in water resource recovery 

catchments in south Western Australia. Report to the Natural Heritage Trust, Water and Rivers 

Commission, Resource Investigations Division, Catchment and Salinity Investigations Section. Water 

and Rivers Commission, Perth, WA. 46 pp. 

32

DRAFT 


Sutherland, W.J., S. Bardsley, L. Bennun, M. Clout, I.M. Côté, M.H. Depledge, L.V. Dicks, A.P. Dobson, L. 

Fellman, E. Fleishman, D.W. Gibbons, A.J. Impey, J.H. Lawton, F. Lickorish, D.B. Lindenmayer, T.E. 

Lovejoy, R. MacNally, J. Madgwick, L.S. Peck, J. Pretty, S.V. Prior, K.H. Redford, J.P.W. 

Scharlemann, M. Spalding, M. and A.R. Watkinson 2011 Horizon scan of global conservation 

issues for 2011. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 26(1):10-16 

ISSUES identified`: Environmental consequences of increasing milk consumption in Asia; new greenhouse gases; increases in 

productivity of polar oceans driven by loss of sea ice; biological impacts of perfluorinated compounds; xpansion in mining for 

lithium used in rechargeable batteries; genetic techniques to eradicate mosquitoes; nitric acid rain; substantial changes in soil 

ecology; denial of biodiversity loss; protected area failure; re-emergence of rinderpest; climate governance; transformation of 

oceans and domestication of marine species; vegetation change facilitated by earthworms in North American forests; hydraulic 

fracturing. 

SWAA 2006 INLAND SALTWATER AQUACULTURE – Growth Strategy: Using salined water to grow 

fish and diversify farm income in the dryland areas of Western Australia. Report to Blackwood Basin 

Group. Salt Water Aquaculture Alliance (SWAA), Albany, WA. 22 pp. 


SWAA 2009a Aquaculture organisation plan. Report to Blackwood Basin Group. Salt Water 

Aquaculture Alliance (SWAA), Albany, WA. 3 pp. 


SWAA 2009b Business plan – Section 2: Production plan. Report to Blackwood Basin Group. Salt 

Water Aquaculture Alliance (SWAA), Albany, WA. 27 pp. 

Title adequately describes content. Key message “The “fit” of the Saltwater Trout enterprise into wheatbelt farming systems as 

a diversification option is unlikely to occur because peak labour requirements for the Saltwater Trout enterprise would clash with 

peak seasonal labour demands especially at seeding and still significantly but to a lesser degree at harvest. 

SWAA 2009c Operations manual – saltwater rainbow trout. Salt Water Aquaculture Alliance (SWAA), 

Albany, WA. 27 pp. 


SWCC 2007 Map of oil mallee plantings 2005-07. SWCC, Bunbury, WA. 1 p. 


SWCC 2009a Project report - Project DS.O6a New Opportunities in the Wool belt. SWCC, Bunbury, 

WA. 9 p. 


SWCC 2009b Communications Toolkit. SWCC, Bunbury, WA. 22 p. 


Syrinx Environmental PL 2008 Scott Coastal Plain – Demonstration projects – nutrient and water 

management. Prepared for the BBG. Syrinx Environmental PL, Perth, WA. 103 pp. 

This report details the sample and analysis plan for four monitoring sites on dairy farms that are implementing BMPs on their 

properties to reduce nutrient runoff. As such, has no information relevant to strategy development. 

Trayler, KM, JA Davis, P Horwitz and DL Morgan 1997 Aquatic fauna of the Warren Bioregion, southwest 

Western Australia: Does reservation guarantee preservation Journal of the Royal Society of 

Western Australia 79: 281-291. 


Thompson, McRobert, Edgeloe 2009 Waroona Drainage Study. Report to Waroona Shire, Waroona, 

WA, 94 pp. 


Thompson, McRobert, Edgeloe 2009 Cost benefit analysis of water sensitive urban design. 

Leschenault Catchment Council, Bunbury, WA, 20 pp. 

This report details the costs and benefits of Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) within the Leschenault catchment. It is to be 

used as a guide to direct WSUD works throughout the catchment and allow decisions on the best overall outcome from limited 

budgets. To achieve this, the report looks at the constraints and opportunities of implementing WSUD in a variety of areas, 

including different soil types, position in the catchment to priority water bodies and retrofitting WSUD versus direct incorporation 

in new developments. The report also contains a simple matrix to assist with this prioritisation of works and a table on actual 

WSUD examples implemented in the South West. These will assist with ranking potential projects based on budgets and 

outcomes. Useful report but not directly relevant to development of the strategy. 

33

DRAFT 


Townley, Lloyd Richard. & Balla, S. A. & Davis, J. A. & Water Authority of Western Australia. 1993 

Wetlands of the Swan Coastal Plain. Water Authority of Western Australia, [Leederville, W.A.] : 

Trees South West 2008 Report on the Barriers and Benefits to the Adoption of Farm Forestry. 

Unpublished report to SWCC, TreesSW, WA. 8 pp. 

Title adequately describes content – provides results of a minor literature review, discussions with a focus group and a survey. 

Van Niel, KP, KW Holmes and B Radford 2007 Seagrass mapping – Geographe Bay 2004-2007. 

Technical report prepared for South West Catchment Council. School of Earth and Geographical 

Sciences, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA. 25 pp. 

Title adequately describes content. Expanded version of GEM 2007. 

Webb, Hugh, & Giblett, Rodney James. & Wetlands Conservation Society. & Convention on Wetlands of 

International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat, (1971) 1996, Western Australian wetlands 

: the Kimberley and south-west / edited by Rod Giblett and Hugh Webb Black Swan Press/Wetlands 

Conservation Society, Perth : 173pp. 

Westera, MB, Barnes, PB, ES Harvey, GA Kendrick and G Shedrawi 2008 Benchmark study on marine 

communities of the South West (Capes) region for long-term monitoring including the proposed Ngari 

Capes Marine Park. Technical report prepared for South West Catchments Council. University of 

Western Australia, Perth, WA. 101 pp. 

Report on surveys of 22 sites. Data was collected on the abundance and size (or biomass) of fishes, algae and mobile 

invertebrates from 22 sites in the Capes region (Cape Naturaliste - Geographe Bay to Cape Leeuwin - Flinders Bay). Sanctuary 

zones are proposed as part of the Ngari Capes Marine Park and sampling was designed to test the effect of sanctuary zones on 

marine communities as well as to provide baseline data on marine reef communities for the SW region. 

Westera, MB, PB Barnes, GA Kendrick and ML Cambridge 2007 Establishing benchmarks of seagrass 

communities and water quality in Geographe Bay, Western Australia. Technical report prepared for 

South West Catchments Council. University of Western Australia, Perth, WA. 67 pp. 

Report on surveys done in 2006 to determine patterns of distribution of benthic habitats, seagrasses, epiphytes, fishes, 

invertebrates and water quality at 20 sites in Geographe Bay to establish benchmarks for future management of impacts on 

these seagrass meadows (see also Barnes et al 2008 for final report). 

Westera, MB, PB Barnes, GA Kendrick and ML Cambridge 2009 Brochure – Seagrass Communities of 

Geographe Bay – Patterns of Diversity, Ecological Importance & Threats to Conservation. Prepared 

for SWCC, Bunbury, WA. 2 pp. 


Westera, M, E Harvey, G Kendrick and P Barnes 2009 Brochure – Marine Communities of the SW 

Capes Region – Biodiversity, Marine Management and Creating Sanctuary Zones. Prepared for 

SWCC, Bunbury, WA. 2 pp. 


WRM 2008 SW Rivers – Design of a Program to Monitor Ecological Effects of Environmental Water 

Provisions in South-West Rivers. Technical report prepared by Wetland Research & Management for 

Department of Water, Perth, WA. 57 pp. 


WorleyParsons 2009 Wheatbelt Groundwater Desalination – Feasibility Study. WorleyParsons, Perth, 

WA. 168 pp, 

The objective of this study was to undertake a high level assessment of the feasibility of desalinating groundwater for 

commercial and/or public use in the Blackwood Catchment, and includes a separate review of desalination technologies as an 

appendix. Case studies were Dumbleyung, Kojonup, Darkan and Narrogin. The major finding of this investigation was that 

desalinating groundwater for irrigation use in the Wool and Wheatbelt region of WA is currently most economical using RO 

technology but it currently appears only to be financially viable for high yielding agricultural activities (i.e. those with high 

financial returns). Two enterprises, a piggery using the water for stock drinking and wash down, and a grazing property using 

the water for stock drinking, returned a positive net value over the 25 year horizon if power was already available on the site. No 

irrigation-based enterprises were profitable. However, this financial assessment did not include the potentially significant costs 

associated with establishing the enterprise. Qualitative and semi-quantitative assessment of the external benefits of lowering the 

water table and restoring natural and social values to the region were very low at each individual site and are not likely to have a 

material affect on the NPV of any of the case studies. The greatest likelihood of an enterprise using desalinated water being 

financially viable is where the financial return from the prime enterprise using the desalinated water is high, and the concentrate 

itself has significant value. With continuing land degradation, the costs of damage caused by salinity and water logging will 

34

DRAFT 


increase, but with technical advances, desalination technology may become cheaper, making desalinating groundwater for 

commercial and/or public use financially viable. 

It was thus recommended that the feasibility of the financially viable case studies assessed in this study be explored beyond this 

very high level, and that the costs not included in this assessment, such as enterprise establishment costs, be included. To 

support future studies, the following data that affect costs and feasibility of extracting and desalinating ground water and utilising 

or disposing of concentrate should be collected and made more widely available by government agencies whenever 

groundwater investigations are undertaken: 

pH, major ionic composition, silica, iron, manganese and other metals, and suspended solids content of groundwater 

yield, transmissivity and storativity of bores and aquifers. 

Zhao, M and SW Running 2011 Drought-induced reduction in global terrestrial primary production from 

2000 through 2009. Science 329(5994):940-3 

Terrestrial net primary production (NPP) quantifies the amount of atmospheric carbon fixed by plants and accumulated as 

biomass. Previous studies have shown that climate constraints were relaxing with increasing temperature and solar radiation, 

allowing an upward trend in NPP from 1982 through 1999. The past decade (2000 to 2009) has been the warmest since 

instrumental measurements began, which could imply continued increases in NPP; however, our estimates suggest a reduction 

in the global NPP of 0.55 petagrams of carbon. Large-scale droughts have reduced regional NPP, and a drying trend in the 

Southern Hemisphere has decreased NPP in that area, counteracting the increased NPP over the Northern Hemisphere. A 

continued decline in NPP would not only weaken the terrestrial carbon sink, but it would also intensify future competition 

between food demand and proposed biofuel production. Electronic version not available. 

3.3 Other key documents 

The following documents were reviewed and relevant information used to develop the strategy, but the 

referencing has not been completed and the summary is yet to be written: 

BBG, 2004, Strategic Action Plan and Investment Programme 2004 – 2007, Blackwood Basin Group 

Beckwith, J 2009 Social values of South West water resources, A report to the Department of Water 

CALM 1994 Dryandra Woodland Management Plan 1995 – 2005. Department of Conservation and Land 

Management Management Plan No 30 

Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management 2004 Ecological Water Requirements of the 

Blackwood River and tributaries – Nannup to Hut Pool. Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource 

Management, University of Western Australia, Report CENRM 11/04: 134 pp. 

CCCG Cape to Cape Catchment Management Strategy 

CCCG 2003 Margaret River River Action Plan. Cape to Cape Catchments Group, 65 pp. 

CCCG 2006 Wilyabrup Brook River Action Plan. Cape to Cape Catchments Group, 81 pp. 

CCCG Cape to Capes Catchment Group additional RAPs (available from Capes Office): Yallingup Brook; 

Gunyulgup Brook; Cowaramup Brook; Ellen Brook and Boodjidup Brook. 

DAFWA 2008 Setting targets for resource condition in Date Creek catchment, Leon van Wyk and Paul 

Raper, DAFWA 

DAFWA 2008 Setting targets for resource condition in Lake Towerrininning catchment, Leon van Wyk 

and Paul Raper, DAFWA 

DAFWA 2008 Setting targets for resource condition in the Narrakine Gully and Highbury catchments, 

Leon van Wyk and Paul Raper, DAFWA 

DAFWA 2008 Setting targets for resource condition in Upper Crossman catchment, Leon van Wyk and 

Paul Raper, DAFWA 

DAFWA 2008 Setting targets for resource condition in Yilliminning catchment, Resource Management 

Technical Report 332, DAFWA 

DEC 2008 Lake McLarty Nature Reserve Management Plan No 60. Department of Environment and 

Conservation, 72 pp. 

35

DRAFT 


DEC 2010 Management of the Ramsar-listed Vasse-Wonnerup wetlands. Department of Environment 

and Conservation, Information Sheet 28: 2 pp. 

DEC Approved recovery plans (see http://www.dec.wa.gov.au/content/view/869/1556/), e.g. for Chuditch 

(Dasyurus geoffroii), Woylie (Bettongia penicillata), Orange-bellied (Geocrinia vitellina) and whitebellied 

frogs (Geocrinia alba), Sunset frog (Spicospina flammocaerulea), Western swamp tortoise 

(Pseudemydura umbrina), Carnaby’s Cockatoo, Dunsborough Burrowing Crayfish (Engaewa reducta), 

Margaret River Burrowing Crayfish (Engaewa pseudoreducta) and Walpole Burrowing Crayfish 

(Engaewa walpolea), Forest Black Cockatoo (Baudin’s Cockatoo Calyptorhynchus baudinii and Forest 

Redtailed Black Cockatoo Calyptorhynchus banksii naso) and Western Trout Minnow (Galaxias 

truttaceus hesperius). 

DEC Also approved interim recovery plans (see http://www.dec.wa.gov.au/content/view/865/1556/) 

Deeley, D. 2005 Geographe Bay Coastal Catchment - Land Capability Assessment for Managing the 

Impact of Land Use Change on Water Resources. Parsons Brinckerhoff, Landvision, 132 pp. 

Del Borrello, N. 2007 Management triggers and responses for groundwater-dependent ecosystems in 

the South West groundwater areas. Department of Water, Water resource allocation planning series 

Report no. 31: 76 pp. 

Donohue, R., Green, A., Pauli, N., Storey A., Lynas, J. and Bennett, K. 2010, Ecological Water 

Requirements of Cowaramup Brook, Department of Water, Government of Western Australia, 

Environmental Water Report No. 10. 

DoW 2007 Agency statement of Important Natural Resource Management Assets in Western Australia 

Prepared by the Department of Water for the NRM Senior officers group 106 pp. 

DoW 2009 Draft management response framework for rural drainage on the coastal plains of SW 

Western Australia: Statement of Response. Department of Water, Perth, 28 pp. 

DoW 2009 Draft Perth Peel Regional Water Plan 2010 – 2030 Responding to our Drying Climate. 

Department of Water, Perth. 69 pp. 

DoW 2010 Murray drainage and water management plan draft for public comment, Department of 

Water, Drainage and water management plan 4, September 2010 

DoW 2010 The effects of climate change on streamflow in south-west Western Australia Projections for 

2050 Department of Water Surface water hydrology series Report no. HY34 

DoW 2010 Vasse Wonnerup wetlands and Geographe Bay – Water Quality Improvement Plan. 

Department of Water, Perth. 187 pp. 

DoW 2010 South West Regional Water Plan 2010 – 2030. Department of Water, Perth. 

Economics Consulting Services 2008, Peel waterways: An economic evaluation, prepared for the 

Department of Water. Perth, WA. 

Ecosystem Solutions 2009 Biodiversity Sub-Strategy for the South West Catchments Council. 

Ecosystem Solutions, Dunsborough, 105 pp. 

EPA 2009 Deep drainage in the Wheatbelt. Environmental Protection Authority, Perth, Western 

Australia, Environmental Protection Bulletin No.5:4 pp. 

EPA 2009 South West Regional Ecological Linkages. Environmental Protection Authority, Perth, 

Western Australia, Environmental Protection Bulletin No.8:4 pp. 

EPA 2010 Revised Draft Environmental Protection (Western Swamp Tortoise Habitat) Policy 2010 – 

Report to the Minister for Environment. Environmental Protection Authority, Perth, Western Australia, 

79 pp. 

Finning, S 2009 Lower Harvey River Rehabilitation Plan. Harvey River Restoration Taskforce / PHCC 

24 pp. 

36

DRAFT 


Froend, R. and R. Loomes 2006 Determination of Ecological Water Requirements of Wetland and 

Terrestrial Vegetation - Southern Blackwood and Eastern Scott Coastal Plain. Centre for Ecosystem 

Management, Edith Cowan University Report No. 2005-07: 147 pp. 

GeoCatch 1999 Capel River Action Plan. Geographe Catchment Council, 102 pp. 

GeoCatch 2000 Carbanup River Action Plan. Geographe Catchment Council, 73 pp. 

GeoCatch 2000 Vasse River Action Plan. Geographe Catchment Council, 79 pp. 

GeoCatch 2002 River Action Plan for the Sabina, Abba and Ludlow Rivers. Geographe Catchment 

Council, 63 pp. 

GeoCatch 2004 River Action Plan for the Cape Naturaliste streams. Geographe Catchment Council, 98 

pp. 

GeoCatch 2006 River Action Plan for the Sabina, Abba and Ludlow Rivers. Geographe Catchment 

Council, 70 pp. 

GeoCatch additional RAPs: Abba River Action Plan; Capel River Action Plan; Cape Naturaliste Streams 

Action Plan; Carbanup River Action Plan; Ellen Brook Action Plan; Gunyulgup Brook Action Plan; 

Gynudup Brook & Tren Creek Action Plan; Ludlow River Action Plan; Margaret River Action Plan; 

Sabina River Action Plan; Vasse River Action Plan and Yallingup Brook Action Plan. 

GeoCatch, 2008, Geographe Catchment Management Strategy 2008, Geographe Catchment Council, 45 

pp 

GHD 2008 Preliminary Salinity Situation Statement for the Hotham Williams Murray Catchment Part 1 

and Part 2 Report to DoW / PHCC Part 1 53 pp. Part 2 47 pp. 

Goode, B. and C. Irvine 2008 A Survey of Aboriginal Social Water Requirements for the Southern 

Blackwood Plateau and Scott Coastal Plain, Southwest, Western Australia. Brad Goode & 

Associates, Dunsborough, 70 pp. 

Government of Western Australia 1992 Environmental Protection Act 1986 – Environmental Protection 

(Peel Inlet – Harvey Estuary) policy approval order 1998. WA Government Gazette No.215: 15 pp. 


(Swan Coastal Plain Lakes) policy approval order 1992. WA Government Gazette No.179: 5 pp. 


(South West agricultural zone wetlands) policy approval order 1992. WA Government Gazette 

No.175: 9 pp. 

Government of WA 2007 State Water Plan 2007. 

Hale, J and Butcher, R 2007 Ecological Character Description of the Peel-Yalgorup Ramsar Site. 

Report to the Department of Environment and Conservation and the Peel-Harvey Catchment Council, 

Perth, Western Australia. 

Hales G. and N. Reichelt 2009 Daping Creek Catchment / Implementation Plan. Blackwood Basin 

Group 

Hales G. 2009 East Yornanning Catchment / Implementation Plan. Blackwood Basin Group 

Hick, P. 2006 Understanding, quantifying & demonstrating the likely local effects of climate change & 

variability in the Peel-Harvey catchment, Peel-Harvey Catchment Council, Mandurah, WA. 

Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands – Muir-Byenup System. 2pp. 

Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands – Toolibin Lake. 2pp. 

Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands – Vasse-Wonnerup System. 2pp. 

37

DRAFT 


Kelsey, P. and J. Hall 2010 Nutrient loads, status and trends in the Leschenault catchment, Water 

Science Technical series, Report no. 9, Department of Water, Western Australia. 

Kilminster, K.L. 2010 Sediment quality in three south-western Australian estuaries, Water Science 

technical series, Report no. 18, Department of Water, Western Australia. 

LCC 2006 River Action Plan for the Upper Preston River. Leschenault Catchment Council, 67 pp. 

LCC 2006 River Action Plan for the Brunswick River. Leschenault Catchment Council, 64 pp. 

LCC 2007 Leschenault NRM sub-regional strategy 2007 

LCC 2008 River Action Plan for the Lower Collie River. Leschenault Catchment Council, 68 pp. 

Luu, R., Mitchell, D. and Blyth, J. 2004 Interim Recovery Plan No. 153 Thrombolite (Stromatolite-Like 

Microbialite) Community of a Coastal Brackish Lake (Lake Clifton) Interim Recovery Plan 2004-2009, 

Dept of Conservation and Land Management. 22 pp. See also 

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/recovery.html for national plan details. 

Mauger, G.W., M. Bari, L. Boniecka, R.N.M. Dixon, S.S. Dogramaci and J. Platt 2001 Salinity situation 

statement: Collie River. Water and Rivers Commission, Water Resource Technical Series No. WRT 

29: 108 pp. 

Mayer, X.M., J.K. Ruprecht, and M.A. Bari 2005 Stream salinity status and trends in south-west 

Western Australia, Department of Environment, Salinity and land use impacts series, Report No. SLUI 

38, Government of Western Australia, Perth, WA. 

Martin, K. 2006 Analysis and Comparison of Regional NRM Strategy and LGA Planning Documents, 

South West Catchments Council, pp 108 

McKenna, M. 2007 The Leschenault Estuarine System, South-Western Australia – Condition Statement 

and Recommendations for Management. Department of Water, Bunbury, 172 pp. 

McPhearson R. 2010 Upper Capel River Action Plan. 

PHCC 2008 Middle Murray River Action Plan, Peel-Harvey Catchment Council 83 pp. 

PHCC 2008 South Dandalup River Action Plan, Peel-Harvey Catchment Council 65 pp. 

Rapid Catchment Appraisal Resource Management Technical Reports: 233 Blackwood - Katanning Zone 

6 Feb-02 307,000 ha; 243 Blackwood - Beaufort Zone Sep-03 339,000 ha; 309 Hillman - Narrogin 

Nov-05 409,000 ha; 275 Wagin - Woodanilling Jan-06 163,000 ha; 319 Boyup Brook - Upper Warren 

Zone Jun-07 613,000 ha; and 322 High Rainfall Oct-07 2,400,000 ha. 

Seewraj, K. 2010 Fence Road drainage system - interim assessment of monitoring data, Department of 

Water, Bunbury, Western Australia. 

Seewraj, K. 2009 Draft management response framework for rural drainage on the coastal plains of SW 

Western Australia: Statement of Response, Department of Water, Bunbury, Western Australia. 

Smith, M.G., R.N.M. Dixon, L.H. Boniecka, M.L. Berti, T. Sparks, M.A. Bari, and J. Platt 2006 Salinity 

Situation Statement: Warren River, Western Australia. Department of Water, Water Resource 

Technical Series No. WRT 32: 110 pp. 

Strang, M. 2009 INFFER Project Assessment Form Lake Muir-Unicup (South-West WA), August 2009 

accessed via http://cyllene.uwa.edu.au/~dpannell/inffer.htm 22 Dec 2010 

URS 2008 State of Play Peel-Harvey Eastern Estuary Catchment Environmental Assessment Discussion 

Paper, a report to the Department of Water 

van Looij, E. and T. Storer 2009 Framework for the Assessment of River and Wetland Health (FARWH) 

in the south-west of Western Australia – Inception Report Volume 1. Department of Water, Perth, 75 

pp. 

38

DRAFT 


van Looij, E and T. Storer 2009 Framework for the Assessment of River and Wetland Health (FARWH) 

in the south-west of Western Australia – Inception Report Volume 2 – Methods. Department of Water, 

Perth, 47 pp. 

WCC 2006 Donnelly River Action Plan. Warren Catchments Council, 106 pp. 

WCC 2006 Lower Warren River Action Plan. Warren Catchments Council, 69 pp. 

WCC 2007 Strategy for Natural Resource Management in the Warren Subregion 2007 - 2011 Warren 

Catchment Council, 40pp 

Wells, 2005, Draft Peel-Harvey Catchment Natural Resource Management Plan, Peel-Harvey Catchment 

Council 88 pp ( 95 pp in appendices, separate document) 

Wong, D. and G.M. Blake 2009 Salinity situation statement: Tweed River and Gnowergerup Brook. 

Department of Water, Water Resource Technical Series No WRT 41: 81pp. 

WRM 2007 Ecological Character Description for the Vasse-Wonnerup Wetlands Ramsar Site in Southwest 

Western Australia. Unpublished report to the Department of Environment and Conservation and 

Geographe Catchment Council Inc. by Wetland Research & Management. 

39

DRAFT 


4. Historical perspective 

A brief overview of assets and threats identified by NRM stakeholders over the past decade or more is 

presented in this section. This information, while not directly relevant to the current strategy, has been 

included to provide the historical context for the current strategy, which has been developed based on a 

review of this information combined with updates provided by the broader NRM community (including 

agency staff, NRM professionals and community members). 

A wide range of documents was consulted to determine this historical background about NRM priorities, 

including key documents that provided information at a catchment level (BBG 2004, CCCG 2007, 

Geocatch 2008, LCC 2007, PHCC 2005 and WCC 2011), regional level (Ecosystem Solutions 2008, 

SWCC 2005) and State level (Stuart-Street 2003, State NRM Office 2007). Water Quality Improvement 

Plans (WQIPs) also provided key information. 

4.1 Biodiversity 

4.1.1 Previously identified priority biodiversity assets 

The following six biodiversity asset categories were assigned regional priority in the previous strategy 

(SWCC 2005): 

Declared Rare Flora (CR, EN); 

Gazetted Threatened Fauna; 

Threatened Ecological Communities (CR, EN); 

Ramsar wetlands; 

Conservation Reserves in the Avon-Wheatbelt and Mallee bioregions; and 

Other land managed for conservation in the Avon-Wheatbelt and Mallee bioregions. 

At a catchment level, priority assets were identified by six community catchment groups as follows: 

Blackwood River Catchment 

All TECs. 

Natural Diversity Recovery 

Catchments, e.g. Lake Toolibin. 

Lower Blackwood ecological 

communities, e.g. Scott River 

plain. 

Avon Wheatbelt and Mallee 

conservation reserves. 

All “Critically endangered”, 

“Endangered” and “Estuarine 

dependent” species. 

Avon Wheatbelt 1 & 2 

Vegetation systems – Beaufort, 

Bridgetown, Broomehill, 

Dumbleyung, Scott River, Wagin 

and Williams 

Cape to Capes Catchment 

All biodiversity assets of the region 

listed in the strategy, but not 

prioritized. The following were 

identified (but needs to be 

expanded): 

All TECs. 

All Declared Rare Flora and 

Threatened Fauna species. 

Geographe Catchment 

5 TECs: 

o Heaths on SW coastal 

granites; 

o Swan Coastal Plain (SCP) 

Community 1b – Corymbia 

calophylla woodlands; 

o SCP Community 2 - Southern 

wet shrublands; 

o SCP Community 10a - 

Shrublands on dry clay flats; 

and 

o SCP Community 10b - 

Shrublands on southern 

ironstones. 

8 species - Western Ringtail 

Possum, Quenda, Brush-tailed 

Phascogale, Chuditch, Water 

Rat, and Baudin’s, Carnaby’s and 

Red-tailed Black Cockatoos. 

Leschenault Catchment 

Threatened flora (21 species). 

Fauna including Western Ringtail 

Possum; Quenda; Brush-tailed 

Phascogale; Water rat; Baudin’s, 

Peel-Harvey Catchment 

38 TECs. 

All Declared Rare Flora and 

Threatened Fauna species. 

Yalgorup National Park. 

Warren Catchment 

Avifauna 

Granite outcrops 

Marron, salamanderfish and 

lamprey eel 

40

DRAFT 


Carnaby’s and Red-tailed Black 

Cockatoos; migratory shorebirds; 

all native freshwater crayfish and 

some native freshwater fish (incl. 

pouched lamprey). 

TECs (Community types 3c, 7, 8, 

9, 18 and 19). 

Other ecological communities (7 

including the White Mangrove). 

Various wetlands, including 

Leschenault Estuary, Kemerton 

wetland chain and billabongs 

along Collie River. 

Eastern estuary nature reserves. 

Dryandra Reserve. 

Migratory shorebirds. 

Remnant vegetation. 

Microbial mats (Lake Preston). 

Mt Chudalup 

Native fauna 

Native flora 

Peat swamps 

Yeagarup Dunes 

Ecosystem Solutions (2009) refined this information, assigning priority ranking on the basis of 38 criteria in 

the following five groupings: 

Richness (2 criteria); 

Rarity (22 criteria); 

Distinctiveness (3 criteria); 

Representativeness (9 criteria); and 

Naturalness (2 criteria). 

Eight bio-landscapes were then identified as the highest value biodiversity assets in the South West NRM 

region that would protect priority fauna and/or flora species/communities, in addition to rare and/or 

endangered vegetation associations. A further 11 assets of secondary priority were also identified that 

contained only priority fauna and/or flora species. 

In the current strategy, aquatic biodiversity has been separated out from terrestrial biodiversity, as aquatic 

fauna and flora have generally been under-represented in past documents and are subject to different 

issues and management options. Indeed, aquatic biodiversity assets haven’t been identified as a specific 

theme area at either State, regional or catchment level, but a number of priority assets are listed in various 

documents that can be included in this theme area. They include: 

All “Critically endangered”, “Endangered” and “Estuarine dependent” aquatic species. 

Aquatic fauna including all native freshwater fish and crayfish, with priority given to Margaret River 

freshwater crayfish, Dunsborough freshwater crayfish, Balston’s Pygmy Perch and the lamprey eel. 

Very little is known about most aquatic species, so this list will undoubtedly be expanded at various levels 

as time goes on. 

4.1.2 Previously identified threats to the region’s terrestrial biodiversity 

The following threats were identified as key threats for biodiversity in the six IBRA regions represented in 

the South West (State NRM Office 2007, Ecosystem Solutions 2009 – high-level threats are shown in 

bold): 

Climate change; 

Dieback (Phytophthora spp); 

Decreasing rainfall (drought); 

Fire (including inappropriate fire management regimes); 

Environmental weeds (Category A) and introduced animals (cats, European fox, rabbits); 

Problem species (introduced and native – European Honey Bee, Kookaburra, Minahs, Galahs, 

Corellas); 

Habitat fragmentation and/or isolation; 

41

DRAFT 


Land clearing; 

Removing buffer and/or riparian vegetation; 

Grazing by stock; 

Salinity; 

Armillaria; 

Other problem species – pigs and kangaroos; 

Contamination through chemicals/pesticides; 

Water extraction and/or capture; and 

Physical removal of plants and/or animals. 

A further 20 lower level threats were identified, including problem weeds and species (introduced and 

native – Category B weeds, Port Lincoln Ringneck Parrot, plantation species such as pines and blue 

gums), floods/inundation, erosion, urban expansion, recreational management and access, illegal 

activities (e.g. rubbish dumping) and mines and quarries. 

The Western Australian Government identified five of these as priority threats to biodiversity in WA in its 

State of the Environment Report (SoE 2007): 

Changed fire regimes; 

Introduced animals; 

Loss or degradation of native vegetation; 

Phytophthora dieback; and 

Weeds. 

In terms of aquatic biodiversity, a number of threats were identified, including the following (key threats are 

shown in bold): 

climate change, e.g. reduced rainfall causing drying out of refuges such as permanent pools; 

introduction of non-native species, e.g. yabbies and Gambusia; 

ecosystem fragmentation; 

eutrophication; 

movement of species, e.g. marron from one catchment to another; 

pollution from point sources; 

coastal development (including the development of oil and gas fields and other mining 

activities); 

intensive agriculture; 

water development; 

fishing by Australian and foreign fleets; 

aquaculture and boating facilities; and 

recreational and commercial fishing. 

4.2 Water resources 

4.2.1 Previously identified priority water resources 

The water resources of the South West region as defined in the NRM strategy (SWCC 2005) include the 

categories waterways, wetlands, estuaries and water resources. No specific assets were given priority in 

the strategy. 

At a State level, a wide variety of water resources were identified as either priority waterscapes or water 

supplies (State NRM Office 2007), as follows: 

Waterscapes: Barraghup Swamp, Broadwater Wetland, Brunswick River, Carey Brook, Collie River, 

Cowaramup River, Gingilup-Jasper Wetland System, Hardy Inlet Estuary, Lake McLarty, Lake 

Toolibin, Leeuwin Ridge streams, Leschenault Estuary, Lower Blackwood tributaries, Margaret River 

42

DRAFT 


and Estuary, Milyannup Brook, Muir/Unicup System, Peel Harvey Estuaries, Poison Gully, Reedia 

Complexes, Scott Coastal Plain Wetlands, Scott River, Serpentine River, Vasse-Wonnerup 

Estuaries/Wetlands, Wilyabrup River and Estuary, Upper Blackwood (above Boyup Brook) and 

Yalgorup Lakes. 

Water supplies: Badgarning, Balingup, Bridgetown – Hester Dam, Bancell Brook, Blackwood, Boyup 

Brook, Busselton-Capel, Bunbury, Collie, Conjurunup Creek Pipehead Dam, Donnybrook, 

Dumbleyung, Dunsborough/Yallingup, Greenbushes Dams, Jandakot, Kirup, Kojonup Dam, Leeuwin 

Spring Dam, Lefroy Brook, Manjimup Dam (Phillips Creek and Scabby Gully), Margaret River/Ten 

Mile Brook, Millstream, Mullalyup, Mullalyup Dam, Mungalup, North Dandalup Pipehead Dam, 

Pemberton (Lefroy Brook and Big Brook Dam), Preston Beach, Quinninup Dam, South Dandalup 

Pipehead Dam, Tanjanerup creek, Warren River, Wellington Dam and Wungong Brook. 

A slightly different approach assigned priority to the following water assets in SWCC’s previous strategy 

(SWCC 2005): 

Lower Blackwood River and estuary; 

Peel-Harvey estuarine system; 

Vasse-Wonnerup Estuary; 

Lower Scott River; 

Broadwater; 

Gingilup-Jasper wetland system; 

Preston River; 

Hardy Inlet; 

Leschenault Estuary; and 

Warren River. 

At a catchment level, priority assets were identified by six community catchment groups as follows: 


Lower Blackwood River. 

Middle Blackwood River reaches. 

Mid-upper Blackwood – 

groundwater resources. 

Hardy Inlet – water quality. 

Mid-low basin – in-stream water 

quality. 


All water assets of the region listed 

in their strategy, but not prioritized. 

Only the following was identified: 

Groundwater with connection to 

cave formations. 


Vasse-Wonnerup wetlands. 

Bussell Highway Swamp, Ludlow 

wetlands (incl. McCarley’s 

Swamp), Tutunup Rd Lake, 

Broadwater floodplain (incl. 

Toby’s Inlet), and Ludlow-Abba & 

Naturaliste Lake wetlands. 

Capel, Ludlow and Sabina 

Rivers. 

Meelup & Dologup Brooks. 

Seasonal wetlands on ironstone 

between Capel and Carbanup 

Rivers. 


Leschenault Estuary and Inlet. 

Rivers (Brunswick, Ferguson, 

Lower Collie, Preston, 

Wellesley). 

Wetlands (Benger Swamp, Mialla 

Lagoon, Kemerton wetlands, Big 

Swamp and Cathedral Avenue 

wetlands). 

Stored water (Wellington Dam, 

SW Irrigation Area, Groundwater 


3 Ramsar wetland systems. 

All 53 regionally significant 

wetlands and lakes. 

19 regionally important 

waterways (Fig 12 – PHCC 

2005). 


Deep River. 

Coastal freshwater streams. 

Ground water. 

Shannon River. 

Warren River. 

Big Brook dam. 

Farm dams. 

Groundwater systems. 

Town water supplies. 

Water quality. 

43

DRAFT 


of the Bunbury, SW Coastal, 

Busselton-Capel and Collie 

GMAs). 

Coastal lakes. 

Lake Jasper. 

4.2.2 Previously identified threats to the region’s water resources 

The following were identified in strategies published by the community catchment groups, as well as in 

Water Quality Improvement Plans as the key threats that impact on the region’s water resources (with key 

threats shown in bold): 

Erosion; 

Sedimentation; 

Eutrophication; 

Salinity; 

Pollution from point sources; 

Ecosystem fragmentation; 

Land development (residential, rural residential, intensive agriculture, broad acre farming, 

pastoral, aquaculture and boating facilities); 

Feral animals and weed infestations; 

Recreational and commercial fishing; 

Industrial discharge; 

Water abstraction; and 

Agricultural drainage (e.g. coastal plain and saline land drainage). 

The State of the Environment Report (SoE 2007) cites two documents as sources for identified threats at 

a State level (WRC 2000, 2003), which listed the following as the key threats to the state’s water 

resources: 

Salinisation and acidification of inland waters; 

Loss or degradation of wetlands, and of fringing, in-stream and riparian vegetation, linked to: 

Erosion and sedimentation of inland waters; 

Eutrophication linked to nutrient enrichment (diffuse sources) and point source pollution; 

These were linked to exotic plant and animal invasions; waterlogging, drainage and inundation; 

streamflow and channel changes; unsustainable use of water resources and in-stream and riparian zone 

use. These compare well with those identified previously. In addition, the report identified contamination 

of inland waters and loss of floodplain connectivity as emerging issues. 

4.3 Land resources 

4.3.1 Previously identified priority land assets 

The land resources of the South West region as defined in the NRM strategy (SWCC 2005) include the 

categories agricultural land, remnant vegetation on private land and productive forests, particularly those 

found in the following priority agricultural zones (State NRM Office 2007): 

Bassendean Zone 

Donnybrook Sunkland Zone 

Eastern Darling Range Zone 

Leeuwin Zone 

Perth Coastal Zone 

Pinjarra Zone 

Scott Coastal Zone 

South-eastern Zone of Ancient Drainage 

South-western Zone of Ancient Drainage 

Southern Zone of Rejuvenated Drainage 

Warren-Denmark Southland Zone 

Western Darling Range Zone 

44

DRAFT 


At a catchment level, priority assets were identified by some of the six community catchment groups as 

follows: 


Agricultural land in mid-low 

rainfall belt (

DRAFT 


4.4 Coasts and the marine environment 

4.4.1 Previously identified priority coastal assets 

No specific priority assets were identified in the previous strategy (SWCC 2005), with the strategic 

direction of management actions being directed towards management of key identified threats. Some of 

the six community catchment groups did identify the following priority assets: 


Lower Blackwood estuary. 

“Estuarine dependent”, “Critically 

endangered”, “Rare & Threatened” 

and “Potentially threatened” 

species. 


All coastal assets of the region 

listed in their strategy, but not 

prioritized, so were not included 

here. 


Geographe Bay seagrass 

communities. 

Southern Geographe Bay 

(proposed marine park). 

All coral species. 

Quindalup dune system. 


None specifically identified in the 

strategy, but the Leschenault 

Peninsula Conservation Park, the 

Ocean to Preston Regional Park and 

System 6 – Leschenault Inlet, white 

mangroves in the estuary and inlet, 

and Point Druro are important (J 

Hugues-Dit-Ciles pers.comm.). 


All coastal assets of the region 

listed in their strategy, but not 

prioritized, so were not included 

here. 


Black Point Beach. 

Broke Inlet. 

Coalmine Beach. 

Mouth of the Doggerup. 

Walpole-Nornalup Inlet. 

Fish stocks. 

Highly natural quality. 

Whales. 

4.4.2 Previously identified threats to the region’s coastal assets 

A number of key threats for SW coastal and marine environments were identified in the previous strategy 

(SWCC 2005; listed alphabetically, not in order of priority): 

Chemical pollution; 

Climate change; 

Coastal development. 

Commercial and recreational fishing; 

Disease; 

Habitat degradation (sediments and nutrients); 

Introduced fauna and flora, including marine pests; and 

Recreation and tourism, including tourist interactions. 

Similar threats were also identified by the WA Government in it’s State of the Environment Report (SoE 

2007), which identified the following key threats to coastal resources: 

Degradation and contamination of coastal and marine environments through: 

o pollution (waste discharge and nutrient enrichment); 

o dredging and sedimentation; 

o increasing coastal populations; 

o overfishing; 

o industrial development; 

o oil spills; and 

o increasing ecotourism. 

Introduced marine species. 

High costs of research and monitoring. 

The report also identified marine debris as an emerging issue. 

46

DRAFT 


4.5 People and Culture of the South West 

4.5.1 Previously identified priority socio-cultural assets 

The theme area “People and Culture of the South West region” as defined in the NRM strategy (SWCC 

2005) includes the categories people, culture, NRM capacity, Indigenous people and settlements & 

infrastructure. 

At both catchment and regional levels, priority assets identified included the whole SW community, and all 

registered Indigenous sites and listed European sites of historical significance, based on the following 

values (listed alphabetically, not in order of priority): 

Community well-being; 

Economic resources; 

Governance capacity; 

Knowledge and skills, particularly in the areas of cross-cultural awareness and the principles of 

community engagement; 

Networks/organisations; and 

Values/culture. 

Community engagement was the cross-cutting activity that was identified as the key way to secure these 

values into the future. 

4.5.2 Previously identified threats to the region’s socio-cultural assets 

A number of key threats for SW socio-cultural assets were identified in the strategies developed by the 

community catchment groups and in other documents, and include (listed alphabetically, not in order of 

priority): 

Declining terms of trade impacting on the economic health of country areas resulting in rural decline 

and loss of disposable income for use in NRM; 

Improved communications and the replacement of labour by technology, resulting in population 

decline; 

Inadequate resourcing at all levels; 

Loss or degradation of Indigenous knowledge and heritage; 

Loss or degradation of natural and historic heritage; and 

Loss of landholder knowledge through rural decline. 

Some of these were also identified by the WA Government’s State of the Environment Report (SoE 2007), 

which identified the following key threats to heritage resources: 

Loss or degradation of natural heritage; 

Loss or degradation of Indigenous knowledge and heritage; 

Loss or degradation of historic heritage; 

Gaps and deficiencies in heritage legislation; 

Incomplete recognition, monitoring and maintenance of heritage places; and 

Inadequate resourcing at the State and local government levels.No emerging issues were identified. 

4.6 Air and Climate 

At a catchment level, no specific priority actions were identified. At a State level, the atmosphere as a 

whole was identified as the priority asset, and a number of key threats were identified (SoE 2007), 

including: 

47

DRAFT 


Stratospheric ozone depletion; 

Greenhouse gas emissions; 

Particulates; 

Photochemical smog; and 

Sulphur dioxide. 

The report also listed some emerging issues, i.e. oxides of nitrogen and the decline in indoor and outdoor 

air quality linked to air pollution. 

48

DRAFT 


5. Results of Community Consultation 

5.1 Potential to refine scores allocated to assets 

Three scores were allocated to assets identified by the community and were used to rank these assets in 

the strategy. In order to improve this ranking, it is suggested that four further scores could be allocated to 

all identified assets in order to draw up a more robust, prioritized ranking of the assets: 

1. Whether or not (a) SMART goal(s) for intervention(s) can be identified (yes=1, no=0). 

2. Whether or not the proposed action(s) will make a real difference (yes=1, no=0). 

3. Whether or not it is likely that the private sector will participate actively if the intervention requires 

it, e.g. through allocation of own resources (yes=1, no=0); and/or 

4. Whether or not it is likely that the public sector will participate actively if the intervention requires 

it, e.g. through provision of government data or providing support through existing programmes 

(yes=1, no=0). 

These four “extra” scores have not been drawn up for this strategy, however, as it requires more 

resources than were allocated by SWCC, i.e. about 1½ to 2 full days to obtain the required information 

and cross-check the analysis with competent specialists for a batch of 15-20 similar assets. The 

estimated resources required (40-55 days plus funds) are currently unavailable, but it is recommended 

that SWCC and its partners assess the possibility of scoring all assets completely in the near future. 

A total of 546 assets were identified in the South West region through this “community feedback process”, 

including some that are thought-provoking and usually not described as NRM assets in the conventional 

NRM literature. These included “community groups” and “sites of previous NRM work”. The collated 

results are presented by catchment region in the following sections, with an additional section for the 

individual responses, as these results were not subjected to the same form of peer review as the others. 

5.1 Workshop with Cape to Capes Catchment Group 

Held on 31 st March 2011 at the Education Campus, Margaret River. Assets were identified and scored as 

being exceptionally valuable, very highly valuable or highly valuable, and are listed under those three 

headings, but not in any particular order. 

The level and likelihood of all threats to the asset as a whole was also scored on the basis of the expected 

level of degradation of the asset in the next 20 years if there is no additional management action. The 

assumed threat level was scored as being very high (>75% degradation or loss), high (50-75% 

degradation or loss), moderate (25-50% degradation or loss) or low (

DRAFT 


Likely private intervention if required: xxx 

Likely public intervention if required: xxx 

Very high level threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; water; introduced weeds (arum 

lily, Vinca, onion weed 1 and Dolichos pea). 

High level threats: Land management practises (incl. introduced species and fire) on private land and 

public land; clearing on private land and human use. 

Medium to low level threats: Land management practises (incl. introduced species and fire) on public 

land; clearing on public land and human use. 

Comments: 

5.1.1.2 7 Wildlife Corridors 

Asset value: Exceptional 

Asset identifiable: Yes 

Will proposed action make real difference: xxx 



Threat score: Moderate 

SMART goal for actions: xxx 

Very high level threats: Climate change; weeds; feral animals (incl. aquatic species such as fish and 

crustaceans) and water. 

High level threats: Land management practises (incl. introduced species and fire) on private land and 

clearing on private land. 

Medium to low level threats: None identified at this workshop. 

Comments: Ecological linkages (N-S AND E-W); Augusta-Margaret River Shire has relevant plan 

(contact Drew McKenzie CCCG) 

5.1.1.3 Margaret River & its catchment 


Asset identifiable: Yes, but dispersed 






Very high level threats: Weeds; Feral animals (incl. aquatic species such as fish and crustaceans) and 

coal & gas mining. 

High level threats: Climate change; dams; water extraction; barriers in the catchment; degradation of 

vegetation along river banks and pollution. 

Medium to low level threats: Urban development and human use. 

Comments: Drinking water catchment, therefore very high value; several RAPs completed; includes 

swamps. 

5.1.1.4 Hardy Inlet 








Very high level threats: Coal and gas mining; pollution; human use; upstream management and 

management of Scott River. 

1 

Questionable whether this really is a very high level threat. 

50

DRAFT 


High level threats: Weeds; Feral animals (incl. aquatic species such as fish and crustaceans). 

Medium to low level threats: Climate change; degradation of vegetation around the Inlet and dams. 

Comments: Particularly valuable due to its cultural heritage and significance (both Indigenous and other). 

5.1.1.5 Groundwater aquifers 








Very high level threats: Climate change effects on shallower aquifers; water extraction and coal & gas 

mining. 

High level threats: Climate change effects on deep aquifers. 

Medium to low level threats: Pollution; clearing and plantations. 

Comments: None listed at this workshop. 

5.1.1.6 Blackwood River 






Very high level threats: Salinity. 



High level threats: Flooding; degradation of vegetation along riverbanks and feral animals. 

Medium to low level threats: Weeds; dams; pollution; clearing; water extraction; urban development and 

cols/gas mining. 


5.1.1.7 Remnant vegetation on public land 








Very high level threats: Climate change and pathogens. 

High level threats: Introduced species and fire. 

Medium to low level threats: Fire management practises; logging and access. 


5.1.1.8 Coastline - sections with easy access 


Threat score: High 






Very high level threats: Introduced species. 

High level threats: Human use. 

51

DRAFT 


Medium to low level threats: Fire; marine pollution; development pressure; sewerage; upstream land 

management practises and climate change. 

Comments: Includes Meelup, Yallingup, Smiths, Gracetown, Kilcarnup, Prevelly, Gnarabup, Redgate, 

Contos, Hamelin, Quarry Bay, Black Point, Gas Bay / Boodji, Cosy Corner, Ellensbrook, Wilyabrup Cliffs 

and Injidup. 4WD access major impacts. 

5.1.1.9 Caves 






Very high level threats: Climate change. 



High level threats: Human use (pollution, vandalism, and linked to land use) and water use. 

Medium to low level threats: Fires. 

Comments: Threat is mainly due to decreasing water levels (water use, decreasing rainfall and pumping 

aquifers). 

5.1.1.10 Healthy trees 


Asset identifiable: No 




Very high level threats: Climate change; pathogens and water. 



High level threats: Fire (both fire management practises and wildfires). 

Medium to low level threats: Land management practises. 

Comments: Trees all over the SW are in decline, including Jarrah (dieback), flooded gums, peppermints 

(mainly “other” type of dieback – Phytophtera) and Marri (canker & borers). Murdoch has listed some 20 

reasons for the decline in tree health, decreasing rainfall being a key factor in exacerbating the effects of 

other threats. 

5.1.1.11 Flinders Bay 






Very high level threats: Introduced species 

High level threats: Human use 



Medium to low level threats: Fire; marine pollution; development pressures; sewerage; upstream land 

management practises and climate change 

Comments: Sewage is leaching directly into streams and leaching from old tip are possible/suspected 

threats. 

5.1.1.12 Water Point No. 4 






52

DRAFT 




Very high level threats: Climate change; pathogens; tree decline (dieback etc.); fire (both fire 

management practises and wildfires) and land management practises 

High level threats: None identified at this workshop. 


Comments: A swamp just off Davis Rd, SE of Witchcliffe, has Geocrinia alba, recently a break was cut 

through it to construct a fence for a vineyard. 

5.1.1.13 Water volume and quality 








Very high level threats: Climate change; dams; water extraction and pollution (e.g. leaching from tips) 


Medium to low level threats: Salinity; mining and gas extraction; plantations; acid sulphate soils and 

land management practises 

Comments: Linked to “Environmental Water. 

5.1.2 Very High Value Assets 

5.1.2.1 Permanent pools 

Asset value: Very high 







Very high level threats: Climate change; feral aquatic species such as goldfish, redfin perch and 

yabbies; degradation of vegetation along riverbanks and around pools, fire (both fire management 

practises and wildfires) and land management practises 




5.1.2.2 Agricultural soils 








Very high level threats: Climate change; fire (both fire management practises and wildfires) and land 

management practises 




53

DRAFT 


5.1.2.3 Lake Jingi 






Very high level threats: None identified at this workshop. 



Threat score: xxx 


Comments: Near Bunker’s Bay; further info from SWCC (Zac) – perched seasonal wetland. 

5.1.2.4 Barrabup Pools 






Very high level threats: Feral aquatic species such as goldfish 




5.1.2.5 McLeod Creek 






Threats: None identified at this workshop. 

Comments: Further info from CCCG; LB LCDC has RAP. 





5.1.2.6 Calgardup Brook 







Comments: Further info from CCCG, needs RAP. 



5.1.2.7 Quinninup Brook 









Comments: Further info from CCCG, RAP is scheduled; some important Indigenous sites. 

54

DRAFT 


5.1.2.8 Wilyabrup Brook 







Comments: Further info from CCCG. 

5.1.2.9 Biljedup Brook 












5.1.2.10 Cowaramup Brook 







Comments: Further info from CCCG, RAP available. 

5.1.2.11 Ellen Brook 











Comments: Further info from CCCG; RAP available (CCCG/DEC/National Trust). 

5.1.2.12 Boodjidup Brook 







Comments: Further info from CCCG; RAP available. 



5.1.2.13 Turner Brook 






55

DRAFT 





Comments: Further info from CCCG; needs RAP. 

5.1.2.14 Scott River 









Comments: Further info from Lower Blackwood LCDC/DoW; see Hardy Inlet WQIP. 

5.1.2.15 Chapman Brook 







Comments: Part of the brook; further info from CCCG (has RAP). 



5.1.2.16 Remnant vegetation on private land 








Very high level threats: Climate change; pathogens and introduced species 

High level threats: Land management practises 

Medium to low level threats: Fire management practises; wildfires; fire and logging 


5.1.2.17 Bird diversity 








Very high level threats: Climate change 

High level threats: Land management practises; fire management practises, wildfires and logging (both 

legal and illegal (for firewood)) 


Comments: Seek info from Birds Australia or other specialists. 

5.1.2.18 Kilcarnup wetland 





56

DRAFT 





Very high level threats: None identified at this workshop. 

High level threats: Weeds; feral animals, fire and climate change 



5.1.2.19 Waterways in general 









Comments: Refers mainly to riparian biodiversity; further info from CCCG. 

5.1.2.20 Gingilup swamps 






Very high level threats: Acid sulphate soils 



Comments: Further info from Lower Blackwood LCDC. 

5.1.2.21 Leeuwin springs 











Comments: See Leeuwin National Park management plan; water supply for Augusta. 

5.1.2.22 Marine assets impacted by human use 









Comments: Further info from CCCG & Murdoch. 

5.1.2.23 “Augusta” wetlands 





57

DRAFT 






Comments: Wetlands east of river mouth (possibly Emu Springs); further info from Lower Blackwood 

LCDC. 

5.1.2.24 Threatened species 







Comments: None identified at this workshop. 



5.1.2.25 Indigenous heritage 







Comments: SWCC (Zac and his team) to comment 

5.1.2.26 Devil’s Pool 











Comments: On Boodjidup Brook; has had significant investment in weed control (blackberry and fig) in 

accordance with actions identified in RAP. 

5.1.2.27 Unnamed and other small creeks 








5.1.2.28 Geocrinia habitats 










58

DRAFT 



Comments: Further info from recovery plans. 

5.1.2.29 Yallingup Brook 










5.1.3 High Value Assets 

5.1.3.1 Rails to Trails Reserve 

Asset value: High 





Very high level threats: Climate change and pathogens 



High level threats: Introduced species and fire 

Medium to low level threats: Fire management practises; logging and access 

Comments: Environmentally 2 and socially significant. 

5.1.3.2 Cape to Cape Track 






Very high level threats: Climate change and pathogens 

High level threats: Introduced species and fire 




Comments: Further info available from “Friends of the Cape to Cape Track”. 

5.1.3.3 Perched wetlands 









Comments: Example is the one south of the Margaret River golf course; seek info from DEC. 

2 

Environmental significance is only on parts of the reserve. 

59

DRAFT 


5.1.3.4 Lake Davies 







Comments: Near Lake Hamelin; further info from CCCG. 

5.1.3.5 Lindburg Remnant Vegetation 










Very high level threats: Climate change; weeds; water and feral animals (incl. aquatic species such as 

fish and crustaceans) 

High level threats: Land management practises (incl. introduced species and fire) and clearing 


Comments: VERY large block of private land east of lower part of the Blackwood River; further info 

possibly from Lower Blackwood LCDC. Threats are assumed (similar to corridors – 2.1.1.2); makes up a 

significant portion of the Blackwood River corridor but should be considered alongside Boathaugh property 

directly to the north with similar values. Drew has good information about both properties (CCCG). 

5.1.3.6 Witchcliffe Remnant Vegetation 1 










High level threats: Land management practises (incl. introduced species and fire) and clearing 


Comments: VERY large block of private land east of Witchcliffe; further info possibly from Lower 

Blackwood LCDC. Threats are assumed (similar to corridors – 2.1.1.2); this block of state forest was not 

identified on the maps provided by SWCC – needs to be checked. 

5.1.3.7 Witchcliffe Remnant Vegetation 2 










High level threats: Land management practises (incl. introduced species and fire); clearing and leaching 

from tip (also a health issue) 


60

DRAFT 


Comments: High quality patch south and east of Witchcliffe tip. Threats are assumed (similar to corridors 

– 2.1.1.2); see also Chapman Brook management plan for possible further info. 

5.1.3.8 Gunyulgup Brook 








5.1.3.9 Wyadup Brook 












5.1.3.10 West Bay Creek 










5.1.3.11 Environmental awareness of community 










5.1.3.12 Weed-free areas 









Comments: Example would be to set up containment lines, e.g. east of highway for arum lily; 

further info from CCCG. 

61

Asset identifiable 

SMART goal possible 

Technol. Feasible 

Private participation likely 

Public participation likely 

TOTAL SCORE 

DRAFT 


The following table shows the ranked/scored assets (also available as an Excel spreadsheet): 

No. and Name of asset 

Asset 

Value 

E=Exceptional=5 

VH=Very High=3 

H=High=1 

Level of 

Threat 

VH=Very 

High=4 

H=High=3 

M=Moderate=2 

L=Low=4 

U=Unknown=0 

Other Scores 

If yes, score 1 

If no, score 0 

Cape to Cape workshop 

5.1.1.1 Leeuwin National Park 5.0 4.0 1.0 10.0 

5.1.1.12 Water Point No. 4 5.0 3.0 1.0 9.0 

5.1.1.9 Caves 5.0 3.0 0.5 8.5 

5.1.1.8 Coastline - sections with easy access 5.0 3.0 0.5 8.5 

5.1.1.10 Healthy trees 5.0 3.0 0.5 8.5 

5.1.1.4 Hardy Inlet 5.0 2.0 1.0 8.0 

5.1.1.2 7 Wildlife Corridors 5.0 2.0 1.0 8.0 

5.1.1.7 Remnant vegetation on public land 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.1.1.6 Blackwood River 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.1.1.5 Groundwater aquifers 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.1.1.3 Margaret River & its catchment 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.1.1.13 Water volume and quality 5.0 2.0 0.0 7.0 

5.1.1.11 Flinders Bay 5.0 2.0 0.0 7.0 

5.1.2.2 Agricultural soils 3.0 2.0 0.5 5.5 

5.1.2.1 Permanent pools 3.0 2.0 0.5 5.5 

5.1.2.4 Barrabup pools 3.0 1.0 4.0 

5.1.2.3 Lake Jingi 3.0 1.0 4.0 

5.1.2.26 Devil's Pool 3.0 1.0 4.0 

5.1.2.23 “Augusta” wetlands 3.0 1.0 4.0 

5.1.2.21 Leeuwin springs 3.0 1.0 4.0 

5.1.2.20 Gingilup swamps 3.0 1.0 4.0 

5.1.2.18 Kilcarnup wetland 3.0 1.0 4.0 

5.1.2.9 Biljedup Brook 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.8 Wilyabrup Brook 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.7 Quinninup Brook 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.6 Calgardup Brook 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.5 McLeod Creek 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.29 Yallingup Brook 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.28 Geocrinia habitats 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.27 Unnamed and other small creeks 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.25 Indigenous heritage 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.24 Threatened species 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.19 Waterways in general 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.16 Remnant vegetation on private land 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.15 Chapman Brook 3.0 0.5 3.5 

62

DRAFT 


5.1.2.14 Scott River 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.13 Turner Brook 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.12 Boodjidup Brook 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.11 Ellen Brook 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.10 Cowaramup Brook 3.0 0.5 3.5 

5.1.2.22 Marine assets impacted by human use 3.0 0.0 3.0 

5.1.2.17 Bird diversity 3.0 0.0 3.0 

5.1.3.7 Witchcliffe Remnant Vegetation 2 1.0 1.0 2.0 

5.1.3.6 Witchcliffe Remnant Vegetation 1 1.0 1.0 2.0 

5.1.3.5 Lindburg Remnant Vegetation 1.0 1.0 2.0 

5.1.3.4 Lake Davies 1.0 1.0 2.0 

5.1.3.2 Cape to Cape Track 1.0 1.0 2.0 

5.1.3.1 Rails to Trails Reserve 1.0 1.0 2.0 

5.1.3.9 Wyadup Brook 1.0 0.5 1.5 

5.1.3.8 Gunyulgup Brook 1.0 0.5 1.5 

5.1.3.3 Perched wetlands 1.0 0.5 1.5 

5.1.3.10 West Bay Creek 1.0 0.5 1.5 

5.1.3.12 Weed-free areas 1.0 0.0 1.0 

5.1.3.11 Environmental awareness of community 1.0 0.0 1.0 

5.2 Workshop with Leschenault Catchment Group 

Held on 4 th April 2011 at the Department of Water offices in Bunbury. Assets were identified and scored 

as being exceptionally valuable, very highly valuable or highly valuable, and are listed under those 

three headings, but not in any particular order. 





DRAFT 


Likely private intervention if required: xx 

Likely public intervention if required: xx 

Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; introduced species; weeds; feral 

animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on banks; land management practises; 

bushfires; human use; pollution; water extraction; dams; gas extraction (fracking); erosion; salinity; falling 

water tables (groundwater); illegal human activities; pollution (nutrients); edge effect; dogs; cats; human 

population growth and pressure. 

Comments: Refers to its recreational and social values; range of ecotypes, represents a contiguous tract 

of land extending from the western bank of the Preston River to the coast. 

5.2.1.3 Dune system west of Leschenault Inlet 




SMART goal for actions: xx 

Will proposed action make real difference: xx 




animals; development; clearing; degradation of vegetation through human use; fire management 

practises; fire and human use 

Comments: None. 

5.2.1.4 Preston River 


Threat score: Very High 






Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; weeds; land management practises; fire management 

practises and bushfires; stock access and salinity 

Comments: Pathogens, water stress, vegetation structure, water quality (nutrients) all factors in decline; 

still has freshwater oysters, mussels and mayflies (4 species). 

5.2.1.5 Flooded gums 


Asset identifiable: Partially (thru’ veg mapping) 







animals; development; clearing; degradation of vegetation through human use; land & fire management 

practises; dams; water extraction; bushfires; erosion; salinity; lerps and human use 

Comments: High mortality causing river blockage and diversion, erosion and siltation. Loss of over-story 

causing a loss of habitat, loss of shade resulting in rising water temperatures. Concern that some 

populations north of collie may be E. camaldulensis.. 

5.2.1.6 State Forest 


Asset identifiable: Yes, but diverse 




Threat score: Low 


64

DRAFT 



animals; clearing; land & fire management practises; bushfires; logging; human use (uncontrolled access 

and mining); pollution; water extraction; dams; gas extraction (fracking); urban development; erosion; 

salinity; logging; lack of consultation; lack of transparency; no public record of flora and fauna; lack of 

balance between environment and economics; mining. 

Comments: Carbon and ecosystem services, aesthetics, biodiversity, heritage, recreation, tourism, 

spiritual, weather. 80% of the shire of collie is state forest or national park, poor management practices 

resulting in loss of high quality trees. 

5.2.1.7 Banksia woodlands on Bassendean sands 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; introduced species; weeds; clearing; 

urban and industrial development; land management practises; clearing; fire management practises; 

bushfires; salinity and human use 


5.2.1.8 Preston River delta 








Identified threats: Realignment of delta. 

Comments: Bird haven, fish nursery and habitat; river may be diverted, but diversion will impact on 

birdlife (“killing” it); salt marsh is in good condition. 

5.2.1.9 Hay Park wetlands, Bunbury 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; weeds; feral animals; fire management practises and 

human use 

Comments: Valued for its biodiversity, remnant vegetation and wetland characteristics; paperbarks; 

federally listed; owned by City; has cockatoos and possums. 

5.2.1.10 Community groups 



Asset identifiable: Yes (but not by GIS) SMART goal for actions: xx 




Identified threats: Funding discontinuity; lack of transparency; loss of knowledge; government policy 

changes; narrowly-targeted funding. 

65

DRAFT 


Comments: If lose these groups, lose expertise, networks and knowledge; loss of funding can lead to loss 

of groups’ activities and impetus, eventual decline of groups. 

5.2.1.11 Leschenault Inlet mangroves 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction; introduced species; development; clearing; 

degradation of vegetation; human use; species loss; algal blooms; heavy industry; vandalism; saltwater 

intrusion; acid suphate issues (anaerobic processes); weeds; rowing club wants them out 

Comments: Southernmost mangroves in world; last remnant of prehistoric distribution; under system 6. 

5.2.1.12 Lake Preston 








Identified threats: Freshwater infiltration on west side of lake, trickling from dunes from underground 

aquifer – urban development on west side may dry out the fresh water infiltration is key threat; climate 

change; weeds; clearing; degradation of vegetation; land management practises; fire management 

practises; extractive industries; market gardens; road through DEC land (access problems) and infiltration 

of seawater 

Comments: Not in Leschenault catchment, but in Peel-Harvey; private landholders; long lake; DEC owns 

foreshore’ Ramsar-listed; saltwater lake (8x seawater levels); lots of birdlife, some remnant vegetation, 

water levels are dropping; outside of catchment but included as an asset. Microbial mats are key asset. 

5.2.1.13 High value agricultural land 








Identified threats: Climate change; weeds; subdivisions; pests and diseases and pollution of water 

Comments: Refers to agricultural land that has access to good water supplies, often of multiple use; 20- 

100 ha minimum size, e.g. on Harvey irrigation scheme. 

5.2.1.14 Leschenault Community Nursery 








Identified threats:Dieback and other pathogens; fire; loss/degradation of vegetation remnants that are 

source of seeds and lack of funding/loss of site 

Comments: Only place that local provenance seedlings can be bought for the Leschenault Catchment; 

also doing research into growing of native orchids; only organisation that grow a large variety of native 

wetland species for rehab projects; major supporter for their land tenure is DoW, who will longer deal in 

NRM; relies on volunteers and is a not for profit organisation. 

66

DRAFT 


5.2.1.15 Loughton Park, Bunbury 








Identified threats:Fire management practises; bushfires and human use 

Comments: Has some rare orchids. 

5.2.1.16 Non-urban wetlands 








Identified threats: Climate change; water extraction; weeds; feral animals; urban development; clearing; 

degradation of vegetation on banks; land management practises; human use; bushfires and pollution. 

Comments: Yourdamung Lake may be of specific interest/value. 

5.2.1.17 Good Quality & Quantity Groundwater 








Identified Threats: Climate change; clearing; land management practices; pollution; water extraction; gas 

extraction (fracking); urban development; erosion; salinity; plantations and logging. 

Comments: A water resource that is at risk of contamination by heavy metals from mining, and 

mismanagement of acid sulphate soils, acidification and other pollutants. 

5.2.1.18 Air and Rainwater Quality 


Asset identifiable: partially 






Identified Threats: Land Management Practices, Pollution, Plantations, Logging 

Comments: WHO compliant atmospheric levels of acid rain producing compounds. Acidic rain of pH 5.5 

present, increase in industrial air pollution will affect all land and human and water resources n the airshed 

areas of the Collie Basin 

5.2.1.19 Sites where previous weed control has been done 








Identified Threats: Introduced species, Weeds, 

Comments: Value of previous weed control investment will be lost if ongoing weed control is not done at 

these sites. 

67

DRAFT 


5.2.1.20 NRM Staff 


Asset identifiable: no 






Identified Threats: Lack of resources, lack of knowledge by Local Govt of role of NRM officers, lack of 

skill development, networking and support, Working in isolation, organisational structure 

Comments: No NRM staff means no NRM projects; needed to support community, Link NRM to 

community. 

5.2.1.21 NRM Positions 






Identified Threats: Lack of continuity, funding 




5.2.1.22 Batalling Reserve 








Identified Threats: Dieback and pathogens; climate change; introduced species; weeds; feral animals; 

land management practices; fire management practices; human use; erosion (soil); salinity; logging; 

conflicting management and recreation. 

Comments: Protected species, heritage value, high biodiversity values, and release site for endangered 

species. 

5.2.1.23 Arcadia Forest 








Identified Threats: Dieback and Pathogens; climate change; introduced species; weeds; feral animals; 

clearing; land management practices; fire management practices; bushfires; human use; pollution; 

degradation of vegetation on river banks; erosion; salinity; plantations; logging and bauxite mining. 

Comments: Suggested it should become part of the Wellington National Park, nature based tourism, 

quokka habitat 

5.2.1.24 Remnant Vegetation on Coastal Plain 








68

DRAFT 



clearing; land management practices; fire management practices; fire; human use; pollution; water 

extraction; urban development and erosion. 

Comments: Urban development pressures – housing, industry & Kemerton (as 80% has been cleared 

what’s left is considered important). 

5.2.1.25 Minninup Pool (on Collie River) 








Identified Threats: Dieback and pathogens; climate change; weeds; human use; degradation of 

vegetation on river banks and salinity. 

Comments: Salinity considered key threatening process to maintain vegetation. 

5.2.1.26 Run-off 








Identified Threats: Climate change; dams; plantations; lack of river flushing; lower level flooding; silting of 

pools. 

Comments: Main issue is small lifestyle dams that abound on lots of small creeks and gullies 

5.2.1.27 High Value Agricultural Land 


Asset identifiable: Dispersed 






Identified Threats: Climate change; weeds; feral animals; clearing; land management practices; fire; 

pollution; urban development; degradation of vegetation on river banks; erosion; salinity; plantations; fire 

management on stubbles; lifestyle development; mining and industry. 

Comments: Needed for food production; aesthetics needs protection by sustainable practices; diversity. 

Inappropriate use or rezoning of assets should be kept for Agricultural production. Loss of financial 

viability for agriculture, resulting in subdivision for housing; plantations; reduced surface water and runoff; 

5.2.1.28 Marine Aquatic Diversity (SW) 








Identified Threats: Climate change; introduced species and pollution. 

Comments: Also should include Dive sites, e.g. Lina 

5.2.1.29 Waterways and Tributaries (including creeks) 



69

DRAFT 







Identified Threats: Dieback and pathogens; climate change; introduced species; weeds; clearing; land 

management practices; human use; pollution; water extraction; dams; urban development; degradation of 

vegetation on river banks; erosion; salinity; plantations and logging. 

Comments: those on the coastal plain considered to have higher degree of threats than those in the 

scarp, however considered together as one asset. 

5.2.1.30 The Coast 








Identified Threats: Climate change; introduced species; weeds; feral animals; clearing; land 

management practices; fire management practices; human use; pollution; urban development; erosion; 

4wd recreation; over fishing; rubbish; lack of controlled access; sea level rises; desalination plant; 

dredging and canal developments. 

Comments: Iconic, tourism, recreations, biodiversity, aesthetic values. 

5.2.1.31 EPP Conservation Category Wetlands 








Identified Threats: None specifically identified during workshop. 

Comments: Asset identified at end of workshop as a missing value. 

5.2.1.32 Water Resources for Agriculture 



Asset identifiable: Yes, but limited 





Identified Threats: Urban development and plantations. 

Comments: Allocations limiting development; industry and mining are priority; plantations not requiring 

water allocations. 

5.2.1.33 Good Quality Wetlands near populated areas 








Identified Threats: Climate change; introduced species; weeds; clearing; land management practices; 

fire management practices; pollution; water extraction and urban development. 

70

DRAFT 


Comments: Degraded wetlands haven no natural predators for mosquitoes (RRvirus and Barnah Forest 

Virus, very low pH water renders chemical control ineffective. 

5.2.1.34 Remnant Vegetation with rare flora and fauna 



Asset identifiable: Partially 






clearing; land management practices; fire management practices; fire; human use; pollution; urban 

development; degradation of vegetation on river banks; erosion and salinity. 


5.2.1.35 Land for Wildlife Sites 









clearing; land management practices; fire management practices; fire; human use; urban development; 

degradation of vegetation on river banks; erosion and salinity. 

Comments: Lack of funding for landowners and project coordinators is issue 

5.2.1.36 Collie River, lower sections from Wellington dam down 










extraction; dams; urban development; degradation of vegetation on river banks; erosion; salinity; logging; 

boating traffic; stock access; nutrients; siltation; over-fishing and recreation. 

Comments: Values include tourism, water resource, aesthetic, recreation and biodiversity. 

5.2.1.37 Brunswick River 








Identified Threats: Dieback and pathogens; climate change; introduced species; weeds; clearing; human 

use; pollution; dams; degradation of vegetation on river banks; erosion (from stock) salinity; plantations 

and logging. 

Comments: Has saline, brackish and fresh waters 

5.2.1.38 Harris River Dam Catchment (incl Lake Ballingal) 



71

DRAFT 







Identified Threats: Dieback and pathogens; climate change; weeds and logging. 

Comments: Has a fully forested catchment. 


5.2.2.1 Lake Kepwari 

Asset value: Very High 







Identified threats: None specifically identified during workshop. 

Comments: Near Collie – is an open pit, disused; valued for recreation; can be trashed; 100 ha and 75m 

deep, man-made asset; South West Development Commission and others have been trying for years to 

get this going. 

5.2.2.2 Dolphin nurseries 






Identified threats: Human use (boating, ships). 



Comments: Mainly refers to Koombana Bay, which has high tourist value; also a valuable nursery site for 

the species as shallow and protected. 

5.2.2.3 Kemerton wetlands 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction; weeds; industrial development; clearing; 

degradation of vegetation on banks; land management practises; fire management practises; plantations 

and human use (uncontrolled access). 

Comments: Degradation is linked to land management practises. 

Feasibility: See Infrastructure Plan – zoned as heavy industrial area, therefore priorities lie elsewhere; 

socially acceptable; monitoring only scheduled to be “in-house”. 

5.2.2.4 Ecosystem Interdependency 








72

DRAFT 


Identified Threats: Dieback and pathogens; climate change; clearing; urban development; degradation of 

vegetation on river banks; erosion; salinity; plantations and logging. 

Comments: Within catchment, the current high degree of fragmentation and need to reconnect corridors 

focusing on waterways, need to extend Ocean to Preston Regional Park to the ocean and to Collie hills 

and beyond. 

5.2.2.5 Benger Swamp 








Identified Threats: Climate change; weeds (Typha); feral animals (pigs); fire; human use; pollution and 

water extraction. 

Comments: Main impacts are from climate change and reduced drainage. 

5.2.2.6 Reefs off Back beach 






Identified Threats: Climate change; human use and pollution. 




5.2.2.7 Poorly Reserved Coal Basin Vegetation 









clearing; land and fire management practices. 

Comments: Unique veg complexes and poorly reserved, hence security isn’t guaranteed. 

5.2.2.8 Remnant Vegetation on Scarp 









clearing; land management practices; fire management practices; fire; human use; pollution and urban 

development. 


5.2.2.9 Remnant vegetation 






73

DRAFT 




Identified threats: 

Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; introduced species; weeds; urban development; clearing; 

land management practises; fire management practises; salinity; bushfires and human use. 

Comments: Ecologically and socially important; mainly for biodiversity; used as corridors and for 

reproduction by certain species; bits worth protecting are rare and often small. 

5.2.2.10 Water Resources for Environmental Flows 









Comments: Asset identified at end of workshop as a missing value. 

5.2.2.11 Road Reserve Corridors 









clearing; land management practices; fire management practices; human use; pollution; urban 

development; erosion; salinity; water logging; lack of education/training in local government; lack of 

identification; mapping and protection. 

Comments: Whole SW region, often only remnant native vegetation left, wildlife corridors, containing 

protected vegetation, high biodiversity. 

5.2.2.12 Local Reserves – Shire Managed 









clearing; land management practices; fire management practices; fire; human use; pollution; urban 

development; degradation of vegetation on river banks. 

Comments: important for local biodiversity hotspots, and community focus (friends of groups). 

5.2.2.13 Noneycup Creek - Donnybrook 








74

DRAFT 



clearing; land management practices; fire management practices; human use; pollution; water extraction; 

dams; gas extraction (fracking); urban development; degradation of vegetation on river banks; erosion; 

salinity. 

Comments: Other pressure includes industry along creek. The creek is the only recharge for the 3 bores 

that supply Donnybrook with its drinking water. 

5.2.2.14 Balingup Brook 









clearing; land management practices; fire management practices; human use; pollution; water extraction; 

dams; urban development; degradation of vegetation on river banks; erosion and salinity. 

Comments: Directly feeds into the Blackwood, has aesthetic values. 

5.2.2.15 Beaufort, Arthur and Hillman Rivers 









management practices; fire management practices; human use; pollution; water extraction; urban 

development; degradation of vegetation on river banks; erosion and salinity. 


5.2.2.16 Haddleton Reserve 









clearing; land management practices; fire management practices; human use; erosion and salinity. 


5.2.2.17 Lake Towerrinning 








Identified Threats: Dieback and pathogens; climate change; weeds; feral animals; land management 

practices; fire management practices; human use; pollution; degradation of vegetation on river banks; 

erosion; salinity. 

Comments: Recreational values as well. 

75

DRAFT 


5.2.2.18 Eelup Wetland, Eaton (EPP listed, next to Collie River) 








Identified Threats: Climate change; introduced species; weeds; feral animals; land management 

practices; pollution; urban development; salinity. 

Comments: Urban development is main threat. Eelup is part of the wetland chain following the Collie 

River. 

5.2.2.19 Upper Collie River (above Wellington Dam) 









land management practices; fire management practices; human use; pollution; degradation of vegetation 

on river banks; erosion; salinity; logging; mining; industry; access. 

Comments: Values – Biodiversity, Water resources, Tourism, recreation. 











extraction; dams; urban development; degradation of vegetation on river banks; erosion; logging; stock 

access; nutrients; siltation; water logging; overfishing; acidification. 

Comments: Values – recreation, irrigation, biodiversity, tourism. 

5.2.2.21 Groundwater 








Identified Threats: Climate change; clearing; land management practices; pollution; water extraction; 

dams; urban development; erosion; salinity; plantations; logging; lack of regulation; over allocation; 

nitrification; lack of knowledge regarding extraction and recharge; lack of water conservation measures; 

acidification. 

Comments: Major source of water for biodiversity and food production 

5.2.2.22 Crooked Brook Reserve 






76

DRAFT 




Identified Threats: Dieback and pathogens; weeds; land management practices; fire management 

practices; human use. 

Comments: none 


5.2.3.1 Leschenault Inlet / Estuary 








Identified threats: Pollution (nutrients, plastics); climate change; water extraction; introduced species 

(e.g. Caulerpa); feral animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on banks (erosion 

through boating traffic); land management practises; fire management practises; human use; species loss; 

algal blooms; heavy industry; vandalism; saltwater intrusion; acid sulphate issues (anaerobic processes); 

weeds (Patterson’s Curse, Cape tulip); logging; management of riparian zones; over-fishing; poorly 

maintained watercraft; market gardens with poor practices; lack of ownership and responsibility; change of 

zonings; high populations and density and mass tourism. 

Comments: There is an accretion of sediment on eastern side as compared to being sandy flats in 50s- 

60s; losing crabs (now no longer crab fishing); areas north of Inlet have been downgraded from being for 

conservation use to multiple use; holistic asset of whole estuary, sustainability attributes need to be 

included in development, considered an icon for tourism, recreation, biodiversity. 

Feasibility: Need to know who is responsible for what (grey area); very costly; socially important and 

acceptable; WQIP will give further information; technical fixes available. 

5.2.3.2 Wetland on East side of Old Coast Rd 








Identified threats: Water extraction; introduced species; weeds; feral animals; land management 

practises; fire management practises; fire and human use (uncontrolled/unmanaged access) 

Comments: Opposite Galty’s farm, DEC wetland, nature reserve, at moment is a mess. 

5.2.3.3 Tuart Forest, South Bunbury 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; introduced species; weeds; feral animals and human 

use (uncontrolled access and domestic animals (cats, birds) 

Comments: Wetland that is under threat (management shared by Bunbury and Capel); value mainly as a 

recreational asset and educational tool for community; bush is wrecked (no conservation value), although 

the coastal dune and coastal shrub ecosystem is good. 

77

DRAFT 


5.2.3.4 Reef off Binninup 






Identified threats: None identified at workshop. 



Comments: There is a “Friends of” group; Harvey shire responsible for protection of foreshore; used for 

fishing crayfish. 

5.2.3.5 Riparian Vegetation in Plantations 








Identified Threats: Clearing; plantations; logging. 


5.2.3.6 Isolated Paddock Trees 






Threat score: Very high 


Identified Threats: Dieback and pathogens; climate change; introduced species; land management 

practices; urban development; soil compaction; acidification; herbicides; insects; rising water tables. 

Comments: Biodiversity, shelter, aesthetics. 

5.2.3.7 Blackberry Containment Line 








Identified threats: Lack of funding (continuity); politics; should be funded by the Commonwealth 

government through the State. 


5.2.3.8 Wellington Dam 








Identified threats: Lack of funding (continuity); politics; should be funded by the Commonwealth 

government through the State 


78

DRAFT 


5.2.3.9 Wetlands surrounded by suburbs 








Identified Threats: Climate change; introduced species; weeds; feral animals; human use; pollution; acid 

sulphates; heavy metal contaminations; unfiltered storm water-runoff. 

Comments: If classified multiple use, protected to some degree by exiting policy. 

5.2.3.10 Organic Food Production 






Identified Threats: none identified. 

Threat score: Not determined 


Comments: Was initially stated as increasing organic food production, however that is an action, the 

asset was considered to be organic food production. 

5.2.3.11 Leschenault Estuary – Biota, Flora, Fauna, Fish, Birds 









management practices; human use; pollution; water extraction; dams; urban development; degradation of 

vegetation on river banks; erosion and salinity. 

Comments: Water quality issues in estuary are important to maintain biota and food chain 

5.2.3.12 Leschenault Estuary and associated Vegetation complexes 









management practices; human use; pollution; urban development; degradation of vegetation on river 

banks and salinity. 

Comments: Vegetation is not protected and valued, esp. by local government, fringes of estuary still 

being cleared for urban and industrial development, no management occurring. 

5.2.3.13 Good Quality Surface Water (especially East of Collie) 








Identified Threats: Climate change; clearing; land management practices; dams; salinity and plantations. 

79

DRAFT 


Comments: Plantations an issue to manage quality and quantity issues. 

5.2.3.14 Native Freshwater Fish 


Asset identifiable: Not compete 






Identified Threats: Climate change; feral animals; pollution; water extraction; dams; urban development; 

degradation of vegetation on river banks; erosion and salinity. 


5.2.3.15 Collie Groundwater 






Threat score: not determined 


Identified Threats: Land management practices pollution; water extraction; mining; changing hydrological 

balances. 

Comments: Outflows from highly contaminated aquifers risk contaminating receiving bodies with heavy 

metals. 

5.2.3.16 Small Geographe Wineries 







Threat score: Not determined 


Comments: Not in Leschenault catchment; considered by some as a threat rather than an asset: group 

thought that this was an asset for owners improving the surrounds and bringing visitors into the area. 

5.2.3.17 Myalup Lagoon 









Comments: Not in Leschenault catchment; wetland east side of old coast road (north of buffalo road and 

treasure road) 

5.2.3.18 Tuart Forest south of Bunbury 








80






DRAFT 



Comments: Asset identified at end of workshop as a missing value 

5.2.3.19 Transition Vegetation (jarrah to Wheatbelt) 








Identified Threats: Dieback and Pathogens; climate change and clearing. 

Comments: Transition zone from jarrah forest to wandoo woodlands and Wheatbelt vegetation 



Asset 

Value 



H=High=1 

Level of 

Threat 

VH=Very 

High=4 

H=High=3 

M=Moderate=2 

L=Low=4 

U=Unknown=0 




Leschenault workshop 

5.2.1.1 Leschenault Estuary (recreational & social values) 5 4 1.0 

5.2.1.2 Ocean to Preston Regional Park 5 4 1.0 

5.2.1.3 Dune system west of Leschenault Inlet 5 4 1.0 

5.2.1.4 Preston River 5 4 1.0 

5.2.1.5 Flooded gums 5 4 1.0 

5.2.1.6 State Forest 5 4 1.0 

5.2.1.7 Banksia woodlands on Bassendean sands 5 4 1.0 

5.2.1.8 Preston River delta 5 4 1.0 

5.2.1.9 Hay Park wetlands, Bunbury 5 4 0.5 9 

5.2.1.10 Community groups 5 4 0.5 9 

5.2.1.11 Leschenault Inlet mangroves 5 4 0.5 9 

5.2.1.12 Lake Preston 5 4 0.5 9 

5.2.1.13 High value agricultural land 5 4 0.5 9 

5.2.1.14 Leschenault Community Nursery 5 4 0.5 9 

5.2.1.15 Loughton Park, Bunbury 5 4 0.5 9 

5.2.1.16 Non-urban wetlands` 5 4 0.5 9 

5.2.1.17 Good Quality & Quantity Groundwater 5 4 0.5 9 

5.2.1.18 Air and Rainwater Quality 5 4 0.5 9 

81

DRAFT 


5.2.1.19 Sites where previous weed control has been done 5 4 0.5 9 

5.2.1.20 NRM Staff 5 3 1.0 

5.2.1.21 NRM Positions 5 3 1.0 

5.2.1.22 Batalling Reserve 5 4 0.0 

5.2.1.23 Arcadia Forest 5 3 1.0 

5.2.1.24 Remnant Vegetation on Coastal Plain 5 4 0.0 

5.2.1.25 Minninup Pool (on Collie River) 5 4 0.0 

5.2.1.26 Run-off 5 3 1.0 

5.2.1.27 High Value Agricultural Land 5 3 1.0 

5.2.1.28 Marine Aquatic Diversity (SW) 5 3 0.5 8 

5.2.1.29 Waterways and Tributaries (including creeks) 5 3 0.5 8 

5.2.1.30 The Coast 5 3 0.5 8 

5.2.1.31 EPP Conservation Category Wetlands 5 3 0.5 8 

5.2.1.32 Water Resources for Agriculture 5 3 0.5 8 

5.2.1.33 Good Quality Wetlands near populated areas 5 4 1.0 

5.2.1.34 Remnant Vegetation with rare flora and fauna 5 4 1.0 

5.2.1.35 Land for Wildlife Sites 5 4 1.0 

5.2.1.36 Collie River, lower sections from Wellington dam 

down 5 4 1.0 

5.2.1.37 Brunswick River 5 2 1.0 

5.2.1.38 Harris River Dam Catchment (incl Lake Ballingal) 5 3 0.0 

5.2.2.1 Lake Kepwari 3 2 1.0 

5.2.2.2 Dolphin nurseries 3 3 0.0 

5.2.2.3 Kemerton wetlands 3 4 0.5 7 

5.2.2.4 Ecosystem Interdependency 3 4 0.5 7 

5.2.2.5 Benger Swamp 3 4 0.5 7 

5.2.2.6 Reefs off Back beach 3 4 0.5 7 

5.2.2.7 Poorly Reserved Coal Basin Vegetation 3 2 0.5 5 

5.2.2.8 Remnant Vegetation on Scarp 3 3 1.0 

5.2.2.9 Remnant vegetation 3 4 0.0 

5.2.2.10 Water Resources for Environmental Flows 3 3 1.0 

5.2.2.11 Road Reserve Corridors 3 3 1.0 

5.2.2.12 Local Reserves - Shire Managed 3 3 0.5 6 

5.2.2.13 Noneycup Creek - Donnybrook 3 3 0.5 6 

5.2.2.14 Balingup Brook 3 3 0.5 6 

5.2.2.15 Beaufort, Arthur and Hillman Rivers 3 3 0.5 6 

5.2.2.16 Haddleton Reserve 3 4 1.0 

5.2.2.17 Lake Towerrinning 3 4 1.0 

5.2.2.18 Eelup Wetland, Eaton (EPP listed, next to Collie 

River) 3 4 1.0 

5.2.2.19 Upper Collie River (above Wellington Dam) 3 4 1.0 

5.2.2.20 Preston River 3 3 0.0 

5.2.2.21 Groundwater 3 2 1.0 

5.2.2.22 Crooked Brook Reserve 3 3 0.0 

5.2.3.1 Leschenault Inlet / Estuary 1 4 0.5 5 

5.2.3.2 Wetland on East side of Old Coast Rd 1 2 0.5 3 

5.2.3.3 Tuart Forest, South Bunbury 1 2 0.5 3 

5.2.3.4 Reef off Binninup 1 2 0.5 3 

5.2.3.5 Riparian Vegetation in Plantations 1 3 1.0 

82

DRAFT 


5.2.3.6 Isolated Paddock Trees 1 3 1.0 

5.2.3.7 Blackberry Containment Line 1 3 1.0 

5.2.3.8 Wellington Dam 1 3 0.0 

5.2.3.9 Wetlands surrounded by suburbs 1 2 1.0 

5.2.3.10 Organic Food Production 1 2 1.0 

5.2.3.11 Leschenault Estuary - Biota, Flora, Fauna, Fish, 

Birds 1 2 1.0 

5.2.3.12 Leschenault Estuary and associated Vegetation 

complexes 1 3 0.0 

5.2.3.13 Good Quality Surface Water (especially East of 

Collie) 1 2 0.5 3 

5.2.3.14 Native Freshwater Fish 1 2 0.5 3 

5.2.3.15 Collie Groundwater 1 2 0.5 3 

5.2.3.16 Small Geographe Wineries 1 0 1.0 

5.2.3.17 Myalup Lagoon 1 0 0.5 1 

5.2.3.18 Tuart Forest south of Bunbury 1 0 0.0 

5.2.3.19 Transition Vegetation (jarrah to Wheatbelt) 1 

5.3 Workshop with GeoCatch 

Held on 5 th April 2011 at the Community Centre, Busselton. Assets were identified and scored as being 

exceptionally valuable, very highly valuable or highly valuable, and are listed under those three 






DRAFT 


Asset identifiable: No, dispersed 





Identified threats: Climate change; krill harvesting; seismic testing and human use, e.g. boat traffic 


5.3.1.3 State forest 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; pollution; climate change; introduced species; weeds; 

feral animals; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land management practises; erosion; fire 

management practises; salinity; fire and human use 

Comments: Refers to native forests, not plantations. 

5.3.1.4 Meelup Regional Park 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; pollution; climate change; water extraction; introduced 

species; weeds; feral animals; clearing; land and fire management practises; erosion; bushfires and 

human use 

Comments: Rare tree and orchid species; unique vegetation also used for seed collection; high social 

value and recreational value (landscape); A-class reserve; includes Eagle Bay and Castle Bay and the 

environs; iconic beaches. 

5.3.1.5 Dunsborough urban reserves (TECs) 









animals; urban development (and facilitation); clearing; land management practises; fire management 

practises; fire; human use; small patches (edge effect) and bushland reserves used to make cubbies, bike 

tracks etc. 


5.3.1.6 NRM community groups 








Identified threats: Lack of funding and support for projects. 

84

DRAFT 


Comments: Includes historical knowledge; need to be relevant in the “big picture” of regional NRM; 

includes Friends of Breadwater Beach; Wonnerup residents; Dunsborough Coast and Landcare group; 

Toby Inlet Catchment Group; FAWNA; LCDCs in Capel, Vasse-Wonnerup, Yallingup, Sussex and 

Donnybrook & Balingup residents. 

5.3.1.7 Wildlife corridors 








Identified threats: Climate change; water extraction; urban development; clearing; degradation of 

vegetation; land management practises; erosion; fire management practises; plantations and human use 

Comments: Essential that we grow the level of corridors to maintain and expand possible access & 

egress for wildlife to encourage population increases and diversity of same. 

5.3.1.8 Black Cockatoos 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; introduced species; urban 

development; clearing; land management practises; fire management practises; bushfires; human use and 

logging 


5.3.1.9 Coastal Peppermint woodlands 









species, weeds; feral animals; urban development; clearing; land management practises; fire 

management practises; degradation of vegetation; human use and clearing (in old part of Busselton) 

Comments: Stronghold of Western Ring-tailed Possum; decline of trees (pathogens); including urban 

populations of possums; also includes other peppermint woodlands away from coast; great opportunity to 

maintain habitat by encouraging eco-parks not only on coast but in most agricultural areas. 

5.3.1.10 Seagrass meadows 


Threat score: Moderate to high 






Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; gas extraction (fracking); urban development; land 

management practises and human use 

85

DRAFT 


Comments: In Geographe Bay; potential for dredging for access to Busselton as a major threat; some 

discussion on level of threat, with some saying that there is no scientific basis for allocating more than a 

“low” threat score. 

5.3.1.11 Migratory birds 








Identified threats: Pollution and waste materials; climate change; water extraction; urban development; 

degradation of vegetation; land management practises; salinity; bushfires and human use 


5.3.1.12 Iconic beaches 






Likely private intervention if required: Yes 


Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; urban development; land management practises; erosion 

and human use 

Comments: Meelup, Eagle Bay, Castle Bay and Bunkers. 

5.3.1.13 Yallingup siding 









animals; clearing; land management practises; fire management practises; fire and human use 

Comments: Rails to Trails. 

5.3.1.14 Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge 









species; dams; weeds; feral animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river 

banks; land management practises; erosion; fire management practises; fire; plantations; human use; 

logging 

Comments: Refers to areas outside of national park. 

5.3.1.15 Happy Valley Forest 





86

DRAFT 





Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; weeds; land management practises; 

fire management practises; mining 

Comments: Not in GeoCatch catchment; very valuable as EPA has deemed it too exceptional to mine – 

see also BMax mining proposal. 

5.3.1.16 Urban populations of Western Ring-Tailed Possum 


Threat score: Moderate to high 

Asset identifiable: No, dispersed 





Identified threats: Climate change; feral animals; urban development; clearing; land management 

practises; fire management practises; human use; lack of community understanding and peppermint 

decline 


5.3.1.17 Vegetated streams 










banks; land management practises; erosion; fire management practises; salinity and human use 

Comments: Includes revegetation. 

5.3.1.18 Patch of State forest 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; feral animals and fire. 

Comments: Refers to an identified Quokka habitat north of Margaret River managed by DEC. 

5.3.1.19 Ironstone TECs 







Likely public intervention if required: Yes 

Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; water extraction; introduced species; 

weeds; mining; gas extraction (fracking); feral animals; clearing; land management practises; fire 

management practises; fire and human use 


87

DRAFT 


5.3.1.20 Underwater Observatory 






Identified threats: Pollution and climate change 




5.3.1.21 Ambergate Reserve 









weeds; feral animals; land management practises; fire management practises; salinity; human use and 

uncontrolled fires 

Comments: 90% TECs with 3-5 DRF species (declared rare flora); well near car park 50m up walking trail 

is fresh in top 1m, deeper is salty (seawater level); shire reserve, managed by Busselton Naturalist Club – 

needs ongoing management, very high social values (2-4000 visitors annually), also educational values. 

5.3.1.22 Spearwood Swamp 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; introduced aquatic species; weeds; 

feral animals; degradation of vegetation on river banks; erosion; fire management practises; salinity; 

bushfires; human use (4WDs; motorbikes; horticultural gardens) 

Comments: On Lower Blackwood; has both white-bellied and orange-bellied frogs. 

5.3.1.23 Walburra Reserve 









animals; land and fire management practises; fire and human use 


5.3.1.24 Coastal walk trails 








88

DRAFT 



animals; fire management practises; fire and human use (littering and camping) 

Comments: Cape to Cape and in Meelup Regional Park. 

5.3.1.25 Western Ring-Tailed Possum core habitat 








Identified threats: Climate change; weeds feral animals; urban development; clearing; land management 

practises; fire management practises; fire; human use; peppermint decline; lack of connectivity; smaller 

lots in new subdivisions and lack of knowledge 

Comments: Refers to peppy woodlands. 

5.3.1.26 Fishing in the Bay 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; introduced species; urban development; degradation of 

vegetation on beach; land management practises and human use 

Comments: Refers to recreational values, e.g. fishing for blue manna crabs, herring, whiting and squid; 

also educational and recreational opportunities; commercial fishing affects the recreational values; huge 

tourism drawcard; management of seagrass as nursery included. 

5.3.1.27 Cape Naturaliste Precinct 









animals; urban development; clearing; land management practises; fire management practises; fire and 

human use 

Comments: Important tourism and environmental asset. 

5.3.1.28 Endemic and rare flora 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; pollution; climate change; introduced species; pollution; 

water extraction; weeds; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land 

management practises; fire management practises and human use 


89

DRAFT 


5.3.1.29 Wetlands 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; pollution (nutrient run-off); degradation 

of vegetation on banks; drainage; weeds; land management practises (grazing) 

Comments: Likely to be some very good ones, but needs to be studied to identify them. One set of 

important wetlands is located on private land in triangle between Stratham-Boyanup Rd, Preston River 

and SW Highway; of value to birds, many on private land; excludes Vasse-Wonnerup, Broadwater and 

Toby’s Inlet (dealt with separately); all need to be further studied for functional values; drainage reform 

needed – before drains, green grass most of year and now cut hay 4-6 weeks earlier than then, resulting 

in less and poorer growth in cold season. 

5.3.1.30 Groundwater quality 








Identified threats: Water extraction; introduced species; land management practises; salinity and human 

use 


5.3.1.31 Yarragadee aquifer 








Identified threats: Climate change; water extraction and salinity (if pumped, saline water from Leederville 

will enter aquifer; also saltwater intrusion will increase 

Comments: Threat score goes to “very high” if proposed water extraction plans go ahead; linked to 

Leederville aquifer. 

5.3.1.32 Sabina River 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction; introduced species; dams; weeds; feral 

animals (aquatic and others; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; 

farming and land management practises; erosion and human use 

Comments: Is an Indigenous trading route, so valuable; many catchment rivers are also tribal boundaries. 

5.3.1.33 Capel River 



90

DRAFT 








species (redfin perch); dams; weeds; feral animals (pigs in upper reaches); urban development; clearing; 

degradation of vegetation on river banks; land management practises; erosion; fire management 

practises; salinity; fire; plantations; human use and logging 

Comments: Fed by Yarragadee, therefore permanent; has mussels and marron. 

5.3.1.34 Ludlow River 








Identified threats: Climate change; water extraction; introduced species; weeds; feral animals (pigs); 

degradation of vegetation on river banks; farming / land management practises and human use 

Comments: Exceptional because of its fish fauna – redfin perch is a threat. 

5.3.1.35 Vasse River 









animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; farming and land 

management practises; erosion; salinity; human use; nutrients 

Comments: The Lower Vasse River was also discussed but assigned same scores, values and threats, 

so included here. 

5.3.1.36 All waterways 








Identified threats: Climate change; Water extraction; weeds; degradation of vegetation on river banks; 

land management practises; erosion (particularly on slopes; drainage network and fire management 

practises 

Comments: Ludlow important for fish; Capel for mussels etc.;

DRAFT 



species; weeds; feral animals; erosion; fire management practises; salinity; fire; human use; mining; 

increasing kangaroo densities and logging 


5.3.1.38 Ludlow Tuart Forest 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; introduced species; weeds (including 

pasture grasses); feral animals; clearing; fire management practises; human use; kangaroos (at a 

historical high, wipe out understorey); lack of funding for DEC; mining and plantations (DECs pine 

plantations); over-use (abstraction) of groundwater might cause saline intrusion. 

Comments: Tuarts require really hot fire to reproduce, as seeds fall into and germinate in ash bed where 

no other competition; only very old trees produce seed; forest now dominated by young trees and 

peppermints; conflict between need to protect peppermints (for possums – community pressure) vs. need 

for hot fires that kills peppermints. 

5.3.1.39 Remnant vegetation on Coastal Plain 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens (most important); climate change; water extraction; 

introduced species; weeds; feral animals; urban development; fire management practises; salinity; 

bushfires; drainage and human use 

Comments: Includes both public and private remnants; main value as an ecosystem and potentially as a 

corridor; also as seed collection source. 









Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; water extraction; introduced species 

(fox); weeds (dodder vine, pest grasses, fruit trees); feral animals; land management practises 

(monocultures); erosion; fire management practises; bushfires and lack of connectivity to other remnant 

vegetation patches 

Comments: Seed collection source. 

5.3.1.41 Road verges with intact remnant vegetation 








92

DRAFT 



species; weeds; feral animals; clearing; land management practises; erosion; fire; plantations; domestic 

animals (cattle, sheep etc.), where allowed to graze; realignment of roads with consequent clearing and 

human use (population increase) 

Comments: Lack of public understanding of value for biodiversity along roadsides etc. LGAs appear to 

look more at safety than the broader socio-cultural issues. 

5.3.1.42 Community landcare nurseries 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; fire; loss/degradation of vegetation remnants that are 

source of seeds and lack of funding 

Comments: Refers mainly to the Geographe community landcare nursery; value is mainly as source of 

seedlings of local provenance. 

5.3.1.43 Productive agricultural land 








Identified threats: Climate change; land and fire management practises; introduced species; weeds; feral 

animals; clearing; water extraction; development (subdivisions); mining; salinity; erosion; plantations and 

human use 

Comments: Should be protected for long-term food production; is part of the environment, but can be a 

liability if not managed correctly. 

5.3.1.44 Tourism 








Identified threats:Climate change; pollution; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation; 

erosion; salinity; plantations; human use and logging 

Comments: Can be linked to environmental education. 

5.3.1.45 Lower Blackwood 1 










bushfires; human use (4WDs; motorbikes) 

93

DRAFT 


Comments: Refers to its recreational values for locals (highly valued); see also Spearwood Swamps; has 

good Reedia beds. 

5.3.1.46 Lower Blackwood 2 










bushfires; human use (4WDs; motorbikes) 

Comments: Refers to its biodiversity and natural values; includes a strip 5-10 km wide each side of the 

river. 

5.3.1.47 Geographe Bay 








Identified threats: Pollution (nutrient run-off); climate change; introduced species (continual risk); urban 

development; clearing; land and fire management practises and human use 

Comments: Urban run-off is highest risk; risk also of major urban run-off due to summer storms. 

5.3.1.48 Stirling wetlands 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; introduced species; weeds; feral animals; urban 

development; drainage; salinity; erosion; human use; water management and land management practises 

(many linked to private ownership) 

Comments: Little knowledge of values, so need for surveys; multiple owners makes management 

complicated; reasonable water supply; very heavily grassed at boundaries; less diversity than Vasse- 

Wonnerup. 

5.3.1.49 Vasse-Wonnerup wetlands 








Identified threats: Pollution (nutrients from farming, industry and sewerage); climate change; water 

extraction; introduced species; weeds; feral animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of 

vegetation on banks; land management practises; erosion; fire management practises; salinity; bushfires; 

human use and water level management through floodgates 

Comments: Water level is dropping and greatly impacted by lack of flow of water through the system; 

peppermint decline; State/local laws reduce development threat; as seawater doesn’t come in any more; 

94

DRAFT 


so the salt-tolerant vegetation has disappeared and is replaced with species that require fresher water 

over an 80-year period – if open again, will kill off the latter and should return to original, natural state; bird 

numbers high though some species decreasing; of international significance; environment is degrading. 

5.3.1.50 Beach and dune ecosystem 








Identified threats: Climate change; weeds; urban development (Holy Mile); clearing; land management 

practises (particularly measures to stabilise coast with breakwaters causing sedimentation up-current and 

erosion down-current; erosion and human use 

Comments: Social and recreational values important; buffer against sea level rise. 

5.3.1.51 Wonnerup-Tutunup Railway Reserve 









weeds; feral animals; land management practises; bushfires; human use and fire management practises 

Comments: Full of rare and endangered plants; one of only two corridors across the Swan Coastal Plain 

south of Perth; all fenced off; in spite of 100+ years of continuous burning off annually, STILL important 

flora. 

5.3.1.52 Engaewa habitat 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction; weeds; urban development; clearing; land 

management practises and fire management practises 

Comments: Lack of knowledge about species distribution and biology. 

5.3.1.53 Remnant vegetation on Whicher Range 1 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; water extraction; weeds; feral animals; 

urban development; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land management practises; erosion and 

fire management practises and bushfires 

Comments: Refers to private land only; biodiversity values (cockatoo nesting sites). 

95

DRAFT 


5.3.1.54 Remnant vegetation on Whicher Range 2 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; weeds; feral animals (pigs); clearing 

(mining); fire management practises; human use (motorbikes and 4WDs) and logging (illegal taking of 

firewood) 

Comments: Refers to public land only; problem is poor silvicultural practises; has rare species. 

5.3.1.55 Whicher National Park 



Asset identifiable: xx 






animals; fire management practises; bushfires and human use (illegal firewood/timber harvesting; 4WDs 

and motorbikes) 

Comments: Very rare flora and very diverse. 

5.3.1.56 Toby’s Inlet 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; weeds; feral animals; land management practises; 

clearing; degradation of vegetation on banks; seawater intrusion and human use (jetties etc.) 

Comments: Is saline over summer; very high social value; natural drainage patterns have been severely 

modified leading to less water flow through inlet; adjacent housing development not sewered; restrictions 

to natural tidal flows impacting on water quality in inlet. 

5.3.1.57 Haag Reserve 








Identified threats: Climate change; weeds; land management practises; fire management practises; fire 

and human use 

Comments: Careful intervention needed to maintain Albany Pitcher plant and Dunsborough burrowing 

crayfish; DEC-managed, see the draft Leeuwin-Naturaliste management plan for further information. 

5.3.1.58 Ironstone Gully Falls 






96

DRAFT 




Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; water extraction; introduced species; weeds; feral 

animals; degradation of vegetation on river banks; forest and fire management practises; salinity; fire; 

human use (illegal access) 

Comments: Refers mainly to recreational values; but also ecological, tourism and Indigenous values; 

popular tourism spot and an Aboriginal Heritage site; camping, picnicking, wildflowers. 

5.3.1.59 Carbanup River 









animals; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land management practises; erosion; fire and 

human use 


5.3.1.60 Whicher scarp 









weeds; feral animals; clearing; fire management practises; bushfires; erosion; plantations; logging and 

human use 

Comments: Contains a large proportion of biodiverse flora; vegetated hinterland with visual values; if 

vegetation lost, will affect Geographe Bay catchment. 

5.3.1.61 Groundwater in general 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; pollution; climate change; water extraction; weeds; gas 

extraction (fracking); feral animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; 

land management practises; erosion; fire management practises; salinity; plantations; human use; logging 

and mining 

Comments: Limited follow-up of the amounts of water extracted, i.e. monitoring of amounts of water 

drawn, even where licenses are allocated. 


5.3.2.1 Busselton-Dunsborough Foreshore parks 





97

DRAFT 





Identified threats: Urban development 

Comments: Signal, Barnard; social and recreational value very high. 

5.3.2.2 Wonnerup House 








Identified threats: Urban development; fire and human use 


5.3.2.3 Muddy Lakes 








Identified threats: Climate change (decreasing rainfall); water extraction; introduced species; weeds; 

feral animals; fire management practises; fire and acid sulphate soils. 

Comments: Last mainland population of quokkas on the Swan Coastal Plain; there’s a drain through the 

area removing water; also blister bush is present which keeps people out. 

5.3.2.4 St John’s Brook 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; water extraction; weeds; feral animals; 

fire management practises and fire 

Comments: Not in this catchment, but valued; mooted as a Conservation Park in State forest, not 

gazetted; asset does not include private land. 

5.3.2.5 Capel Nature Reserve 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; weeds; feral animals; fire management practises; 

bushfires and human use (off-road vehicles) 

Comments: Rare orchids – very little known. 

98

DRAFT 


5.3.2.6 Busselton Par 3 golf course 









animals; urban development; clearing; land management practises and human use 

Comments: Vegetation reserves; contains Caladenia procera and ringtail possums and quenda. 

5.3.2.7 Native fauna 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; pollution; climate change; introduced species; feral 

animals; clearing; land management practises and fire 


5.3.2.8 Biodiversity 










banks; land management practises; erosion; fire management practises; salinity; fire; plantations; human 

use; logging 


5.3.2.9 Private land under Conservation Covenant 









animals; clearing; land management practises; fire management practises; fire and human use 


5.3.2.10 Irrigated land 



Asset identifiable: No; dispersed 





Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction; dams; weeds and erosion 

99

DRAFT 


Comments: Used for horticulture and viticulture, i.e. as productive agricultural land. 

5.3.2.11 Holy Mile 









animals; clearing; land management practises; erosion and human use, e.g. tourism practises 


5.3.2.12 Paluslope wetlands 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction; dams; clearing; land management 

practises; fire management practises; salinity; fire; human use; mining and logging 


5.3.2.13 Groundwater-dependent ecosystems 









weeds; land management practises; acid sulphate soils and human use 

Comments: Includes Vasse-Wonnerup wetlands; Peron Reserve (Dunsborough); Quindelup Lake 

Reserve; Fish Nature Reserve (Busselton); Ruabon-Tutunup reserves; Muddy Lake. 

5.3.2.14 Ngilgi Cave 








Identified threats (most important in bold): Pollution; climate change; water extraction; urban 

development and human use 


5.3.2.15 Dunsborough streams 








100

DRAFT 



animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land management 

practises; erosion and human use 

Comments: Dugulup; Jingarmup; Dailadup. 

5.3.2.16 Shipwrecks 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; ocean management practises and human use 


5.3.2.17 Local herbaria 








Identified threats: Urban development and lack of funding (continuity) 

Comments: Threat value questioned; great opportunity to revegetate degraded areas of vegetation with 

local flora. 

5.3.2.18 Marron 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction; introduced species; dams; aquatic weeds; 

gas extraction (fracking); feral animals; urban development; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land 

management practises; erosion; salinity and human use 

Comments: Refers to both the smooth-backed marron and the Dunsborough burrowing crayfish. 

5.3.2.19 Enthusiastic new residents 








Identified threats: Lack of programmes that encourage new participants to engage in NRM projects. 


5.3.2.20 Shire reserves 





101

DRAFT 






animals; urban development; clearing; land management practises; fire management practises; fire; 

human use (illegal access); lack of resources to manage values; not valued enough by the community and 

no formal protection 

Comments: Refers to bushland reserves. 

5.3.2.21 Lamprey 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction; introduced species; dams; degradation of 

vegetation on river banks; land management practises; fire management practises; salinity and bushfires 


5.3.2.22 Frogs 








Identified threats: Pathogens; pollution; climate change; water extraction; introduced species; weeds 

(including aquatic); feral animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; 

land management practises; erosion; fire management practises; salinity; fire; plantations; human use and 

logging 


5.3.2.23 Yoongarillup Reserve 









animals; clearing; land management practises; fire management practises; fire; human use and lack of 

recognition 


5.3.2.24 Native freshwater fish 








102

DRAFT 


Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction; introduced species; dams; degradation of 

vegetation on river banks; land management practises; fire management practises; salinity; fire and 

human use 


5.3.2.25 Rainbow bee-eaters 








Identified threats: Urban development; clearing; land management practises; fire management practises; 

bushfires; lack of knowledge and human use 

Comments: Migratory birds; nesting sites are being lost as suitable sites are often used for development. 

5.3.2.26 Buayanup River 








Identified threats: Pollution; water extraction; introduced species; dams; weeds; feral animals; urban 

development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land management practises; erosion and 

human use 

Comments: Heavily modified (as a drain); upper reaches are in very good condition. 

5.3.2.27 Caravan parks 








Identified threats: Urban development; land management practises; lack of demand and financial profits 

Comments: Refers to those with natural values; very useful as an educational resource for visitors; also 

cultural values. 

5.3.2.28 Chicken Treat Hill 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; pollution; introduced species; weeds; urban 

development; human use; land management practises 

Comments: Refers mainly to cultural values (incl. Indigenous); library reserve; degraded but has 

interesting flora. 

103

DRAFT 


5.3.2.29 Curtis Bay Reserve 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; introduced species; weeds and feral 

animals 


5.3.2.30 Locke Estate 









clearing; land management practises and erosion 



5.3.3.1 Surf spots 






Identified threats: Human use 



Comments: Meelup. Point Piquet; value is for tourism and recreation 

5.3.3.2 NZ Fur Seal colony 






Identified threats: Human use and overfishing 

Comments: None 



5.3.3.3 4-Mile Reef 









Comments: Recreational value and tourism. 

104

DRAFT 


5.3.3.4 Freshwater mussels 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction; introduced species; dams; weeds; gas 

extraction (fracking); urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land 

management practises; erosion; salinity and human use 


5.3.3.5 Salmon migration 








Identified threats: Climate change; introduced species; human use (fishing) 


5.3.3.6 Private wetland blocks 











use; logging 


5.3.3.7 Capel-Boyanup railway reserve 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; weeds and fire management practises 


5.3.3.8 Busselton showgrounds 








Identified threats: Urban development and clearing 


105

DRAFT 


5.3.3.9 Millennium seed bank 









Comments: Rather than identifying threats, this is seen as an opportunity to support future species 

rehabilitation and counter current threats to biodiversity. 

5.3.3.10 Heritage trees 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; water extraction; urban development; 

clearing; land management practises; fire and human use 


5.3.3.11 Boronia Swamps 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction; dams; weeds; feral animals; clearing; land 

management practises; fire management practises; salinity; fire; human use and logging 


5.3.3.12 Natural soaks 








Identified threats: Water extraction; clearing; land management practises; salinity; plantations and 

human use 

Comments: Natural values. 

5.3.3.13 Fry’s Dam 








Identified threats: Climate change; introduced species; clearing; degradation of vegetation on banks; 

land management practises and human use 

Comments: Feeds the Capel River; of high value, needs to be managed better. 

106

DRAFT 


5.3.3.14 Rural hinterland with vegetation 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; introduced species; weeds; clearing; 

land management practises; erosion and salinity 


5.3.3.15 Broadwater Nature Reserve 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction; weeds; feral animals; urban development 

and degradation of vegetation on banks of wetlands 

Comments: Not enough known about threats. 

5.3.3.16 Free campsites on Tuart Drive 











use; logging 

Comments: Tourism asset; provides a rare bushland experience for travellers. 

5.3.3.17 Land for Wildlife properties 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; introduced species; dams; weeds; feral 

animals; land management practises; fire management practises; fire and human use 

Comments: Support for landholders by DEC. 

5.3.3.18 Naturaliste Lighthouse 






Identified threats: Fire and human use 



107






TOTAL SCORE 

DRAFT 


Comments: Tourism asset. 



Asset 

Value 



H=High=1 

Level of 

Threat 

VH=Very 

High=4 

H=High=3 

M=Moderate=2 

L=Low=4 

U=Unknown=0 




GeoCatch workshop 

5.3.1.58 Ironstone Gully Falls 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.57 Haag Reserve 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.56 Toby's Inlet 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.55 Whicher National Park 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.54 Remnant vegetation on Whicher Range 2 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.53 Remnant vegetation on Whicher Range 1 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.51 Wonnerup-Tutunup Railway Reserve 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.5 Dunsborough urban reserves (TECs) 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.4 Meelup Regional Park 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.3 State forest 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.21 Ambergate Reserve 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.20 Underwater Observatory 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.19 Ironstone TECs 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.18 Patch of State forest 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.15 Happy Valley Forest 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.14 Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.13 Yallingup siding 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.1 Sites of Aboriginal significance 5.0 4.0 1.0 10 

5.3.1.9 Coastal Peppermint woodlands 5.0 4.0 0.5 9.5 

5.3.1.7 Wildlife corridors 5.0 4.0 0.5 9.5 

5.3.1.59 Carbanup River 5.0 4.0 0.5 9.5 

5.3.1.52 Engaewa habitat 5.0 4.0 0.5 9.5 

5.3.1.50 Beach and dune ecosystem 5.0 4.0 0.5 9.5 

5.3.1.17 Vegetated streams 5.0 4.0 0.5 9.5 

5.3.1.12 Iconic beaches 5.0 4.0 0.5 9.5 

108

DRAFT 


5.3.1.10 Seagrass meadows 5.0 4.0 0.5 9.5 

5.3.1.8 Black Cockatoos 5.0 4.0 0.0 9 

5.3.1.6 NRM community groups 5.0 4.0 0.0 9 

5.3.1.23 Walburra Reserve 5.0 3.0 1.0 9 

5.3.1.22 Spearwood Swamp 5.0 3.0 1.0 9 

5.3.1.2 Humpback whales, Blue whales and other 

cetaceans 5.0 4.0 0.0 9 

5.3.1.11 Migratory birds 5.0 4.0 0.0 9 

5.3.1.25 Western Ring-Tailed Possum core habitat 5.0 3.0 0.5 8.5 

5.3.1.24 Coastal walk trails 5.0 3.0 0.5 8.5 

5.3.1.16 Urban populations of Western Ring-Tailed 

Possum 5.0 3.0 0.5 8.5 

5.3.2.17 Local herbaria 3.0 4.0 1.0 8 

5.3.1.49 Vasse-Wonnerup wetlands 5.0 2.0 1.0 8 

5.3.1.48 Stirling wetlands 5.0 2.0 1.0 8 

5.3.1.42 Community landcare nurseries 5.0 2.0 1.0 8 

5.3.1.38 Ludlow Tuart Forest 5.0 2.0 1.0 8 

5.3.1.32 Sabina River 5.0 2.5 0.5 8 

5.3.1.28 Endemic and rare flora 5.0 2.0 1.0 8 

5.3.1.27 Cape Naturaliste Precinct 5.0 2.0 1.0 8 

5.3.2.22 Frogs 3.0 4.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.2.21 Lamprey 3.0 4.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.2.20 Shire reserves 3.0 4.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.2.18 Marron 3.0 4.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.2.16 Shipwrecks 3.0 4.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.2.15 Dunsborough streams 3.0 4.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.1.60 Whicher scarp 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.1.47 Geographe Bay 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.1.46 Lower Blackwood 2 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.1.45 Lower Blackwood 1 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.1.43 Productive agricultural land 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.1.41 Road verges with intact remnant vegetation 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.1.39 Remnant vegetation on Coastal Plain 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.1.37 National parks 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.1.36 All waterways 5.0 2.5 0.0 7.5 

5.3.1.35 Vasse River 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.1.34 Ludlow River 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.1.33 Capel River 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.1.31 Yarragadee aquifer 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.1.29 Wetlands 5.0 2.0 0.5 7.5 

5.3.2.19 Enthusiastic new residents 3.0 4.0 0.0 7 

5.3.2.14 Ngilgi Cave 3.0 3.0 1.0 7 

5.3.2.11 Holy Mile 3.0 3.0 1.0 7 

5.3.1.61 Groundwater in general 5.0 2.0 0.0 7 

5.3.1.44 Tourism 5.0 2.0 0.0 7 

5.3.1.40 Remnant vegetation 5.0 2.0 0.0 7 

5.3.1.30 Groundwater quality 5.0 2.0 0.0 7 

5.3.1.26 Fishing in the Bay 5.0 2.0 0.0 7 

5.3.2.13 Groundwater-dependent ecosystems 3.0 3.0 0.5 6.5 

109

DRAFT 


5.3.2.12 Paluslope wetlands 3.0 3.0 0.5 6.5 

5.3.2.9 Private land under Conservation Covenant 3.0 2.0 1.0 6 

5.3.2.6 Busselton Par 3 golf course 3.0 2.0 1.0 6 

5.3.2.5 Capel Nature Reserve 3.0 2.0 1.0 6 

5.3.2.30 Locke Estate 3.0 2.0 1.0 6 

5.3.2.3 Muddy Lakes 3.0 2.0 1.0 6 

5.3.2.29 Curtis Bay Reserve 3.0 2.0 1.0 6 

5.3.2.28 Chicken Treat Hill 3.0 2.0 1.0 6 

5.3.2.23 Yoongarillup Reserve 3.0 2.0 1.0 6 

5.3.2.2 Wonnerup House 3.0 2.0 1.0 6 

5.3.2.1 Busselton-Dunsborough Foreshore parks 3.0 2.0 1.0 6 

5.3.2.4 St John's Brook 3.0 2.0 0.5 5.5 

5.3.2.27 Caravan parks 3.0 2.0 0.5 5.5 

5.3.2.26 Buayanup River 3.0 2.0 0.5 5.5 

5.3.2.25 Rainbow bee-eaters 3.0 2.0 0.5 5.5 

5.3.3.9 Millennium seed bank 1.0 3.0 1.0 5 

5.3.2.8 Biodiversity 3.0 2.0 0.0 5 

5.3.2.7 Native fauna 3.0 2.0 0.0 5 

5.3.2.24 Native freshwater fish 3.0 2.0 0.0 5 

5.3.2.10 Irrigated land 3.0 2.0 0.0 5 

5.3.3.8 Busselton showgrounds 1.0 2.0 1.0 4 

5.3.3.7 Capel-Boyanup railway reserve 1.0 2.0 1.0 4 

5.3.3.3 4-Mile Reef 1.0 2.0 1.0 4 

5.3.3.2 NZ Fur Seal colony 1.0 2.0 1.0 4 

5.3.3.18 Naturaliste Lighthouse 1.0 2.0 1.0 4 

5.3.3.17 Land for Wildlife properties 1.0 2.0 1.0 4 

5.3.3.16 Free campsites on Tuart Drive 1.0 2.0 1 4 

5.3.3.15 Broadwater Nature Reserve 1.0 2.0 1 4 

5.3.3.13 Fry's Dam 1.0 2.0 1.0 4 

5.3.3.11 Boronia Swamps 1.0 2.0 1.0 4 

5.3.3.10 Heritage trees 1.0 3.0 0.0 4 

5.3.3.6 Private wetland blocks 1.0 2.0 0.5 3.5 

5.3.3.4 Freshwater mussels 1.0 2.0 0.5 3.5 

5.3.3.14 Rural hinterland with vegetation 1.0 2.0 0.5 3.5 

5.3.3.12 Natural soaks 1.0 2.0 0.5 3.5 

5.3.3.1 Surf spots 1.0 2.0 0.5 3.5 

5.3.3.5 Salmon migration 1.0 2.0 0.0 3 

5.4 Workshop with Warren Catchment Group 

Held on 8 th April 2011 at the Community Resource Centre, Manjimup. Assets were identified and scored 

as being exceptionally valuable, very highly valuable or highly valuable, and are listed under those three 


The level and likelihood of all threats to the asset as a whole is also scored on the basis of the expected 

level of degradation of the asset in the next 20 years if there is no additional management action. Scores 

are given as being either very high (>75% degradation), high (50-75% degradation), moderate (25-50% 

degradation) or low (

DRAFT 


Useful comment: Historically, catchment groups worked mainly on rivers, revegetating river banks, fencing 

them off, etc. This has changed, and they now work at a broader, landscape scale. 

5.4.1 Exceptional Assets 

5.4.1.1 Lake Muir/Unicup 






Identified Threats: None identified during workshop. 

Comments: Included at end of workshop as a missing asset. 

5.4.1.2 Wilgarup Lake 








5.4.1.3 Remnants on Private Property 







Comments: Highly important connectivity in the upper catchment. 

5.4.1.4 Rivers and Waterways 














Identified Threats: Dieback and other pathogens, climate change; introduced species, weeds, feral 

animals, clearing, land management practices, fire management practices, human use, pollution, water 

extraction, dams, degradation of vegetation on river banks, erosion, salinity, plantations and logging. 


5.4.1.5 Forests 





111

DRAFT 






animals, clearing, land management practices, fire management practices, human use, degradation of 

vegetation on river banks, , plantations, logging and mining. 

Comments: Unique, beauty, old growth, resource, dominates landscape, habitat. 

5.4.1.6 Karri 



Asset identifiable: partially though veg mapping SMART goal for actions: xxx 




Identified Threats: Climate change. 


5.4.1.7 Walpole – Nornalup Inlet 








5.4.1.8 Freshwater permanent streams 










Identified Threats: Climate change; land management practices, human use, pollution, water extraction, 

dams, degradation of vegetation on river banks, erosion, salinity and plantations. 

Comments: Potential threats include mining, bauxite exploration. 

5.4.1.9 Coastal Environment 








Identified Threats: Climate change; human use, pollution, gas extraction (fracking), urban development, 

degradation of vegetation on river banks, erosion, salinity, plantations, logging, overfishing, shipping, 

mining (offshore) and acid sulphate soils. 

Comments: Wilderness, recreation, unique, isolation. 

112

DRAFT 


5.4.1.10 Broke Inlet 








Identified Threats: Dieback and other pathogens, climate change; introduced species (pigs), weeds, feral 

animals, fire management practices, human use, degradation of vegetation on river banks and commercial 

fishing (net). 

Comments: Intact/undisturbed/non modified, unique, totally protected forest catchment. Management of 

the opening is need to let water in and out. 

5.4.1.11 Native Flora and Fauna 









animals, clearing, land management practices, fire management practices, fire, human use, pollution, 

water extraction, dams, urban development, degradation of vegetation on river banks, erosion, salinity, 

plantations, logging and mining. 

Comments: Uniqueness, diversity, degree of threats is concern. 

5.4.1.12 National Parks 










water extraction, degradation of vegetation on river banks, erosion, salinity and acid sulphate. 

Comments: Secure natural assets for biological process and human use (recreation). 

5.4.1.13 Wilderness/Naturalness 










water extraction, urban development, degradation of vegetation on river banks, erosion, salinity, 

plantations, logging. 

Comments: Lots of it, large protected areas, biodiversity and natural beauty. 

113

DRAFT 


5.4.1.14 Soils 








Identified Threats: Dieback and other pathogens, climate change;, weeds, feral animals, clearing, land 

management practices, fire management practices, fire, human use, pollution, water extraction, dams, 

urban development, erosion, salinity, overfishing. 

Comments: Foundation for life, production, economic values. 

5.4.1.15 Productive Agricultural Land 










water extraction, dams, urban development, erosion, salinity, acidity, overspray (fertiliser and pesticide), 

GMO, age of landowners, labour availability. 

Comments: Only makes up 15% of region, very diverse. 

5.4.1.16 Farmers and Knowledge 








Identified Threats: Plantations, polarisation of supermarkets, competition in markets, 

Comments: Ageing and viability issues, money, overseas investments. 

5.4.1.17 Dryland Farming 







Comments: None identified during workshop. 



5.4.1.18 Lakes 








114

DRAFT 



animals, clearing, land management practices, human use, pollution, water extraction, erosion, salinity, 

plantations. changes to hydrology. 

Comments: Migratory bird habitat, recreation. 

5.4.1.19 Yeagerup Dunes 







Comments: included at end of workshop as a missing asset. 

5.4.1.20 Mt Chudalup 








5.4.1.21 Known/Registered Indigenous Sites 








5.4.1.22 Granite Outcrops 








5.4.1.23 Black Point Beach and Surrounds (Points etc) 















115

DRAFT 




Comments: Bird nesting areas and NZ fur seals. 

5.4.1.24 Mouth of Doggerup 








5.4.1.25 Peat Swamps 








5.4.1.26 Groundwater 












Identified Threats: Dieback and other pathogens, climate change; clearing, human use, pollution, water 

extraction, dams, urban development, erosion, salinity, plantations, logging and mining. 


5.4.1.27 Avifauna 










water extraction, dams, urban development, degradation of vegetation on river banks, erosion, salinity and 

logging. 


5.4.1.28 Deep River 



116

DRAFT 








5.4.1.29 Shannon River 








5.4.1.30 Old Growth Forest 


Asset identifiable: Yes, but dispersed & limited 









Identified Threats: Dieback and other pathogens, introduced species, weeds, fire management practices, 

fire, human use and logging. 

Comments: Lack of education and understanding, inadequate funding for research, unlogged but 

managed, access management needed. 

5.4.1.31 Wetlands/habitat 









animals, land management practices, fire management practices, fire, human use, pollution, water 

extraction, dams, urban development, degradation of vegetation on river banks, erosion, salinity, 

plantations and logging. 


5.4.1.32 Unique Flora (Rare and Endemic) 








117

DRAFT 




urban development, degradation of vegetation on river banks, erosion, salinity, plantations and logging. 

Comments: Universal loss of habitat and resulting fragmentation, lack of knowledge and understanding, 

lack of long term strategic approach due to short term funding. 

5.4.1.33 Unique Fauna (Native) Rare and Endangered 










water extraction, dams, urban development, degradation of vegetation on river banks, erosion, salinity, 

logging, fragmentation, apathy, lack of funding. 

Comments: Last stronghold of some endemics, universal loss of habitat and resulting fragmentation, lack 

of knowledge and understanding, lack of long term strategic approach due to short term funding. 

5.4.1.34 Old Trees as Habitat (Public and Private) 








Identified Threats: Clearing, land management practices, fertilizers, stock access. 

Comments: Farmers feel the need to clear. 

5.4.1.35 Local Knowledge and Expertise 








Identified Threats: Transient populations, centralisation of services, cultural shift for next generations, 

lack of funding, lack of NRM support, decreases in volunteerism and ageing populations. 


5.4.1.36 Heathland Patch 








Identified Threats: Climate change; introduced species, weeds – primarily Victorian Tea Tree. 

Comments: East of Lake Mottram Lake in Fink Creek Catchment on private land (east of Thomas Muirs 

Property). 

118

DRAFT 


5.4.1.37 Water Quality and Quantity 










water extraction, dams, gas extraction (fracking), urban development, degradation of vegetation on river 

banks, erosion, salinity, plantations and logging. 


5.4.1.38 Coastal Belt Lakes 








Identified Threats: Climate change; introduced species, weeds, feral animals, fire management 

practices, human use, water extraction, dams, , plantations, tourism and State government priorities. 

Comments: International areas of migratory birds, unique to area, threats to lake jasper if Yarragadee is 

pumped. 

5.4.1.39 Plantations in Recharge Areas 







Comments: Actual value depends on species. 

5.4.1.40 Climate 










Identified Threats: Dieback and other pathogens, land management practices, lack of knowledge, high 

carbon activities. 

Comments: Education needed for local people. 

5.4.1.41 Permanent Small Streams along the coast 







119

DRAFT 



Identified Threats: Climate change; introduced species, weeds, human use, 4WD, bikes etc. 

Comments: Unique Augusta – Walpole, seepage, Holocene sites. 

5.4.1.42 Lake Jasper 








Identified Threats: Climate change, feral animals (especially pigs), clearing, human use, water extraction 

(yarragadee), plantations, acid sulphate soils. 

Comments: Indigenous values, Yarragadee. 


5.4.2.1 Stored Water (Dams, Lakes) 








Identified Threats: Climate change; weeds, human use, pollution, water extraction, salinity and 

plantations. 

Comments: Bureaucracy. 

5.4.2.2 Air Quality 








Identified Threats: Climate change; fire management practices, fire, pollution, gas extraction (fracking), 

urban development and mining. 


5.4.2.3 Natural Physical Resources Used Locally 







Comments: Includes gravel, sand and other extraction materials. 



120

DRAFT 


5.4.2.4 Coalmine Beach 








5.4.2.5 Urban Bushland Blocks 










Identified Threats: Dieback and other pathogens, weeds, feral animals, clearing, fire management 

practices, fire, degradation of vegetation on river banks, blackberries, off road vehicles. 

Comments: Main issue seen as blackberry. 

5.4.2.6 Marine Coastal Waters 










5.4.2.7 Revegetation and other completed NRM projects 








5.4.2.8 Cultural and Heritage Sites 












water extraction, dams, urban development, erosion and infrastructure. 

121

DRAFT 



5.4.2.9 Water Volume in Warren River 








Identified Threats: Climate change; land management practices, human use, , water extraction, , salinity, 

plantations and logging. 


5.4.2.10 Bibbulmun Track 








5.4.2.11 Farmed Animals 








5.4.2.12 Warren River – riverine biodiversity 













Comments: Other pressure includes industry along creek. The creek is the only recharge for the 3 bores 

that supply Donnybrook with its drinking water. 

5.4.2.13 Local People – Community 








122

DRAFT 


Identified Threats: Climate change; introduced species, land management practices, fire, pollution, water 

extraction, salinity, economics, apathy, loss of knowledge, staff and people turn over and rates. 


5.4.2.14 Active Community Groups (General) 








5.4.2.15 Tourism Industry 












water extraction, dams,, urban development, degradation of vegetation on river banks, erosion, salinity, 

plantations, logging and mining. 

Comments: Economic is also a threat if it declines. 

5.4.2.16 Weed & Feral Community Groups 











5.4.3.1 Low Population 






Identified Threats: Human use, urban development. 

Comments: Diminishes most threats. 



123






DRAFT 


5.4.3.2 Mundabiddy Trail 










5.4.3.3 Salt land in the future – untapped potential land uses 







Threat score: not determined 


Comments: Current unusable land will be an asset into the future once methods for use are developed or 

discovered. 



Asset 

Value 



H=High=1 

Level of 

Threat 

VH=Very 

High=4 

H=High=3 

M=Moderate=2 

L=Low=4 

U=Unknown=0 




Warren workshop 

5.4.1.14 Soils 5 4 1.0 10 

5.4.1.41 Permanent Small Streams along the coast 5 4 0.5 9.5 

5.4.1.40 Climate 5 4 0.5 9.5 

5.4.1.38 Coastal Belt Lakes 5 4 0.5 9.5 

5.4.1.36 Heathland Patch 5 4 0.5 9.5 

5.4.1.30 Old Growth Forest 5 4 0.5 9.5 

5.4.1.29 Shannon River 5 4 0.5 9.5 

5.4.1.28 Deep River 5 4 0.5 9.5 

5.4.1.27 Avifauna 5 4 0.5 9.5 

5.4.1.24 Mouth of Doggerup 5 4 0.5 9.5 

5.4.1.21 Known/Registered Indigenous Sites 5 4 0.5 9.5 

5.4.1.20 Mt Chudalup 5 4 0.5 9.5 

5.4.1.6 Karri 5 3 1.0 9 

5.4.1.5 Forests 5 3 1.0 9 

124

DRAFT 


5.4.1.42 Lake Jasper 5 3 1.0 9 

5.4.1.4 Rivers and Waterways 5 3 1.0 9 

5.4.1.34 Old Trees as Habitat (Public and Private) 5 3 1.0 9 

5.4.1.32 Unique Flora (Rare and Endemic) 5 3 1.0 9 

5.4.1.2 Wilgarup Lake 5 3 1.0 9 

5.4.1.18 Lakes 5 3 1.0 9 

5.4.1.15 Productive Agricultural Land 5 3 1.0 9 

5.4.1.13 Wilderness/Naturalness 5 4 0.0 9 

5.4.1.12 National Parks 5 4 0.0 9 

5.4.1.11 Native Flora and Fauna 5 3 1.0 9 

5.4.1.1 Lake Muir/Unicup 5 3 1.0 9 

5.4.1.9 Coastal Environment 5 3 0.5 8.5 

5.4.1.8 Freshwater permanent streams 5 3 0.5 8.5 

5.4.1.37 Water Quality and Quantity 5 3 0.5 8.5 

5.4.1.25 Peat Swamps 5 3 0.5 8.5 

5.4.1.23 Black Point Beach and Surrounds (Points etc) 5 3 0.5 8.5 

5.4.1.19 Yeagerup Dunes 5 3 0.5 8.5 

5.4.2.2 Air Quality 3 4 1.0 8 

5.4.1.33 Unique Fauna (Native) Rare and Endangered 5 3 0.0 8 

5.4.1.31 Wetlands/habitat 5 3 0.0 8 

5.4.1.3 Remnants on Private Property 5 2 1.0 8 

5.4.1.16 Farmers and Knowledge 5 2 1.0 8 

5.4.1.7 Walpole - Nornalup Inlet 5 2 0.5 7.5 

5.4.1.39 Plantations in Recharge Areas 5 2 0.5 7.5 

5.4.1.35 Local Knowledge and Expertise 5 2 0.5 7.5 

5.4.1.26 Groundwater 5 2 0.5 7.5 

5.4.1.22 Granite Outcrops 5 2 0.5 7.5 

5.4.1.10 Broke Inlet 5 2 0.5 7.5 

5.4.2.8 Cultural and Heritage Sites 3 4 0.0 7 

5.4.2.5 Urban Bushland Blocks 3 4 0.0 7 

5.4.1.17 Dryland Farming 5 2 0.0 7 

5.4.2.7 Revegetation and other completed NRM projects 3 3 0.5 6.5 

5.4.2.6 Marine Coastal Waters 3 3 0.5 6.5 

5.4.2.12 Warren River - riverine biodiversity 3 3 0.5 6.5 

5.4.2.9 Water Volume in Warren River 3 2 1.0 6 

5.4.2.3 Natural Physical Resources Used Locally 3 2 1.0 6 

5.4.2.16 Weed & Feral Community Groups 3 3 0.0 6 

5.4.2.14 Active Community Groups (General) 3 3 0.0 6 

5.4.2.1 Stored Water (Dams, Lakes) 3 3 0.0 6 

5.4.3.1 Low Population 1 4 0.5 5.5 

5.4.2.11 Farmed Animals 3 2 0.5 5.5 

5.4.2.10 Bibbulmun Track 3 2 0.5 5.5 

5.4.2.4 Coalmine Beach 3 2 0.0 5 

5.4.2.15 Tourism Industry 3 2 0.0 5 

5.4.2.13 Local People - Community 3 2 0.0 5 

5.4.3.2 Mundabiddy Trail 1 3 0.0 4 

5.4.3.3 Salt land in the future - untapped potential land 

uses 1 0 0.0 1 

125

DRAFT 


5.5 Workshops with Blackwood Basin Group 

Held on 15 th and 18 th April 2011 on the Department of Food and Agriculture premises in Narrogin and in 

the Community Resource Centre, Boyup Brook. Assets were identified and scored as being 

exceptionally valuable, very highly valuable or highly valuable, and are listed under those three 






DRAFT 


5.5.1.4 Community Resource Centres 

Asset value: Exceptionable 







Identified threats: Changing government policies; changes in community needs; poor management; lack 

of succession planning 

Comments: The ability of such centres to get messages across through their broad networks is 

exceptional; usually have excellent resources; in 4-5 years it is expected that they will be even more 

accountable and consistent through standardisation; centres have to become more business-like 

(efficient) to remain “in business”. 

5.5.1.5 Landholders affinity for, and knowledge of, the land 








Identified threats: Lack of incentive to pass on the knowledge and experience (succession) and to keep it 

up (economic pressures, climate change, peer pressure); the role as mentor is key to passing this 

“attitude” on as society doesn’t value it in general; corporate farms; buying power of big companies; 

foreign ownership 

Comments: Stewardship of the land; largely learnt from parents and/or other mentors early on in life; 

great value as case studies for educational and other purposes; educational and inspirational tool. 

5.5.1.6 Local innovators and educators 








Identified threats: Economic pressures; lack of time / energy; surrounding properties (peer pressure); 

decline in availability of water resources as rainfall declines (climate change); government policies; shire 

councils 

Comments: Examples include Sheila’s Tortoiseshell Farm and Roo Gully; lifestyle choice, but also for 

greater benefit; unfortunately no central collection “point” where data collected and experiences can be 

collated, stored and disseminated. 

5.5.1.7 Historical collections of reports, data etc. 








Identified threats: Lack of funding; ad hoc storage methods resulting in data becoming unusable 

(compatibility of software versions etc.) and loss of hard copies (rats, damp); “new broom sweeping 

clean”; loss of staff/people that know what is stored and where/how. 

Comments: Serious issue as much information about past successes and failures (lessons learned) is 

being lost. 

127

DRAFT 


5.5.1.8 Local community groups 








Identified threats: Lack of support; decrease in volunteerism ethic; time and other economic pressures; 

lack of information and information; burnout 

Comments: Includes groups such as LCDCs, “Friends of…..”. 

5.5.1.9 Perup Ecology Centre 









weeds; feral animals; fire and human use (vehicle access; constant trapping; lights blinding animals) 

Comments: Very high educational and recreational value, as well as biodiversity (Woylie); also provides 

good baseline data/information through research program. 

5.5.1.10 Natural resources acting as a climate change buffer 








Identified threats: Potentially any and all of the following: Dieback and other pathogens; pollution (algal 

blooms); climate change; water extraction; introduced species; dams; weeds; gas extraction (fracking); 

feral animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land management 

practises; erosion; fire management practises; salinity; fire; plantations; human use; logging. 

Comments: Degradation of assets, e.g. vegetation on north banks and the lack of knowledge, as well as 

uptake/acceptance of facts is an issue, as will reduce ability of natural systems to recover from climate 

change effects. Many other areas in Australia have less intact ecosystems, so investment in this region to 

prevent further degradation and build resilience would not only be of benefit locally but would provide good 

examples that will benefit these other more degraded regions. Need funds to improve ability to mitigate 

effects, build resilience, etc., e.g. through building carbon stores in soils, using renewable energy sources 

such as wind, use water more efficiently; an enthusiastic community is needed to take such measures on 

board. 

5.5.1.11 Good quality potable water resources 








Identified threats: Pollution (e.g. nutrients causing algal blooms); climate change; water extraction; 

introduced species (algae); dams; gas extraction (fracking); urban development (subdivisions & 

unsewered development); degradation of vegetation; land management practises; erosion; salinity; 

128

DRAFT 


plantations (drying out water sources); human use; logging (fouling the rivers); lack of regulation (policy); 

mining; inefficient irrigation systems; water management practises 

Comments: This asset includes surface water and groundwater; major loss is through leaking irrigation 

channels; water entering drains strips nutrients off agricultural land before polluting drains. 

5.5.1.12 Landcare officers 








Identified threats: Changing government priorities; low pay; lack of security and award system; 

(conditions and wages) 

Comments: Includes NRMOs and environment officers; already lots of gaps throughout rural regions 

where knowledge, experience and networks have been lost; effect on local communities and their 

involvement in NRM is extreme. 

5.5.1.13 Yarragadee 








Identified threats: Following threats refer mainly but not only to recharge areas: Pollution through 

declining water quality; climate change; water extraction; dams; gas extraction (fracking); urban 

development; mining; lack of sufficient surface water and human use 

Comments: Need for water in Perth and elsewhere in the SW, particularly if climate change dries out SW, 

will increase; high environmental value; effects of drawing it down are not yet well understood. 




Asset identifiable: To some extent (dispersed) SMART goal for actions: xx 




Identified threats: Climate change; weeds; urban development (subdivisions and for smaller holdings or 

use for non-productive purposes); land management practises; salinity; bushfires and plantations (seen as 

non-productive – food) 

Comments: Important as areas that can retain carbon. 

5.5.1.15 NRM groups as extension agents 








Identified threats: Lack of funding; changes in government priorities, e.g. competitive environment; loss 

of active landholders as farming not viable (economic pressures) 

129

DRAFT 


Comments: Groups such as the Blackwood Basin Group have provided an excellent extension service 

over the years that has become ever more important as government agencies scale back their extension 

work; the future of these groups hinges on their relevance; need to maintain knowledge acquired 

(succession & storage). 










animals (above normal ring-necked parrot & kangaroo densities, pigs, deer); urban development 

(subdivisions); clearing; degradation of vegetation; land management practises; erosion; fire 

management practises; salinity; fire; plantations (as source of weeds); human use; logging (access); 

edge effect; little regrowth 

Comments: More people = more cats and dogs and other increasing human impacts. 

5.5.1.17 Community knowledge 








Identified threats: Climate change (indirect); urban development (subdivisions); economic (farming not 

viable); succession issues; lack of funding; increase in numbers of hobby and absentee landholders; bad 

advice; societies push to maximise yield rather than sustainability 

Comments: Actual, current farming methods are an important asset (knowledge, experience); risk is that 

lots of farmers could give up and leave, killing small rural communities; values include NRMOs (see 

above). 









Identified threats: Pollution (nutrients, run-off); climate change; water extraction; introduced species 

(carp); dams; weeds; subdivisions; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land management practises 

(e.g. no fencing) and salinity 

Comments: Water resource for agriculture; social, tourist and recreational asset (canoeing, fishing etc.); 

also an environmental asset. 









130

DRAFT 


Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; pollution (run-off from upper catchment during extreme 

events, exacerbated through climate change); climate change; introduced species (yabby, Gambusia); 

dams; weeds; feral animals; subdivisions and smallholdings; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river 

banks; land management practises; erosion; salinity; bushfires; plantations; human use; logging and the 

fact that the river is not proclaimed (refers to its status). 

Comments: Refers to entire river and its catchment; Indigenous values; also recreational, aesthetic 

values, and as a corridor/link (also for people, acting as a unifier); tourism value; lack of funding a clear 

threat. 

5.5.1.20 Tributaries of the Blackwood River 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; pollution (run-off from upper catchment during extreme 

events, exacerbated through climate change); climate change; introduced species (yabby, Gambusia); 

dams; weeds; feral animals; subdivisions and smallholdings; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river 

banks; land management practises; erosion; salinity; bushfires; plantations; human use; logging and the 

fact that the river is not proclaimed (refers to its status). 

Comments: Water quality of the tributaries affects the Blackwood River; same values as Blackwood, but 

also agriculture as often water is of better quality. 

5.5.1.21 Haddleton Reserve Complex 









species; dams; weeds; feral animals; urban development; clearing; land management practises; erosion; 

fire management practises; salinity; fire; plantations; human use; logging. 

Comments: Refers to the Haddleton, Haddleton Springs and Trigwell Reserves as a group of 

interconnected reserves. Is in the South East Collie Biodiversity Recovery Catchment, only fresh 

groundwater dependent catchment prior to clearing; DEC priority - unique flora and fauna, wetland is in 

fairly good condition, high community value; also includes Wild Horse Creek which feeds into Meeking 

Swamp. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process conducted by SWCC 

in 2008. 

5.5.1.22 Agricultural land – Broadacre 








Identified threats: Succession, economics, viability, climate change; introduced species; weeds; land 

management practises; erosion; salinity. 

Comments: Food, productivity, livelihood, amenity, underwrites all NRM in our area, Integral part of 

Ecosystem (wheatbelt), spiritual, Identified by all as N° 1 asset, community/family; includes all broad-acre 

131

DRAFT 


farmland (grains and grazing) - agriculture productive land. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, 

community-driven SIF3 process conducted by SWCC in 2008. 

5.5.1.23 Beaufort palaeochannel and flats 








Identified threats: Salinity, weeds, feral animals, land and fire management practises. 

Comments: Valuable water resource and high value land; grouped as one; one of few pieces of fresh 

water in landscape, patches of salt but components are fresh, site specific areas of fresh, main channelsustainable 

yield, threatening range of values. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, communitydriven 

SIF3 process conducted by SWCC in 2008. 

5.5.1.24 Towerrinning palaeochannels 









Comments: Fresh water, local economic importance, local town water supply. Also identified through the 

peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process conducted by SWCC in 2008. 

5.5.1.25 Hillman palaeochannel 









Comments: Valuable water resource and high value land; grouped as one; one of few pieces of fresh 

water in landscape, patches of salt but components are fresh, site specific areas of fresh, main channelsustainable 

yield, threatening range of values; freshwater resource, underground ecosystem, scientific 

and educational values, high production capacity, consumptive use, opportunity value. Also identified 

through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process conducted by SWCC in 2008. 

5.5.1.26 Toolibin Lake Complex 









Comments: SWCC & DEC priority, Ramsar wetland, a lot of previous investment; well studied, 4 TECs. 

Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process conducted by SWCC in 2008. 

132

DRAFT 


5.5.1.27 Lake Towerrinning 








Identified threats: Salinity, weeds, feral animals, land and fire management practises, climate change. 

Comments: Altered lake with very high value; high value recreational and tourism asset – very high 

community value, also includes surrounding catchment and hinterland; remnant vegetation, bird life, 

recreation; has had significant investment, high value water-skiing lake. Also identified through the peerreviewed, 


5.5.1.28 Wagin Lakes System 









Comments: High biodiversity, water birds, recreation, amenity, spiritual, unique hydrology, high value 

habitat, natural and man made drainage point, cultural and Indigenous value, iconic, good navigation 

point. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process conducted by SWCC in 

2008. 

5.5.1.29 Threatened species/communities 








Identified threats: Salinity, climate change, introduced species, weeds, feral animals, fire management 

practises, human use. 

Comments: Threatened species/TECs, priority spp/ecological communities (whole region); information 

available spatially – overlay with land monitor data (DEC). Also identified through the peer-reviewed, 


5.5.1.30 Dryandra Vegetation Complex 








Identified threats: Weeds, feral animals, human use, climate change, land and fire management 

practises. 

Comments: Includes private land in and around the reserve; corridors between blocks in the reserve 

need to be consolidated; valued as a linkage, with good quality agricultural land (good rain) and remnant 

vegetation, high local value; agricultural land and remnant vegetation exceptional on basis of close 

proximity to Dryandra; corridors as links between blocks in the reserve. Also identified through the peerreviewed, 


133

DRAFT 


5.5.1.31 Central & Eastern Avon Wheatbelt national biodiversity hotspot 








Identified threats: Weeds, feral animals, climate change, salinity, land and fire management practises. 

Comments: Broadly across region (IBRA region); the ones on valley floor conserve rarity; threat is high, 

but is long term; SWCC priority. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 

process conducted by SWCC in 2008. 

5.5.1.32 Private remnant vegetation - protected 








Identified threats: Weeds, feral animals, introduced species, human use, climate change, land and fire 

management practises. 

Comments: Some are exceptional (refer to hotspot), native vegetation on valley floors at risk of salinity. 


5.5.1.33 Australian Bush Heritage Site (Kojonup) 









management practises, salinity. 

Comments: Small 150 ha block with high ecological value (see the Whitfield Report re salinity risk). Also 

identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process conducted by SWCC in 2008. 

5.5.1.34 Marribank Settlement 










Comments: Very high Indigenous value; also historical value; permanent river pool, DRF (Wagin 

Banksia), source of firewood, cemetery. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven 


5.5.1.35 On-farm water (captured) 






134

DRAFT 




Identified threats: Climate change, land management practises, salinity. 

Comments: No comments at the workshop. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven 


5.5.1.36 Lake Dumbleyung 









Comments: Very High values for short periods when it fills, collectively has exceptional value, iconic, 

biggest water body in catchment, needs to be managed to ensure it doesn't impact on Blackwood River; 

historical value (world land water speed record broken by Donald Campbell), needs water for sailing, top 

of Blackwood Catchment, integral part of regional water balance. Also identified through the peerreviewed, 


5.5.1.37 Dryandra Nature Reserve 









Comments: Dryandra Woodland-Tutanning is the focal focal area and may include reserves listed in the 

workshops such as Commodine, east Yornaning and Yornaning; very local impact from salinity (1%); DEC 

priority - rare and endangered flora and faune (28,000 ha). Also identified through the peer-reviewed, 


5.5.1.38 Tarin Rock representative landscape 









Comments: DEC priority. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process 

conducted by SWCC in 2008. 

5.5.1.39 Dongolocking Complex 









135

DRAFT 


Comments: No comments. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process 


5.5.1.40 Tutanning Nature Reserve 









Comments: Dryandra Woodland-Tutanning is the focal focal area and may include reserves listed in the 

workshops such as Commodine, east Yornaning and Yornaning; very local impact from salinity (1%); DEC 

priority - rare and endangered flora and faune (28,000 ha). Also identified through the peer-reviewed, 


5.5.1.41 Tarin Rock representative landscape 









Comments: DEC priority. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process 


5.5.1.42 Lake Ewlymartup 









Comments: Similar to Lake Coyrecup but not as high value (as local recreational site); close to town, 

aesthetics, unique hydrology, good representation of valley floor vegetation, Carnaby Cockatoo's habitat. 


5.5.1.43 Hotham River and significant tributaries 









Comments: RS01 SWCC project; values – high amenity, aesthetics, recreation, fishing, Indigenous 

significance; environmental value (scientific and research); rivers are a good indication of environmental 

health; economic value for tourism; best section is from Dwarda through to forest. Also identified through 

the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process conducted by SWCC in 2008. 

136

DRAFT 


5.5.1.44 Drainage Demonstration Sites 









Comments: Fence Road and Beynon Road; scientific value, lots of previous investment. Also identified 

through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process conducted by SWCC in 2008. 

5.5.1.45 Highbury Forest 









Comments: Part of the Dryandra representative complex, large number of threatened Flora and fauna, 

large, small landholder area, recreational value. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, communitydriven 


5.5.1.46 Kojonup Spring 









Comments: Cultural significance. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 


5.5.1.47 Westmere Nature Reserve 









Comments: High in landscape so less at risk from salinity. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, 


5.5.1.48 Williams Nature Reserve 









137

DRAFT 


Comments: High in landscape so less at risk from salinity. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, 


5.5.1.49 Beaufort remnant vegetation on ridgetops 








Identified threats: Farming practises, kangaroo (increased numbers), rabbits. 

Comments: Range of vegetation change; ironstones, Banksia spp representation, orchids, etc… lizards - 

outliers. 

5.5.1.50 Productive agricultural soils 







Comments: None at workshop. 

5.5.1.51 Kwobrup Nature Reserve 







Comments: Carnaby’s Black Cockatoo habitat. 

5.5.1.52 Bibbulman Track 














5.5.1.53 Active community groups 








Identified threats: Change of community values, lack of continuity, funding perceptions etc. 

Comments: Includes their skills; needed for effective NRM for their knowledge and skills. 

138

DRAFT 


5.5.1.54 Waterways through private properties 








Identified threats: Farm management practises, salinity, erosion. 

Comments: Vegetation on banks valuable as corridors. 

5.5.1.55 Covenanted bushland 








5.5.1.56 Land for Wildlife properties 












5.5.1.57 Blackwood River Basin NRM community 









Comments: Refers to the network of people throughout the region that are involved in NRM; the “vibe” of 

the Blackwood. 

5.5.1.58 Foxes Lair Reserve 









Comments: On southern boundary of Narrogin; natural area, high social and recreational value. 

5.5.1.59 Gnarogin Creek 



139

DRAFT 








Comments: High Indigenous value; artists, public space, creek through town. 

5.5.1.60 Red-tailed Phascogale 







Comments: Rare species; iconic and good “marketing” species. 

5.5.1.61 Numbat 












5.5.1.62 Carnaby’s White-tailed Black Cockatoo 










5.5.1.63 Adaptive farmers 







Comments: Very useful as leaders and as case studies. 



5.5.1.64 NRM champions 







140

DRAFT 




Comments: Very useful as leaders and as case studies. 

5.5.1.65 Employed NRM officers 










5.5.1.66 Potential for carbon storage and sequestration 


Threat score: unknown 







Comments: Opportunities for revegetation projects; potential future value to environment and NRM, but 

not on price of carbon. 

5.5.1.67 Arthur River 









Comments: Valuable for stock water, recreation and remnant vegetation. Also identified through the 

peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process conducted by SWCC in 2008. 

5.5.1.68 Beaufort River 









Comments: DEC priority – unique fauna and flora; drought refuges; local value. Also identified through 

the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process conducted by SWCC in 2008. 

5.5.1.69 Williams River 







141

DRAFT 




Comments: None at this workshop. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 


5.5.1.70 Darkan Palaeochannels 









Comments: Possible water source and reserve. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, communitydriven 


5.5.1.71 Transition zone (woodland to Mallee) 









Comments: Representative of ecosystems “at the edge”. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, 



5.5.2.1 Balingup Pool 








Identified threats: Pollution (nutrients, run-off); climate change; water extraction; introduced species 

(carp); dams; weeds; subdivisions; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land management practises 

(e.g. no fencing) and salinity 

Comments: Weir construction is a possibility. 

5.5.2.2 Coyrecup Lake System 








Identified threats: Climate change; introduced species; weeds; feral animals; clearing; degradation of 

vegetation; land management practises; salinity; human use. 

Comments: Includes Lake Coyrecup and Lake Dumbleyung; large catchment, unique vegetation 

associations, a lot of degradation in the Coblinine catchment; high value refers to lake, high quality 

142

DRAFT 


remnant native vegetation, recreational and cultural significance; high variety of water birds. 


Also 

5.5.2.3 Remnant vegetation between Dryandra and Tutanning 










Comments: Valued for its value as a potential corridor between the two reserves; potential for 

revegetation, protection/linkages of poorly represented patches, remnant vegetation is the asset, critical 

for linking Dryandra to State Forrest, main threat is fragmentation, decline of vegetation increases salinity 

threat on private land; value on a landscape level, biodiversity value; salinity risk needs to be assessed in 

detail. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process conducted by SWCC in 

2008. 

5.5.2.4 Dardadine Reserve 










Comments: Includes the old school site and the gully and railway reserve; sits over Hillman 

palaeochannel. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process conducted by 

SWCC in 2008. 

5.5.2.5 Commodine Nature Reserve 









Comments: Includes private land in and around the reserve; corridors between blocks in the reserve 

need to be consolidated; valued as a linkage, with good quality agricultural land (good rain) and remnant 

vegetation, high local value; agricultural land and remnant vegetation exceptional on basis of close 

proximity to Dryandra; corridors as links between blocks in the reserve. Also identified through the peerreviewed, 


5.5.2.6 Wandering Mission 








143

DRAFT 




Comments: Very high Indigenous value; also historical value; permanent river pool, DRF (Wagin 

Banksia), source of firewood, cemetery. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven 


5.5.2.7 Badgebup Nature Reserve 






Identified threats: None identified at the workshop. 



Comments: Carnaby’s Black Cockatoo habitat; Anglican memorial church – cultural, spiritual, community 

and heritage values. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process 


5.5.2.8 Carrolup River Reach Reserve 






Identified threats: Weeds. 



Comments: Includes the Carrolup River as a whole, fenced (>70%), pools, source of nutrients into 

Beaufort, water to Marribank pools. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 


5.5.2.9 Lake Coomelberrup 









Comments: East of Lake Dumbleyung, decline in water quality overlast 10 yrs, supports lots of water 

birds, fresh water, aesthetics. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process 


5.5.2.10 Cherry Tree Pool Camp 









Comments: Cultural and recreational value (tennis club and camp ground, historical), good native 

vegetation, water birds. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, community-driven SIF3 process 


144

DRAFT 


5.5.2.11 Drainage lines 









Comments: On private properties – contours, surface water management. 

5.5.2.12 Crossman River 









Comments: This river is in better condition than others. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, 



5.5.3.1 Private remnant vegetation - unprotected 










Comments: Some are exceptional (refer to hotspot), native vegetation on valley floors at risk of salinity. 


5.5.3.2 O’Halloran’s Bush Block 









Comments: Near Marribank, has conservation value. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, 


5.5.3.3 Old Toolibin townsite 








145






DRAFT 


Identified threats: Weeds, rabbits, bridal creeper. 

Comments: None at this workshop 

5.5.3.4 Community nurseries 












Asset 

Value 



H=High=1 

Level of 

Threat 

VH=Very 

High=4 

H=High=3 

M=Moderate=2 

L=Low=4 

U=Unknown=0 




BBG workshop 

5.5.1.1 Community-run events with an NRM focus 5 4 1.0 

5.5.1.2 Investment in perennials 5 4 1.0 

5.5.1.3 Sustainable land management practises 5 4 1.0 

5.5.1.4 Community Resource Centres 5 4 1.0 

5.5.1.5 Landholders affinity for, and knowledge of, the land 5 4 1.0 

5.5.1.6 Local innovators and educators 5 4 1.0 

5.5.1.7 Historical collections of reports, data etc. 5 4 1.0 

5.5.1.8 Local community groups 5 4 1.0 

5.5.1.9 Perup Ecology Centre 5 4 1.0 

5.5.1.10 Natural resources acting as a climate change buffer 5 4 1.0 

5.5.1.11 Good quality potable water resources 5 4 1.0 

5.5.1.12 Landcare officers 5 4 0.5 9 

5.5.1.13 Yarragadee 5 4 0.5 9 

5.5.1.14 Productive agricultural land 5 4 0.5 9 

5.5.1.15 NRM groups as extension agents 5 4 0.5 9 

5.5.1.16 Remnant vegetation 5 4 0.5 9 

5.5.1.17 Community knowledge 5 4 0.5 9 

5.5.1.18 Balingup Brook 5 4 0.5 9 

5.5.1.19 Blackwood River 5 4 0.5 9 

5.5.1.20 Tributaries of the Blackwood River 5 4 0.5 9 

5.5.1.21 Haddleton Reserve Complex 5 4 0.5 9 

5.5.1.22 Agricultural land - Broadacre 5 4 0.5 9 

146

DRAFT 


5.5.1.23 Beaufort palaeochannel and flats 5 3 1.0 

5.5.1.24 Towerrinning palaeochannels 5 3 1.0 

5.5.1.25 Hillman palaeochannel 5 3 1.0 

5.5.1.26 Toolibin Lake Complex 5 3 1.0 

5.5.1.27 Lake Towerrinning 5 3 1.0 

5.5.1.28 Wagin Lakes System 5 3 1.0 

5.5.1.29 Threatened species/communities 5 4 0.0 

5.5.1.30 Dryandra Vegetation Complex 5 3 1.0 

5.5.1.31 Central & Eastern Avon Wheatbelt national 

biodiversity hotspot 5 3 1.0 

5.5.1.32 Private remnant vegetation - protected 5 3 0.5 8 

5.5.1.33 Australian Bush Heritage Site (Kojonup) 5 3 0.5 8 

5.5.1.34 Marribank Settlement 5 3 0.5 8 

5.5.1.35 On-farm water (captured) 5 3 0.5 8 

5.5.1.36 Lake Dumbleyung 5 3 0.5 8 

5.5.1.37 Dryandra Nature Reserve 5 3 0.5 8 

5.5.1.38 Tarin Rock representative landscape 5 3 0.5 8 

5.5.1.39 Dongolocking Complex 5 3 0.5 8 

5.5.1.40 Tutanning Nature Reserve 5 3 0.5 8 

5.5.1.41 Tarin Rock representative landscape 5 4 1.0 

5.5.1.42 Lake Ewlymartup 5 4 1.0 

5.5.1.43 Hotham River and significant tributaries 5 4 1.0 

5.5.1.44 Drainage Demonstration Sites 5 2 1.0 

5.5.1.45 Highbury Forest 5 2 1.0 

5.5.1.46 Kojonup Spring 5 2 1.0 

5.5.1.47 Westmere Nature Reserve 5 2 1.0 

5.5.1.48 Williams Nature Reserve 5 2 1.0 

5.5.1.49 Beaufort remnant vegetation on ridgetops 5 2 1.0 

5.5.1.50 Productive agricultural soils 5 2 1.0 

5.5.1.51 Kwobrup Nature Reserve 5 2 1.0 

5.5.1.52 Bibbulman Track 5 2 1.0 

5.5.1.53 Active community groups 5 2 1.0 

5.5.1.54 Waterways through private properties 5 3 0.0 

5.5.1.55 Covenanted bushland 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.56 Land for Wildlife properties 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.57 Blackwood River Basin NRM community 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.58 Foxes Lair Reserve 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.59 Gnarogin Creek 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.60 Red-tailed Phascogale 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.61 Numbat 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.62 Carnaby's White-tailed Black Cockatoo 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.63 Adaptive farmers 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.64 NRM champions 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.65 Employed NRM officers 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.66 Potential for carbon storage and sequestration 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.67 Arthur River 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.68 Beaufort River 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.69 Williams River 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.70 Darkan Palaeochannels 5 3 1.0 

147

DRAFT 


5.5.1.71 Transition zone (woodland to Mallee) 5 3 1.0 

5.5.2.1 Balingup Pool 3 3 1.0 

5.5.2.2 Coyrecup Lake System 3 3 1.0 

5.5.2.3 Remnant vegetation between Dryandra and 

Tutanning 3 3 1.0 

5.5.2.4 Dardadine Reserve 3 2 0.0 

5.5.2.5 Commodine Nature Reserve 3 2 0.0 

5.5.2.6 Wandering Mission 3 2 0.0 

5.5.2.7 Badgebup Nature Reserve 3 3 0.5 6 

5.5.2.8 Carrolup River Reach Reserve 3 3 0.5 6 

5.5.2.9 Lake Coomelberrup 3 4 1.0 

5.5.2.10 Cherry Tree Pool Camp 3 2 1.0 

5.5.2.11 Drainage lines 3 2 0.5 5 

5.5.2.12 Crossman River 3 0.0 

5.5.3.1 Private remnant vegetation - unprotected 1 3 0.5 4 

5.5.3.2 O'Halloran's Bush Block 1 2 1.0 

5.5.3.3 Old Toolibin townsite 1 2 1.0 

5.5.3.4 Community nurseries 1 2 1.0 

148

DRAFT 


5.6 Workshop with Peel-Harvey Catchment Group 

Held on 20 th April 2011 at the Community Resource Centre, Waroona. Assets were identified and scored 

as being exceptionally valuable, very highly valuable or highly valuable, and are listed under those three 






DRAFT 


5.6.1.4 Lake Mealup 








Identified threats: pollution; climate change; water extraction; urban development; clearing; degradation 

of vegetation on river banks; land management practises; erosion; human use. 

Comments: None at this workshop. 

5.6.1.5 Serpentine lakes system 








Identified threats: pollution; climate change; water extraction; introduced species; dams; weeds; urban 

development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land management practises; erosion; fire 

management practises; salinity; fire; plantations; human use. 


5.6.1.6 Other lakes on the Swan Coastal Plain 









Dieback and other pathogens; pollution; climate change; water extraction; introduced species; dams; 

weeds; gas extraction (fracking); feral animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on 

river banks; land management practises; erosion; fire management practises; salinity; fire; plantations; 

human use; logging 


5.6.1.7 Peel Inlet 









animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land management 

practises; erosion; fire management practises; salinity; fire; plantations; human use; eutrophication. 

Comments: Government policy concerns, has recreational and biodiversity values. 

5.6.1.8 Harvey estuary 






150

DRAFT 





species; dams; weeds; gas extraction (fracking); feral animals; urban development; clearing; degradation 

of vegetation on river banks; land management practises; erosion; fire management practises; salinity; 

fire; plantations; human use; logging 


5.6.1.9 Palus Plain 











use; logging, poor understanding. 

Comments: Role in wetland support poorly understood. 

5.6.1.10 Thrombolites 








Identified threats: pollution; climate change; water extraction; introduced species; weeds; urban 

development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on banks; land management practises; erosion; salinity; 

plantations; human use; pH and water quality. 


5.6.1.11 Dryandra Reserve and associated remnants 









species; dams; weeds; feral animals; urban development; clearing;; land management practises; erosion; 

fire management practises; salinity; fire; plantations; human use; logging. 

Comments: Important reserve including the “stepping stones” (corridor) throughout the landscape in the 

eastern section. 

5.6.1.12 Korijegup Reserve 








151

DRAFT 


Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; pollution (illegal rubbish dumping); climate change; 

introduced species; weeds; feral animals; land management practises; erosion; human use. 

Comments: Only one of its kind, has variety of species (wandoo, jarrah, wildflowers, brush-tailed 

wallabies), very close to Harvey and to scarp. 

5.6.1.13 Marradong Nature Reserve 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; pollution; climate change; introduced species; dams; 

weeds; feral animals; urban development; land management practises; erosion; fire management 

practises; salinity; fire; plantations; human use. 

Comments: Wandoo. 

5.6.1.14 Tumulus Springs TEC 








Identified threats: Weeds; urban development; clearing; human use; mining, general loss of stewardship. 

Comments: The one in this catchment is the only one south of Perth. 

5.6.1.15 Beaches and the dunes backing them 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change weeds; feral animals; urban development; clearing; 

degradation of vegetation on river banks;; erosion;; human use; 4WDs. 

Comments: Attached to national park for management decisions, includes inter-dune wetlands and 

relictual rainforest species. 

5.6.1.16 Holocene dunes and inter-dune wetlands 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change weeds; feral animals; urban development; clearing; 

degradation of vegetation on river banks; erosion; human use; 4WDs. 

Comments: Refers to the dune and inter-dune systems and swales just behind the beaches. 

5.6.1.17 State forest 





152

DRAFT 





Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; lack of funds for management; climate change (in 

longer term); water extraction; weeds; feral animals (pigs, deer); land management practises; fire; 

plantations (weedy species & clearing); human use (linked to dieback); logging and mining. 

Comments: The chief value lies in the rarity (uniqueness) of the northern Jarrah Forest ecosystem; also 

social and recreational values. 

5.6.1.18 Remnant vegetation managed by DEC 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; waste (dumping); climate change (decreasing rainfall); 

introduced species; clearing; weeds; feral animals (rabbits, increasing numbers of kangaroos); urban 

development (increasing pressures of human use); degradation of vegetation; land management 

practises; bushfires; human use (motorbikes, 4WDs); lack of knowledge/awareness (“who cares”); limited 

funds. 

Comments: Very few are truly “managed” by DEC due to lack of funds (so not priorities); shire reserves 

generally better managed (in Serpentine and Waroona, less so in Harvey); biodiversity values as little left 

on coastal plain; tap into what people care for (orchids and warm & fuzzies). 

5.6.1.19 Remnant vegetation in well-managed shire reserves 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; pollution (rubbish – illegal dumping); climate change; 

introduced species; clearing; weeds; feral animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of 

vegetation; land management practises; fire management practises; bushfires; human use; lack of funds 

for environmental officers in some shires. 

Comments: Shires include Mandurah City, and Serpentine-Jarrahdale; environmental officers have a very 

focussed role; S-J is divesting itself of “lower” value reserves, only keeping those with DRF etc. (significant 

reserves are known, mapped) – S-J has decided to only keep “good” ones and get rid of everything else; 

other shire threats are magnified as little or no management; S-J has strong community groups (active as 

lobbyists); values include biodiversity. 

5.6.1.20 Remnant vegetation in not-so-well managed shire reserves 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; pollution (rubbish – illegal dumping); climate change; 

introduced species; clearing; weeds; feral animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of 

vegetation; land management practises; fire management practises; bushfires; human use; lack of funds 

for environmental officers in some shires. 

153

DRAFT 


Comments: All other shires (other than Mandurah City and Serpentine-Jarrahdale shire); environmental 

officers have a very focussed role, but only very few of them; threats are magnified as little or no 

management; difficult to motivate locals; Harvey LCDC not invited to LCC workshop; values include 

biodiversity. 

5.6.1.21 Remnant vegetation on private property 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; pollution (rubbish); climate change; water extraction; 

introduced species; clearing; weeds; feral animals; urban development (subdivisions); clearing; 

degradation of vegetation; land management practises (e.g. grazing); erosion; fire management practises; 

human use; economics. 

Comments: Valuable as biodiversity corridors, can be used as linkages for creating corridors; value 

increases with size, e.g. Lowlands in S-J is particularly large; minimum about 1 acre to be of value, unless 

has DRF; S-J has rate subsidy for bushland (conservation rating, e.g. with fencing to exclude stock). 

5.6.1.22 Lot 300 








Identified threats: Climate change; introduced species; weeds; feral animals; urban development; land 

management practises; erosion; salinity; fire; plantations; human use; planning may be threat. 

Comments: Is an Estuary to Ocean corridor/link; intact vegetation, Peel Regional scheme picked it up as 

important. Has Indigenous values too. 

5.6.1.23 Tuarts 









species;; weeds; feral animals; urban development; clearing; land management practises; erosion; fire 

management practises; salinity; human use. 

Comments: Considered an iconic species within the region. 

5.6.1.24 Grasstrees 











154

DRAFT 


Comments: All species including unique and common species, for their impact on the landscape and the 

aesthetics. 

5.6.1.25 Mature trees 









Dieback and other pathogens (tree decline – flooded gums, tuarts, jarrah, wandoo etc.); climate change; 

water extraction; feral animals (bees and others taking over nesting sites); urban development; clearing; 

land management practises; fire management practises (lack of fire) and human use. 

Comments: Habitat loss; mature trees are critical habitat as “hopping points” and for nesting/corridors. 

5.6.1.26 Flora – declared/listed 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; habitat loss; pollution; climate change; water extraction; 

introduced species; dams; weeds; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; 

land management practises; erosion; fire management practises; salinity; fire; plantations; human use and 

unauthorized acceess; logging. 

Comments: Refers to DRFs and TECs (see State and Federal lists). 

5.6.1.27 Regionally significant BioPlan vegetation 











Comments: Refers to vegetation on the Swan Coastal Plain. 

5.6.1.28 Mundijong-SW Highway Rail Corridor 









weeds; feral animals; urban development; clearing; land management practises; erosion; fire management 

practises; salinity; fire; human use. 


155

DRAFT 


5.6.1.29 Fauna – endangered/listed 








Identified threats: climate change; water extraction; introduced species; feral animals; urban 

development; clearing; land management practises; fire management practises; salinity; fire; plantations; 

human use. 


5.6.1.30 Fauna – not listed or endangered 








Identified threats: Climate change; water extraction; introduced species; feral animals; urban 

development; clearing; land management practises; fire management practises; salinity; fire; plantations; 

human use. 


5.6.1.31 Iconic fauna 








Identified threats: Climate change; introduced species; feral animals; urban development land 

management practises; human use. 

Comments: Dolphins, crabs, pelicans and estuarine fish species; 

5.6.1.32 All black cockatoo species 








Identified threats: Climate change; introduced species; feral animals; urban development; clearing; land 

management practises; erosion; human use. 


5.6.1.33 Fairy terns 








156

DRAFT 





5.6.1.34 Hooded Plover 











5.6.1.35 Woodland bird species 








Identified threats: Climate change; dieback and other pathogens; introduced species (bees, other birds); 

feral animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land and fire 

management practises; salinity; bushfires; plantations; human use and logging. 

Comments: Requires research. 

5.6.1.36 Resident waterbirds 








Identified threats: Feral animals; human use; logging; urban development. 


5.6.1.37 Migratory waterbirds 








Identified threats: Climate change; water quality; introduced species; feral animals; human use; logging; 

urban development; water extraction. 








157

DRAFT 




Identified threats: Climate change; weeds; feral animals (pigs, rabbits, foxes); urban development and 

subdivisions; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land management practises; fire management 

practises; decreasing economic viability; landholder succession is issue as next generation leaving the 

land; government restrictions and controls; competition for labour with mining sector; competition from 

overseas products; increasing input costs; increasing rates (disproportionate to CPI). 

Comments: Valued for its food production, amenity, lifestyle, community and social values; some 

progressive landholders do a great job protecting/restoring; just too hard to stay on the land; expectation 

of “all-year round availability” of agricultural products in society is an issue. 

5.6.1.39 High value agricultural soils 








Identified threats: urban development; land management practises; erosion; fire management practises; 

salinity;; plantations; human use. 


5.6.1.40 Landscapes of the Swan Coastal Plain 











use; logging, planning decisions. 

Comments: Includes the topography, vegetation and landforms that together make up the visual 

character (“amenity”) of the region. 

5.6.1.41 Landscapes of the Scarp and hinterland 











use; logging, planning decisions. 

Comments: Includes the topography, vegetation and landforms that together make up the visual 

character (“amenity”) of the region. 

5.6.1.42 Granite outcrops 





158

DRAFT 





Identified threats: Weeds; clearing; human use. 

Comments: Issues related to fragmentation of these elements within the landscape, need to look at 

connectivity. 

5.6.1.43 Lowlands 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; weeds; feral animals; clearing;; land 

management practises; erosion; fire management practises; salinity. 

Comments: Powerlines and other infrastructure impact on the values. 

5.6.1.44 Serpentine River 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens (particularly on scarp); pollution (nutrients); climate 

change; water extraction; introduced species (Gambusia, redfin perch, yabby); dams (Serpentine dam); 

weeds; feral animals (pigs); urban development and subdivisions; clearing; degradation of vegetation on 

river banks; land management practises; erosion; fire (on water quality); human use (unrestricted stock 

access). 

Comments: Refers to entire system/catchment; Goegerup; Water Corporation stopped water flow by 

50%; used for stock and for irrigation, also recreational value (canoeing, fishing for bream and marron); 

feeds into Black Lake so healthy river is key to health of this lake system. 

5.6.1.45 Murray-Hotham River 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens (particularly on scarp); pollution (nutrients); climate 

change; water extraction; introduced species (Gambusia, redfin perch, yabby); dams (farm dams); weeds; 

feral animals (pigs); urban development and subdivisions; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river 

banks; land management practises; erosion; fire (on water quality); human use (unrestricted stock 

access); mining (conveyor belts through bush); salinity (salty, so not dammed); pine plantations (weedy 

species); lack of awareness/knowledge. 

Comments: Refers to entire system/catchment; social and recreational values include boating; no major 

dams; SWCC’s map may be in error re extent of conservation parks as no private land in central portion; 

only river in this region runs from broad-acre farms through forest to the coastal plain. 

5.6.1.46 Harvey River 



159

DRAFT 







Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction; urban development; clearing; degradation 

of vegetation on river banks; land management practises; erosion; human use. 

Comments: Refers to entire system/catchment. 

5.6.1.47 Surface water 









species (Gambusia, redfin perch, yabby); major dams; weeds; gas extraction (fracking – unsure what is 

going on); feral animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation on river banks; land 

management practises; plantations; human use (fishing, boating etc.); logging; mining; transfer of water 

between dams which can bring weeds (Nardoo), salt (from Wellington dam to Harvey) and chlorine across 

catchment boundaries – poor water and environmental management practises; cross-boundary issues 

make it hard to understand/manage for DEC; classified as a drain so regularly dug out/excavated; funds 

for the Harvey River Restoration Fund running out. 

Comments: Value refers mainly to maintaining environmental flows; environmental water flows 

inadequate; pumped for irrigation and stock; social and recreational values; quite good fisheries 

management in public waters; have made inroads into weed infestations but continuity of funding an 

issue. 

5.6.1.47 Water for human use 








Identified threats: Climate change (decreasing rainfall); human use (unrestricted access, wastes); 

government policy and water management. 

Comments: Refers to both potable water and water for agricultural use; has social, economic and 

recreational value; causes lot of issies downstream (major threat); low water levels affecting values and 

the water catchment.. 

5.6.1.48 Groundwater systems 








Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction; dams; urban development; land 

management practises; salinity; plantations; human use. 

Comments: Requires research as lack of knowledge is also a threat. 

160

DRAFT 


5.6.1.49 NRM staff 








Identified threats: Lack of funding; policy that project funding not provided to do farm support work 

(=extension, so engagement is being lost); change of government (funding prioritiesz0; Federal vs. State 

policies; Federal government follows mainly Eastern State priorities, ignores WA; short-term contracts so 

doesn’t attract young people into NRM as a career; burn-out; no job security / career path. 

Comments: NRM staff are needed to organise things, source grants etc., which volunteers can’t cover. 

5.6.1.50 Community-based NRM groups 


Asset identifiable: Yes, but not spatially 






Identified threats: Lack of support; burn-out; few people to “carry” the work load; lack of funds for work; 

change in community perception (more egotistical/ selfish); less time/money; modern lifestyle (including 

communications); lack of skills to write grant applications (lengthy, complex); group dynamics (rotating 

roles) and mining boom. 

Comments: Includes volunteers as “key” input; needs to be promoted/marketed differently (re “what’s in it 

for me” – need recognition, e.g. tree planting days); change mentality of kids so need educational 

programs to help change perceptions). 

5.6.1.51 Landcare centres 








Identified threats: Funding, people, interest, burn-out, knowledge. 

Comments: Community concern about long-term support. 

5.6.1.52 Knowledge systems 



Asset identifiable: Partially, but intangible SMART goal for actions: xx 




Identified threats: Lack of space/funds to collate, store and disseminate information; technological 

change making data incompatible and inaccessible. 

Comments: Includes people’s memories (how things used to be), verbal histories, photos, reports, aerial 

photography, data etc.; skills, knowledge and experience of individuals can be lost, much of which is 

irreplaceable. 

5.6.1.53 Sites of Indigenous significance 


Threat score: Not identified 

161

DRAFT 







Identified threats: Unsure, not specified during workshop. 

Comments: Includes Modulla Valley Includes the East-West and the North-South trail; also includes 

migratory links and other spatial linkages. 

5.6.1.54 Funding streams 


Threat score: Moderate (but possibly larger) 

Asset identifiable: Intangible 





Identified threats: Top-down approach has become serious threat in contrast to bottom-up (communitybased) 

NRM, which historically has worked well; changing priorities; economic pressures (bean-counter 

mentality); people’s values; lack of people and skills to obtain funds and then manage them (transparency 

and accountability have increased the work load and the skill level required). 

Comments: Absolutely essential to community-based NRM; priorities have to be matched to flavour of 

month; how much does industry give to NRM Alcoa used to give $25K. to each LCDC for local priorities 

5.5.1.55 Threatened species/communities 








Identified threats: Salinity, climate change, introduced species, weeds, feral animals, habitat 

degradation; fire management practises, human use. 

Comments: Threatened species/TECs, priority spp/ecological communities (whole region); information 

available spatially – overlay with land monitor data (DEC). Also identified through the peer-reviewed, 

community-driven SIF3 process conducted by SWCC in 2008. Includes mound springs, thrombolites, 

Holocene dune swales, claypans and systems 3a, 3c and 20a. See also Section 5.5.1.16. 


5.6.2.1 Jarrah Forest Transition zone 









feral animals; urban development; clearing; land management practises; erosion; fire management 

practises; salinity; fire; plantations; human use; logging; mining. 

Comments: Refers to the North-South zone; potential impacts from thinning for water run-off. 

5.6.2.2 Eastern Harvey estuary 



162

DRAFT 







Identified threats: Pollution; climate change; water extraction dams; weeds; feral animals; urban 

development; clearing; land management practises; human use - bikes; drainage. 

Comments: Refers to vegetation and birds. 

5.6.2.3 Priority flora 









weeds; urban development; clearing; land management practises; erosion; fire management practises; 

salinity; fire;; human use; logging. 


5.6.2.4 Various eucalypt species 









weeds; urban development; clearing; land management practises; erosion; fire management practises; 

salinity; fire;; human use; logging. 

Comments: Includes E.laeliae, E.lane-poolei, E.haemotoxylon and E.marginata elegatii; the uniqueness 

of these species is an asset to the region. 

5.6.2.5 Fauna - unlisted 








Identified threats: Climate change; introduced species; weeds; feral animals; urban development; 

clearing; degradation of vegetation; land management practises; erosion; fire management practises; 

salinity; fire; logging. 


5.6.2.6 Specific mammal species 








163

DRAFT 


Identified threats: Climate change;; introduced species; feral animals; urban development; clearing; 

degradation of vegetation on river banks; land management practises; erosion; fire management 

practises; salinity; human use. 

Comments: Wallabies, Quokkas, Ring-tailed possums; Chuditch and water rat. 

5.6.2.7 Tuttaning Reserve 











use. 


5.6.2.8 Mundlimup State Forest block 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; climate change; logging, weeds, mining. 

Comments: May have already been substantially cleared for mining. 

5.6.2.9 Warrangup Spring 








Identified threats: pollution; climate change; water extraction; human use – 4WD; feral animals. 

Comments: Indigenous values; used to be perennial, had friends of group and cultural significance. 

5.6.2.10 Sand rises (mined) 









animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation; land management practises; erosion; 

bushfires; human use. 


5.6.2.11 Recreation areas 





164

DRAFT 





Identified threats: Climate change; human use; logging; mining. 

Comments: Includes water bodies and camping areas, e.g. Lane Pool. 

5.6.2.12 Public dams 






Identified threats: Climate change; human use; logging; mining. 


5.6.2.13 Drainage system 










Identified threats: Pollution (nutrients); climate change; introduced species; weeds; feral animals; 

clearing (within drains – management of drains could save money as less maintenance work needed, and 

could be more of benefit to everyone); degradation of vegetation on banks; erosion. 

Comments: Main value is as a flood mitigation asset; of high value as reduces risk of flooding; some 

biodiversity values, also economic and agricultural value. 

5.6.2.14 “Utility” reserves 








Identified threats: Pollution (rubbish, dumping); weeds; feral animals; urban development (e.g. 

realignment of roads); clearing; land management practises (shires – spraying, clearing); fire (particularly 

along railways); and human use (cars). 

Comments: Refers to road, rail and water corporation reserves; some have good vegetation (indeed 

some have the only remaining patches of particular vegetation types); lobbying to stop clearing is key 

management tool. 

5.6.2.15 Tim’s Thicket Reserve 








Identified threats: Introduced species; weeds; feral animals; urban development; clearing; land 

management practises; erosion; fire management practises; salinity; fire; human use – access motor 

cycles; logging. 

165

DRAFT 



5.6.2.16 Tamala Limestone Karst system 








Identified threats: Water extraction; urban development; clearing; human use; logging. 

Comments: Tuart vegetation, groundwater impacts, lack of information. 

5.6.2.17 WALGA regional corridors 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; dumping of waste; climate change; water extraction; 

introduced species; weeds; feral animals; urban development; clearing; degradation of vegetation; land 

and fire management practises; salinity; bushfires; human use. 

Comments: Value as ecological linkages. 


5.6.3.1 Carpet python 








Identified threats: Climate change; introduced species; feral animals; urban development; clearing; 

degradation of vegetation; land management practises; fire management practises; bushfires. 


5.6.3.2 Freshwater mussels 








Identified threats: Climate change; pollution; water extraction; introduced species; degradation of 

vegetation on river banks; land management practises; erosion; salinity; human use. 


5.6.3.3 Private dams 






166






DRAFT 




Identified threats: Climate change; water extraction; lack of education, awareness, knowledge. 

Comments: Mainly belonging to farmers; with regards to landholder dams, value is economic and social, 

plus some biological value as habitat, but these are also threat to rivers as reduce flows, mainly catch rain, 

and water allocations only apply to main rivers not tributaries. 

5.6.3.4 Existing project works 








Identified threats: Dieback and other pathogens; introduced species; weeds; feral animals; clearing; land 

management practises (grazing). 

Comments: Including projects funded through Landcare, Rivercare etc. 



Asset 

Value 



H=High=1 

Level of 

Threat 

VH=Very 

High=4 

H=High=3 

M=Moderate=2 

L=Low=4 

U=Unknown=0 




Peel-Harvey workshop 

5.6.1.1 Peel-Yalgorup Ramsar System 5 4 1.0 

5.6.1.2 Inland wetlands in the Peel-Harvey sub-region 5 4 1.0 

5.6.1.3 Lake McLarty 5 4 1.0 

5.6.1.4 Lake Mealup 5 4 1.0 

5.6.1.5 Serpentine lakes system 5 4 1.0 

5.6.1.6 Other lakes on the Swan Coastal Plain 5 4 1.0 

5.6.1.7 Peel Inlet 5 4 0.5 9 

5.6.1.8 Harvey estuary 5 4 0.5 9 

5.6.1.9 Palus Plain 5 4 0.5 9 

5.6.1.10 Thrombolites 5 4 0.5 9 

5.6.1.11 Dryandra Reserve and associated remnants 5 4 0.5 9 

5.6.1.12 Korijegup Reserve 5 4 0.5 9 

5.6.1.13 Marradong Nature Reserve 5 4 0.5 9 

5.6.1.14 Tumulus Springs TEC 5 4 0.5 9 

5.6.1.15 Beaches and the dunes backing them 5 4 0.5 9 

5.6.1.16 Holocene dunes and inter-dune wetlands 5 4 0.5 9 

5.6.1.17 State forest 5 4 0.5 9 

5.6.1.18 Remnant vegetation managed by DEC 5 4 0.5 9 

167

DRAFT 


5.6.1.19 Remnant vegetation in well-managed shire reserves 5 3 1.0 

5.6.1.20 Remnant vegetation in not-so-well managed shire 

reserves 5 3 1.0 

5.6.1.21 Remnant vegetation on private property 5 3 1.0 

5.6.1.22 Lot 300 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.23 Tuarts 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.24 Grass trees 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.25 Mature trees 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.26 Flora - declared/listed 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.27 Regionally significant BioPlan vegetation 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.28 Mundijong-SW Highway Rail Corridor 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.29 Fauna - endangered/listed 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.30 Fauna - not listed or endangered 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.31 Iconic fauna 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.32 All black cockatoo species 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.33 Fairy terns 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.34 Hooded Plover 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.35 Woodland bird species 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.36 Resident waterbirds 5 3 0.5 8 

5.6.1.37 Migratory waterbirds 5 3 0.5 8 


5.6.1.39 High value agricultural soils 5 4 1.0 

5.6.1.40 Landscapes of the Swan Coastal Plain 5 4 1.0 

5.6.1.41 Landscapes of the Scarp and hinterland 5 4 1.0 

5.6.1.42 Granite outcrops 5 4 1.0 

5.6.1.43 Lowlands 5 2 1.0 

5.6.1.44 Serpentine River 5 2 1.0 

5.6.1.45 Murray-Hotham River 5 2 1.0 

5.6.1.46 Harvey River 5 4 0.5 9 

5.6.1.47 Surface water 5 4 0.5 9 

5.6.1.47 Water for human use 5 2 0.5 7 

5.6.1.48 Groundwater systems 5 2 0.5 7 

5.6.1.49 NRM staff 5 2 0.5 7 

5.6.1.50 Community-based NRM groups 5 2 0.5 7 

5.6.1.51 Landcare centres 5 2 0.5 7 

5.6.1.52 Knowledge systems 5 2 0.5 7 

5.6.1.53 Sites of Indigenous significance 5 2 0.5 7 

5.6.1.54 Funding streams 5 2 0.5 7 

5.5.1.55 Threatened species/communities 5 2 0.5 7 

5.6.2.1 Jarrah Forest Transition zone 3 2 0.0 

5.6.2.2 Eastern Harvey estuary 3 2 0.0 

5.6.2.3 Priority flora 3 2 0.0 

5.6.2.4 Various eucalypt species 3 3 0.5 6 

5.6.2.5 Fauna - unlisted 3 3 0.5 6 

5.6.2.6 Specific mammal species 3 2 1.0 

5.6.2.7 Tuttaning Reserve 3 2 1.0 

5.6.2.8 Mundlimup State Forest block 3 2 0.5 5 

5.6.2.9 Warrangup Spring 3 2 0.5 5 

5.6.2.10 Sand rises (mined) 3 2 0.5 5 

168

DRAFT 


5.6.2.11 Recreation areas 3 2 0.5 5 

5.6.2.12 Public dams 3 2 0.5 5 

5.6.2.13 Drainage system 3 2 0.5 5 

5.6.2.14 “Utility” reserves 3 2 0.5 5 

5.6.2.15 Tim's Thicket Reserve 3 0.5 3 

5.6.2.16 Tamala Limestone Karst system 3 3 0.5 6 

5.6.2.17 WALGA regional corridors 3 3 0.5 6 

5.6.3.1 Carpet python 1 3 0.5 4 

5.6.3.4 Existing project works 1 2 1.0 

5.6.3.2 Freshwater mussels 1 2 0.5 3 

5.6.3.3 Private dams 1 2 0.5 3 

5.7 Individual Submissions 

Community members interested in NRM throughout the region were asked to fill out either an Excel 

spreadsheet or an online survey (see also Section 6.2). The latter was conducted between 4 th February 

and 31 st March 2011. In all, 34 valid 3 responses were received. The format of the survey is shown in 

Appendix 3. 

The results are summarised below. Feedback: 

Nice survey. 

I believe we need to halt logging in areas of high conservation (regrowth) value around the Wellington 

National Park. I know we need the wood resource for industry but the value of those trees in the 

ground outweighs the value of them for that purpose when approached from a balanced sustainability 

perspective. Erosion, salinity, habitat loss, atmospheric carbon, and one of the fastest drying areas in 

the world - when will they get it Chopping down native forest in that catchment really should stop. 

I feel the SWCC in going forward needs to be more strategic and broaden its focus beyond the 'asset 

management' investment model. There is great capacity in new industry development that has large 

external NRM benefits [such as bioenergy from woody perennials] to deliver cost efficient long term 

and scale appropriate change. SWCC needs to strengthen it's partnership relationships with groups 

that have well aligned interests. Given 85% of the region is dryland farmed I believe the funding 

direction can be better targeted to build land use change to stop leakage from cleared land of water, 

dissolved salts and other industrial products. Orientation of investment going forward will be better 

attacked from a strong sustainable community needs focus and targeted actions that have multiple 

benefits. 

Have recently moved to Roelands in southwest. Would like to be actively involved in bush 

regeneration or protecting what we have left with relation to flora and fauna. What groups in southwest 

are actively doing something about this. 

The team who are working in SWCC and dealing with the upper blackwood are doing an excellent job 

despite the unusual funding parameters they're faced with. Let's hope more funds are available in 

future CfoC business plans & funding rounds to directly support locally based NRM's again, and to 

continue implementing sustainable agriculature projects and Groundworks projects but to meet 

objectives that more closely relate to landholder's major concerns such as salinity, soil health & 

erosion, pest control and water quality enancement - in a nut-shell sustainable agriculture! That is, 

profitable farming with protection of the land in mind. 

3 

Valid responses refer to those that were either fully or partially completed. In total, 69 responses were sent in, but had no 

information and the 37 invalid responses were discarded. 

169

DRAFT 


5.7.1 Exceptional Assets 

5.7.1.1 Lefroy River 

Sub-region: Warren 








Identified threats: Salinity, erosion, feral fish species, weeds, reduction in water quality and quantity. 

Comments: Water salinity is very low and water quality is good - best delivered into the Warren River. 

5.7.1.2 Lefroy catchment area 

Sub-region: Warren 






Identified threats: Reduction in water quality and quantity. 



Comments: Lefroy catchment area contains high value agricultural land with largest diversity of land uses 

in our Shire, town water supply dams, tourism, recreational, commercial businesses (nurseries, mills, 

cellar door sales etc). 

5.7.1.3 Yarloop workshops 

Sub-region: Peel-Harvey 








Identified threats: Development, fire, mining and fire management. 

Comments: Values include recreational values, tourism and historical values; only one in southern 

hemisphere. Main management action is fire management. 

5.7.1.4 Bull Banksia & Kangaroo Paws 









Identified threats: Weeds, development, human intrusion (spraying, slashing, mining) and fire 


Comments: Values include flora, recreational values and tourism; natural entry statement to region. Main 

management actions include biodiversity management, weed control and fire management. 

170

DRAFT 


5.7.1.5 Floristic community in reserves along SW Highway 

Sub-region: Whole of SW 








Identified threats: weeds, feral animals, development, mining, human intrusion (rubbish, firewood taken) 

and fire management practises. 

Comments: Values include rare species, fauna, flora, recreational values and tourism; identified in 

system 6 report as vulnerable. Main management actions include biodiversity management, pest animal 

control, weed control and fire management. 

5.7.1.6 Water 

Sub-region: Peel-Harvey and Blackwood (2x) 








Identified threats: Development, climate change and mining. 

Comments: Values include rare species, fauna, flora, water resources, groundwater and agricultural land. 

Main management action is the maintenance or improvement of water quality (stop giving good quality 

water to mining uses); support and promote sustainable farming practises. 

Priority actions: Most important – salinity management; 2 nd most important – maintenance or 

improvement of water quality; 3 rd most important – management of soil or wind erosion. 

5.7.1.7 Fish stocks 









Identified threats: Over-fishing, commercial fishing and mismanagement of stocks. 

Comments: Values are mainly social and recreational (tourism); actions could include ban by Fisheries of 

commercial netting. 

5.7.1.8 Lake Coyrecup 

Sub-region: Upper Blackwood 








Identified threats: Dumping of waste; climate change; weeds; feral animals; clearing; degradation of 

vegetation; land and fire management practises; human use; salinity; Government’s / funder’s priorities 

not matching local priorities; lack of native vegetation. 

171

DRAFT 


Comments: Refers to the whole system including Coyrecup Lake, the Coryecup sub-catchment and the 

broader Coryecup-Coblinine River system. SWCC & DEC priority, native vegetation and high recreational 

values as has high quality remnant vegetation and variety of water birds, large catchment, unique 

vegetation association, a lot of degradation in Coblinine, value refers to lake and vegetation and cultural 

significance. Refers to rare species, fauna, flora, water resources, agricultural land, recreational, tourism 

and historical values. Current community focus. 

Priority actions: Most important – maintenance or improvement of water quality; 2 nd most important – 

salinity management; 3 rd most important – biodiversity management. Also engineering works and 

increasing native vegetation. 

5.7.1.9 Lake Ewlyamartup 









Identified threats: Dumping of waste; climate change; weeds; feral animals; clearing; degradation of 

vegetation; land and fire management practises; human use; salinity; Government’s / funder’s priorities 

not matching local priorities; lack of native vegetation. 

Comments: Refers to rare species, fauna, flora, water resources, agricultural land, recreational, tourism 

and historical values. Current community focus. 


salinity management; 3 rd most important – biodiversity management. Also engineering works and 

increasing native vegetation. 

5.7.1.10 Carrolup River 









Identified threats: Weeds; feral animals; development; fire management; salinity; erosion (wind or water); 

lack of fringing vegetation. 

Comments: Refers to rare species, fauna, flora, water resources, agricultural land, recreational, tourism 

and historical values. 

Priority actions: Most important – salinity management; 2 nd most important – biodiversity management; 

3 rd most important – weed control. Also increasing remnant vegetation. 

5.7.1.11 Engaged community 









Identified threats: Centralisation of decision-making; lack of funds for local officers; local priorities not 

matching those of funding bodies / govt priorities. 

172

DRAFT 


Comments: Can't do anything without them as they are the land managers; also local knowledge, 

experience and historical value; over work by a dedicated few. 

Priority actions: Most important – local officer funding; 2 nd most important – local priorities valued by 

funders. 

5.7.1.12 Farmers 









Identified threats: Development; salinity; lack of funding for local priorities; small landholders. 

Comments: Control most of the land, are a skilled, knowledgeable and resourceful bunch, also economic 

drivers. 

Priority actions: Most important – local officer funding; 2 nd most important – local priorities used by 

funders; 3 rd most important – local networks. 

5.7.1.13 Native animals 

Sub-region: Whole SW, Upper Blackwood 








Identified threats: Feral animals; development; fire management; salinity; lack of remnant vegetation. 

Comments: Refers to rare species, fauna, flora, recreational, tourism and historical values. 

Priority actions: Most important – increasing native vegetation (corridors); 2 nd most important – pest 

animal control; 3 rd most important – salinity management. 










Identified threats: Development; salinity; erosion (wind or water); de-prioritisation of salinity; small 

landholders. 

Comments: Refers to rare species, fauna, flora, water resources, groundwater, agricultural land, tourism 

and historical values. Economic driver in the region, major landuse. 

Priority actions: Most important – salinity management; 2 nd most important – pest animal control; 3 rd 

most important – weed control. Also sustainable farming options. 

5.7.1.15 Native forest 

Sub-region: Whole SW, Upper Blackwood 






173

DRAFT 




Identified threats: Weeds; salinity; lack of connectivity; development and fire management. 

Comments: Refers to rare species, fauna, flora, water resources, groundwater, agricultural land, 

recreational, tourism, Indigenous and historical values; also termed remnant woodlands; tree species not 

found elsewhere (endemics) and the age of the trees is also important. 

Priority actions: Most important – connectivity; 2 nd most important – increasing areas protected; 3 rd most 

important – fire management. Also pest animal and weed control, and maintenance or improvement of 

water quality. 

5.7.1.16 Waterways and their tributaries 









Identified threats: Weeds; salinity; lack of fringing vegetation. 


recreational, tourism and historical values. 


3 rd most important – management of soil or wind erosion. Also increasing native vegetation. 

5.7.1.17 Black Cockatoos 

Sub-region: Whole of SW; Leschault; Upper Blackwood 








Identified threats: Weeds; salinity; lack of fringing vegetation, lack of nesting sites (need artificial ones). 

Comments: Refers to rare species and fauna values; iconic species. 


3 rd most important – management of soil or wind erosion. Also increasing native vegetation and planting 

of food source trees (Marri). 

5.7.1.18 NRM Officers 

Sub-region: Whole SW 






Identified threats: Lack of funding and burn-out (no career path). 



Comments: Refers to their experience, local knowledge and ability to get community involved, bringing 

them together. 

Priority actions: Most important – securing funding. 

174

DRAFT 


5.7.1.19 Blackwood River Basin 

Sub-region: Blackwood 








Identified threats: Development; lack of funding for on-ground works; certain forms of agriculture. 

Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, water resource, Indigenous and tourism values. 


biodiversity management; 3 rd most important – fire management. Also increasing native vegetation. 

5.7.1.20 Marine Environment 

Sub-region: Whole of SW; Cape to Cape 








Identified threats: Introduced species, weeds, development and erosion. 

Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, historical, Indigenous and tourism values; includes the beach and the 

ocean. 

Priority actions: Most important – control of introduced species; 2 nd most important – fisheries 

management. 

5.7.1.21 Harris River Dam 

Sub-region: Leschenault 






Identified threats: None identified. 



Comments: Refers to water resource values; only fully forested catchment in the region. 

Priority actions: Most important – maintenance of water quality. 

5.7.1.22 Minningup Pool and adjoining reserves 







Identified threats: Weeds, salinity, erosion, dieback. 



Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, tourism, Indigenous and historical values; also diversity of 

habitats. 

Priority actions: Most important – weed control; 2 nd most important – biodiversity management; 3 rd most 

important – fire management. 

175

DRAFT 


5.7.1.23 Western Yellow Robin 









Identified threats: Feral animals, development, climate change and fire management. 

Comments: Is a very rare species. 

Priority actions: Most important – biodiversity management; 2 nd most important – fire management; 3 rd 

most important – pest animal control. Also need to look at addressing climate change. 

5.7.1.24 Phascogales 









Identified threats: Feral animals, development, climate change and fire management. 

Comments: Are very rare. 


most important – pest animal control. Also need to look at addressing climate change. 

5.7.1.25 Baldivis National Park 







Identified threats: Development, fire management, dieback. 



Comments: This small pocket of native bushland is close to schools and would be invaluable for 

understanding nature; therefore educational; spring in this nature reserve is outstanding – 

photographically appealing. Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, tourism and Indigenous values. 


most important – weed control. 

5.7.1.26 Port Peron 







Identified threats: Development. 

Comments: Refers to recreational, tourism and historical values. 

Priority actions: Most important – biodiversity management. 



176

DRAFT 


5.7.1.27 Rockingham National Park 









Identified threats: Weeds, development, fire management, dieback. 

Comments: This small pocket of native bushland is close to schools and would be invaluable for 

understanding nature; therefore educational; spring in this nature reserve is outstanding – 

photographically appealing. Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, tourism and Indigenous values. 

Priority actions: Most important – fire management; 2 nd most important – weed control; 3 rd most 

important – biodiversity management. 

5.7.1.28 Nesting sites for birds 









Identified threats: Clearing, land management and fire management practises, climate change, 

introduced species (bees and parrots from the Eastern states). 

Comments: Refers to fauna, recreational, tourism, Indigenous and historical values; also allows increase 

in breeding populations of native birds. 


most important – pest animal control. Also educating people of their importance and creating man-made 

nesting structures on developed reserves. 

5.7.1.29 Coastal dunes 









Identified threats: Weeds, development, erosion, climate change, human use/impacts. 

Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, tourism, Indigenous and historical values; also slows 

coastal erosion. 

Priority actions: Most important – management of erosion; 2 nd most important – biodiversity 

management; 3 rd most important – weed control. Also educating people of their importance, creating 

vehicle barrier fencing and installing walk trails. 

5.7.1.30 Endemic frog species 








177

DRAFT 



Identified threats: Salinity, development, feral animals, spraying (larvicidal properties and other toxic 

effects). 

Comments: Refers to fauna, tourism, Indigenous and historical values; also control of insect breeding, 

e.g. mosquitoes, and are good indicators of habitat health. 

Priority actions: Most important – biodiversity management; 2 nd most important – pest animal control; 3 rd 

most important – salinity management. Also educating people of their importance and vehicle barriers. 

5.7.1.31 Ephemeral wetlands 



Asset identifiable: Partially, but dispersed 






Identified threats: Clearing, land and fire management practises, development, weeds, salinity, erosion, 

dieback, contamination by chemicals. 

Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, tourism, Indigenous and historical values; also habitats for frogs 

(breeding sites). 

Priority actions: Most important – maintenance or improvement of water quality/quantity; 2 nd most 

important – salinity management; 3 rd most important – biodiversity management. Also educating people 

of their importance and vehicle barriers. 

5.7.1.32 Peel-Harvey Estuary 









Identified threats: Weeds, development, salinity, dieback, contamination by chemicals. 

Comments: Refers to recreational, tourism, Indigenous and historical values; also food supply and 

breeding site for waterbirds. 

Priority actions: Most important – biodiversity management; 2 nd most important – maintenance of water 

quality; 3 rd most important – salinity management. Also weed control, educating people about their 

importance and reducing boat access areas. 

5.7.1.33 Buffalo Beach 









Identified threats: Feral animals, development, erosion, 4 wheel driving on the beach creating erosion, 

and destruction of below ground organisms. 

Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, tourism, Indigenous and historical values. 

178

DRAFT 


Priority actions: Most important – erosion management; 2 nd most important – biodiversity management; 

3 rd most important – pest animal control. Also manage erosion beach erosion from vehicles travelling on 

beach. 

5.7.1.34 Leschenault Estuary foreshore 









Identified threats: Weeds, feral animals, development, no vegetation planting to replace trees/shrubs that 

are dying. 

Comments: Refers to boat ramp/picnic area; recreational, tourism, Indigenous and historical values. 

Priority actions: Most important – biodiversity management; 2 nd most important – erosion management; 

3 rd most important – pest animal control. Revegetation projects required. 

5.7.1.35 Brunswick River 









Identified threats: Weeds, salinity, erosion, development, weed infestations within river bed area, no 

protection from development. 

Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, tourism, Indigenous and historical values; also water 

resources. 


important – pest animal control. 

5.7.1.36 Collie River 









Identified threats: Weeds, salinity, erosion, development, speedboats travelling too fast and causing bed 

and bank erosion, no protection from development, logging in nearby State forests. 

Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, tourism, Indigenous and historical values; also water 

resources. 

Priority actions: Most important – biodiversity management; 2 nd most important – weed control; 3 rd most 

important – pest animal control. Also rehabilitation of dredged section of river and maintenance or 

improvement of water quality. 

5.7.1.37 Leschenault Peninsula and Estuary 




179

DRAFT 







Identified threats: Weeds, feral animals, development, fire management, illegal fishing, pollution, 

unauthorised vehicle access and erosion. 

Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, tourism, Indigenous and historical values; also waterbird 

habitat. 

Priority actions: Most important – erosion management; 2 nd most important – biodiversity management; 

3 rd most important – pest animal control. Also protection of, and research on, local marine species, and 

maintenance or improvement of water quality. 

5.7.1.38 Places of Aboriginal significance 










Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, tourism, Indigenous and historical values; important 

stories of the dreamtime and their significance, lessons in taking care of the land, keeping what is there for 

future generations (educational). 



5.7.1.39 Minningup Pool and adjoining reserves 










Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, tourism, Indigenous and historical values; also diversity of 

habitats. 



5.7.1.40 Geographe Bay 

Sub-region: GeoCatch 






Identified threats: Poor water quality. 



Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, tourism and Indigenous values. 

Priority actions: None identified. 

180

DRAFT 


5.7.1.41 Vasse-Wonnerup wetlands 







Identified threats: Weeds, poor water quality, feral animals. 

Comments: Refers to fauna and tourism values. 


5.7.1.42 Western Ringtail Possum 







Identified threats: Feral animals, development, habitat loss. 





Comments: Refers to rare species, fauna and Indigenous values. 


5.7.1.43 Batalling Reserve 







Identified threats: Feral animals, fire management practises. 

Comments: Refers to rare species and recreational values. 



Priority actions: Most important – pest animal control; 2 nd most important – fire management; 3 rd most 

important – biodiversity management. Also increase cooperation between DEC and local community. 

5.7.1.44 Haddleton Reserve 

Sub-region: Blackwood (3x) 








Identified threats: Weeds, feral animals, development, fire management practises, salinity. 

Comments: Refers to rare species, fauna, groundwater and recreational values. 


most important – fire management. Also increase cooperation between DEC and local community and 

weed control. 

181

DRAFT 


5.7.1.45 EEP wetlands on Swan Coastal Plain in Leschenault estuary 









Identified threats: Clearing, weeds, reduced rainfall and lowering water tables, human activities, dogs 

and cats. 

Comments: Refers to rare species, fauna, flora, groundwater, tourism and recreational values. 

5.7.1.46 Upper catchment rivers and creeks in uncleared areas 









Identified threats: Farming practices, drying climate, weeds, dieback. 

Comments: Refers to biodiversity values. 

5.7.1.47 7 Wildlife Corridors 

Sub-region: Lower Blackwood 








Identified threats: Very high level threats: Climate change; weeds; feral animals (incl. aquatic species 

such as fish and crustaceans); and water; High level threats: Land management practises (incl. introduced 

species and fire) on private land; and clearing on private land. 

Comments: Ecological linkages (N-S AND E-W); Augusta-Margaret River Shire has relevant plan 

(contact Drew McKenzie). 

5.7.1.48 Hardy Inlet 









Identified threats: Very high level threats: Coal and gas mining; pollution; human use; upstream 

management; and management of Scott River; High level threats: Weeds; Feral animals (incl. aquatic 

species such as fish and crustaceans); Medium to low level threats: Climate change; degradation of 

vegetation around the Inlet; and dams. 

Comments: Particularly valuable due to its cultural heritage and significance (both Indigenous and other). 

5.7.1.49 Groundwater aquifers 


182

DRAFT 









Identified threats: Very high level threats: Climate change effects on shallower aquifers; water extraction; 

and coal & gas mining; High level threats: Climate change effects on deep aquifers; Medium to low level 

threats: Pollution; clearing; and plantations. 

Comments: None identified. 










Identified threats: Very high level threats: Salinity; High level threats: Flooding; degradation of vegetation 

along river banks; and feral animals; Medium to low level threats: Weeds; dams; pollution; clearing; water 

extraction; urban development; and cols/gas mining. 


5.7.1.51 Remnant vegetation on public land 









Identified threats: Very high level threats: Climate change; and pathogens; High level threats: Introduced 

species; and fire; Medium to low level threats: Fire management practises; logging; and access. 


5.7.1.52 Flinders Bay 









Identified threats: Very high level threats: Climate change; and pathogens; High level threats: Introduced 

species; and fire; Medium to low level threats: Fire management practises; logging; and access. 


5.7.1.53 Nollajup Nature Reserve 

Sub-region: Middle Blackwood 







183

DRAFT 



Identified threats: Weeds, feral animals, fire management practises. 

Comments: Refers to rare species, fauna and recreational values. 


5.7.2 Very High value assets 

5.7.2.1 Balingup Racecourse Flora Reserve 









Identified threats: Dieback and pathogens, climate change; introduced species, weeds, feral animals, 

land management practices, fire management practices, human use, erosion (soil), conflicting 

management, recreation. 

Comments: The reserve is located north of the Balingup Town site on the opposite side of SW Highway 

to the Balingup Golf course. Majority of the reserve is native bush land. The area once disturbed by the 

racecourse has been highlighted as ideal areas for revegetation. Values refer to fauna, flora and historical 

values. 

Priority actions: Most important – fire management; 2 nd most important – pest animal control; 3 rd most 

important – weed control. 

5.7.2.2 Avenue of Honour - Balingup 









Identified threats: Dieback and pathogens, climate change, land management practices, tree 

management, human use, recreation. 

Comments: The Avenue of Honour is an avenue of oak trees planted to honour soldiers who died at war. 

The oak trees require some arborist attention to keep them alive for a long time to come. 

5.7.2.3 Marribank Settlement 









Identified threats: Dieback and pathogens, climate change, land management practices, tree 

management, human use, recreation. 

Comments: Historical value, Indigenous site so high Indigenous values, permanent river pool, DRF 

(Wagin Banksia), source of firewood, cemetery. Also identified through the peer-reviewed, communitydriven 


184

DRAFT 


5.7.2.4 Honey possums 








Comments: Refers to rare species and fauna values. 





5.7.2.5 River riparian zones 











recreational, tourism and historical values. 



5.7.2.6 Road and Railway Reserves 

Sub-region: Whole SW; whole Blackwood; upper Blackwood, Leschenault 








Identified threats: Weeds; salinity; lack of fringing vegetation; value perceptions; fire management 

practises; clearing (development); degrading health of on-farm bush corridor biodiversity. 

Comments: Refers to rare species, fauna, flora, water resources, groundwater, recreational, historical 

and tourism values; often have mature banksias with strong roots to hold soil, home for native creatures; 

needs to be more areas reserved within some shire (e.g. Shire of Harvey) for protection of flora and fauna. 

Priority actions: Most important – fire management; 2 nd most important – weed control; 3 rd most 

important – biodiversity management. Also need to increase native vegetation, manage salinity and 

erosion in some areas. 

5.7.2.7 Wellington National Park (and dam) 







Identified threats: Lack of development to cater for human use. 



185

DRAFT 


Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, water resource, recreational, tourism and historical values. 

Priority actions: Most important – salinity management; 2 nd most important – maintenance or 

improvement of water quality; 3 rd most important – biodiversity management. Also continued improvement 

of visitor management. 

5.7.2.8 Public open spaces 









Identified threats: Weeds, feral animals, development, human use, fire management, removal of native 

species and replacement with grassed areas etc. 

Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, tourism and historical values; iconic species. Includes 

foreshore walks and riding trails. 

Priority actions: Most important – weed control; 2 nd most important – fire management; 3 rd most 

important – pest animal control. Also management of biodiversity and erosion, protect from future 

development and prioritize appropriate zoning. 

5.7.2.9 Noneycup Creek 









Identified threats: Weeds, development, industry, pollutants. 

Comments: Donnybrook. Refers to water resources and water resource values. 


important – management of erosion. 










Identified threats: Weeds, salinity, no protection from development. 

Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, water resources, recreational, tourism, Indigenous and historical 

values. 

Priority actions: Most important – biodiversity management; 2 nd most important – management of 

erosion; 3 rd most important – weed control. Needs a management plan. 







186

DRAFT 





Identified threats: Weeds. 

Comments: Refers to water resources, tourism, Indigenous and historical values. 


important – pest animal control. 


Sub-region: Middle and Upper Blackwood 








Identified threats: Weeds; salinity; lack of fringing vegetation, drought, development. 

Comments: Refers to water resources, recreational, tourism and historical values. 


3 rd most important – management of soil or wind erosion. Also increasing native vegetation and weed 

control. 

5.7.2.13 Dorothy Scott Bushland 







Identified threats: feral animals, development, fire management. 



Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, social/aesthetic and historical values. 



5.7.2.14 Maslins Reserve 







Identified threats: Weeds; feral animals, fire management. 



Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, social/aesthetic and historical values. 



5.7.2.15 Peel Inlet 






187

DRAFT 






Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, social/aesthetic, tourism and historical values, also bird 

breeding area, wildlife refuge, fish and crab breeding area. 

5.7.2.16 Serpentine River 







Identified threats: . 



Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, social/aesthetic, Indigenous and historical values, also 

boating, cruising fishing, crabbing, dolphins. 

5.7.2.17 Big Swamp 







Identified threats: Weeds, development, domestic animals. 



Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, water resources and recreational. 



5.7.2.18 Manea Park 









Identified threats: Weeds, feral animals and development. 

Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational and historical values. 

Priority actions: Most important – pest animal control; 2 nd most important – biodiversity management; 3 rd 


5.7.2.19 Tuart Walk 









188

DRAFT 


Identified threats: Feral animals, domestic animals, litter. 


Priority actions: Most important – pest animal control; 2 nd most important – weed control; 3 rd most 

important – biodiversity management. 

5.7.2.20 Wellington National Park 









Identified threats: Weeds and feral animals, logging in nearby State forests. 


Priority actions: Most important – maintenance or improvement of water quality; 2 nd most important – fire 

management; 3 rd most important – pest animal control. 

5.7.2.21 Ruabon-Tutanup Rail Reserve 







Identified threats: Weeds, feral animals, dieback. 

Comments: Refers to rare species and flora values. 


5.7.2.22 Urban wetlands 











Identified threats: Weeds, feral animals, development, poor water quality. 

Comments: Refers to fauna, recreational, tourism and Indigenous values. 


5.7.2.23 Arthur River 









Identified threats: Weeds, development, salinity, erosion. 

Comments: Refers to rare species, rare species and agricultural land values. 

189

DRAFT 



management; 3 rd most important – maintenance or improvement of water quality. 

5.7.2.24 Beaufort River 













5.7.2.25 Hillman River 













5.7.2.26 Barrabup Pools 









Identified threats: Very high level threats: Feral aquatic species such as goldfish; medium to low level 

threats: Weed Invasion, Human-use. 


5.7.2.27 Turner Brook 









Identified threats: Very high level threats: Eutrophication from run-off and superphosphate; high level 

threats: human-use, weeds of national significance, lack of rain. 


190

DRAFT 


5.7.2.28 Scott River 









Identified threats: Very high level threats: Acid sulphate soils, weeds of national significance; high level 

threats: human-use, pollution, drought. 


5.7.2.29 Chapman Brook 









Identified threats: Very high level threats: Weeds of National Significance, Feral Animals, Soil 

degradation; high level threats: human-use, drought. 

Comments: Part of the brook – further info from Lower Blackwood LCDC. 

5.7.2.30 Remnant vegetation on private land 



Threat score: High to moderate 






Identified threats: Very high level threats: Climate change; pathogens; and introduced species; high level 

threats: Land management practises; medium to low level threats: Fire management practises; wildfires; 

fire; and logging. 


5.7.2.31 Gingilup Swamps 









Identified threats: Very high level threats: Acid sulphate soils; high level threats: pollution, drought. 

Comments: Further info from Department of Water. 

5.7.2.32 Augusta wetlands 







191

DRAFT 




Identified threats: High level threats: pollution, drought. 

Comments: Wetlands east of river mouth (possibly Emu Springs); further info from Lower Blackwood 

LCDC and Department of Water. 

5.7.2.33 West Bay Creek 









Identified threats: Very high level threats: Eutrophication due to runway from other waterways, high 

phosphate levels, soil degradation and soil disturbance; high level threats: Human use, pollution. 


5.7.3 High value assets 

5.7.3.1 Capercup Reserve 







Identified threats: Weeds, salinity. 



Comments: 160ha, no salinity in 1996, currently 50% affected; rare flora, smoker parrot habitat. Also 


5.7.3.2 Lake Towerrrinning 

Sub-region: Upper Blackwood (2x) 








Identified threats: Weeds; feral animals; development; salinity; lack of fringing vegetation. 

Comments: Refers to rare species, water resources, recreational, tourism and historical values. 


3 rd most important – management of soil or wind erosion. Also increasing native vegetation, maintenance 

or improvement of water quality and weed control. 

5.7.3.3 Stream water quality 








192

DRAFT 




Comments: Refers to water resource values; it really is precious stuff, helps everyone, feeds everyone 

too. 



5.7.3.4 Community 










Comments: Sense of place; issues of ownership; capacity for action. 

Priority actions: Create enterprise diversity and employment opportunities, sustainable energy, and 

sustainable water. 

5.7.3.5 Soil health and biodiversity 

Sub-region: Leschenault, Middle & Upper Blackwood (3x) 








Identified threats: Erosion, land management practises, salinity, declining soil pH, reduced biological 

activity through chemical use, weeds, development, erosion. 

Comments: Refers to its value to agriculture and to the health of the overall landscape, its water and 

biodiversity; need to prevent the loss of rich soils from agricultural properties (loss of valuable nutrients, 

helps the farmer to grow what he/she needs without trucking in fertiliser at great cost rich, soil and 

nutrients never to be seen again); foundation to production; support and promote sustainable farming 

practises. 

Priority actions: Most important – control of erosion; 2 nd most important – salinity management; 3 rd most 

important – weed control. 

5.7.3.6 Water security 








Comments: Foundation to production. 

5.7.3.7 Buckingham Reserve 






193

DRAFT 






Identified threats: Weeds, fire management, dieback. 


Comments: Refers to floral values; is also a boundary of different vegetation associations. 

Priority actions: Most important – weed control; 2 nd most important – fire management; 3 rd most 

important – biodiversity management. Also dieback management. 

5.7.3.8 Wallabies 










Comments: Refers to fauna values; also to recognise mammal diversity. 


5.7.3.9 Commet Bay Beach 










Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, social/aesthetic and historical values; also easy access, 

wind protected, beautiful beach. 

Priority actions: Most important – erosion management; also dredge material may change shape and 

colour of the beach. 

5.7.3.10 Mandurah Estuary 










Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, social/aesthetic and historical values; includes the canals, 

also Christmas Lights Cruise, Habour Cruise, dolphins, biking, walking. 


erosion management. 

5.7.3.11 Manjar Bay foreshore 




194

DRAFT 








Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, recreational, social/aesthetic and historical values, also walking, 

picnicking, easy access to shops attractive shaded area. 

Priority actions: Most important – maintenance or improvement of water quality, also clean up rubbish. 

5.7.3.12 Murray River 










Comments: Refers to fauna, flora, water resources, recreational, social/aesthetic, Indigenous and 

historical values, also boating, cruising fishing, crabbing, dolphins 


salinity management. 

195

DRAFT 


6. The online survey 

6.1 The 7-page online survey 

196

DRAFT 


197

DRAFT 


198

DRAFT 


199

DRAFT 


200

DRAFT 


201

DRAFT 


202






DRAFT 


6.2 Results of the online survey 


Asset 

Value 



H=High=1 

Level of 

Threat 

VH=Very 

High=4 

H=High=3 

M=Moderate=2 

L=Low=4 

U=Unknown=0 




Individual responses - online survey 

5.7.1.1 Lefroy River 5 4 1.0 

5.7.1.2 Lefroy catchment area 5 4 0.5 9 

5.7.1.3 Yarloop workshops 5 4 0.5 9 

5.7.1.4 Bull Banksia & Kangaroo Paws 5 3 1.0 

5.7.1.5 Floristic community in reserves along SW Highway 5 3 1.0 

5.7.1.6 Water 5 3 1.0 

5.7.1.7 Fish stocks 5 3 1.0 

5.7.1.8 Lake Coyrecup 5 3 0.5 8 

5.7.1.9 Lake Ewlyamartup 5 3 0.5 8 

5.7.1.10 Carrolup River 5 3 0.5 8 

5.7.1.11 Engaged community 5 3 0.5 8 

5.7.1.12 Farmers 5 3 0.5 8 

5.7.1.13 Native animals 5 3 0.5 8 


5.7.1.15 Native forest 5 3 0.5 8 

5.7.1.16 Waterways and their tributaries 5 3 0.5 8 

5.7.1.17 Black Cockatoos 5 2 1.0 

5.7.1.18 NRM Officers 5 2 1.0 

5.7.1.19 Blackwood River Basin 5 2 1.0 

5.7.1.20 Marine Environment 5 2 1.0 

5.7.1.21 Harris River Dam 5 2 1.0 

5.7.1.22 Minningup Pool and adjoining reserves 5 2 1.0 

5.7.1.23 Western Yellow Robin 5 2 1.0 

5.7.1.24 Phascogales 5 2 1.0 

5.7.1.25 Baldivis National Park 5 2 1.0 

5.7.1.26 Port Peron 5 2 1.0 

5.7.1.27 Rockingham National Park 5 2 1.0 

5.7.1.28 Nesting sites for birds 5 2 1.0 

5.7.1.29 Coastal dunes 5 2 1.0 

5.7.1.30 Endemic frog species 5 2 1.0 

5.7.1.31 Ephemeral wetlands 5 4 1.0 

5.7.1.32 Peel-Harvey Estuary 5 4 1.0 

5.7.1.33 Buffalo Beach 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.34 Leschenault Estuary foreshore 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.35 Brunswick River 5 2 0.5 7 

203

DRAFT 


5.7.1.36 Collie River 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.37 Leschenault Peninsula and Estuary 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.38 Places of Aboriginal significance 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.39 Minningup Pool and adjoining reserves 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.40 Geographe Bay 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.41 Vasse-Wonnerup wetlands 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.42 Western Ringtail Possum 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.43 Batalling Reserve 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.44 Haddleton Reserve 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.45 EEP wetlands on Swan Coastal Plain in Leschenault 

estuary 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.46 Upper catchment rivers and creeks in uncleared 

areas 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.47 7 Wildlife Corridors 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.48 Hardy Inlet 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.49 Groundwater aquifers 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.50 Blackwood River 5 2 0.5 7 

5.7.1.51 Remnant vegetation on public land 5 2 0.0 

5.7.1.52 Flinders Bay 5 2 0.0 

5.7.1.53 Nollajup Nature Reserve 5 2 0.0 

5.7.2.1 Balingup Racecourse Flora Reserve 3 2 0.0 

5.7.2.2 Avenue of Honour - Balingup 3 2 0.0 

5.7.2.3 Marribank Settlement 3 2 0.0 

5.7.2.4 Honey possums 3 2 0.0 

5.7.2.5 River riparian zones 3 3 0.5 6 

5.7.2.6 Road and Railway Reserves 3 3 0.5 6 

5.7.2.7 Wellington National Park (and dam) 3 3 0.5 6 

5.7.2.8 Public open spaces 3 3 0.5 6 

5.7.2.9 Noneycup Creek 3 3 0.5 6 

5.7.2.10 Preston River 3 2 1.0 

5.7.2.11 Balingup Brook 3 2 1.0 

5.7.2.12 Blackwood River 3 2 1.0 

5.7.2.13 Dorothy Scott Bushland 3 2 1.0 

5.7.2.14 Maslins Reserve 3 2 1.0 

5.7.2.15 Peel Inlet 3 2 1.0 

5.7.2.16 Serpentine River 3 2 1.0 

5.7.2.17 Big Swamp 3 2 1.0 

5.7.2.18 Manea Park 3 2 1.0 

5.7.2.19 Tuart Walk 3 2 1.0 

5.7.2.20 Wellington National Park 3 2 1.0 

5.7.2.21 Ruabon-Tutanup Rail Reserve 3 2 1.0 

5.7.2.22 Urban wetlands 3 2 1.0 

5.7.2.23 Arthur River 3 4 1.0 

5.7.2.24 Beaufort River 3 2 0.5 5 

5.7.2.25 Hillman River 3 2 0.5 5 

5.7.2.26 Barrabup Pools 3 2 0.5 5 

5.7.2.27 Turner Brook 3 2 0.5 5 

5.7.2.28 Scott River 3 2 0.5 5 

5.7.2.29 Chapman Brook 3 2 0.5 5 

204

DRAFT 


5.7.2.30 Remnant vegetation on private land 3 2 0.5 5 

5.7.2.31 Gingilup Swamps 3 2 0.5 5 

5.7.2.32 Augusta wetlands 3 2 0.5 5 

5.7.2.33 West Bay Creek 3 2 0.5 5 

5.7.3.1 Capercup Reserve 1 2 0.5 3 

5.7.3.2 Lake Towerrrinning 1 2 0.5 3 

5.7.3.3 Stream water quality 1 2 0.5 3 

5.7.3.4 Community 1 2 1.0 

5.7.3.5 Soil health and biodiversity 1 3 0.0 

5.7.3.6 Water security 1 2 1.0 

5.7.3.7 Buckingham Reserve 1 2 1.0 

5.7.3.8 Wallabies 1 2 1.0 

5.7.3.9 Commet Bay Beach 1 2 1.0 

5.7.3.10 Mandurah Estuary 1 2 0.5 3 

5.7.3.11 Manjar Bay foreshore 1 2 0.5 3 

5.7.3.12 Murray River 1 2 0.0 

Full results not yet incorporated into the document. 

205

DRAFT 


7. Further discussion on emerging threats 

Horizon planning 4 is a workshop approach that has been developed fairly recently, allowing a group of 

people with shared interests to explore changes that might impact on their area of interest in the near to 

mid-term future, whether through human-induced or other causes. Generally specialists from a range of 

fields participate to ensure that as broad a range of factors as possible is discussed. Often, such sessions 

identify and highlight issues that are unlikely to have otherwise been discovered. 

A group of scientists from around the world have been implementing the approach since 2009 to identify 

emerging issues for conservation, highlighting 15 key issues in an annual report. The latest of these 

identified four trends that have some relevance to the South West NRM region (Sutherland et al. 2011): 

Human denial of long-term threats 

Global responses to climate change 

Transformation of oceans and domestication of marine species 

Hydraulic fracturing 

In addition, NRM stakeholders in the South West region have identified a number of other issues through 

direct consultation or at a workshop held in Bunbury on 2011. Each of these issues is discussed in more 

detail below. 

7.1 Human denial of long-term threats 

A number of authors have argued that it is a predictable and natural human behaviour to deny long-term 

threats to human quality of life and health, such as climate change and biodiversity loss (Rees 2011). As 

an example, social responses to HIV-Aids consistently indicate that a large proportion of society will deny 

scientific evidence and that individuals will only change their behaviour when they personally experience 

serious, immediate impacts. It should therefore be expected that society will respond to climate change in 

a similar manner, and indeed, the proportion of people denying climate change in the USA is now 

increasing. 

Worse still, social psychologists suggest that denial is expected to increase both in extent and intensity as 

scientific evidence of a threat from phenomena such as climate change or biodiversity loss accumulates 5 . 

This expected behaviour has major implications for much of the work conducted in the NRM field, 

particularly when combined with the ever-growing aspirations of people in developing countries for a 

“better life” that inexorably lead to increasing consumption levels. 

7.2 Decreasing rainfall 

The only global agreement with specific targets to control greenhouse gas emissions, the Kyoto Protocol, 

expires at the end of 2012. Failure of negotiating parties to reach agreement on a successor means that it 

is now almost inevitable that any new agreement will take effect some time after the Kyoto Protocol 

expires. It is even possible that a global agreement is not feasible. Nevertheless, local efforts to reduce 

emissions will probably continue in many countries. Under a global agreement, there might be 

opportunities to optimize or target emission reduction mechanisms, particularly those designed to reduce 

deforestation or enhance carbon storage in natural systems, which might also benefit native species. 

Without an overarching global agreement, it is unclear which mechanisms will be available to ensure that 

4 

5 

Or as Sutherland et al (2010) put it, “Horizon scanning is the systematic search for incipient trends, opportunities and 

constraints that might affect the probability of achieving management goals and objectives. Explicit objectives of horizon 

scanning are to anticipate issues, accumulate data and knowledge about them, and thus inform crucial decisions.” It is a 

technique widely employed in the health sector, as well as business and in the defence forces, but has not been widely used in 

the fields of conservation and natural resource management. 

Dickinson, J.L. 2009 The people paradox: self-esteem striving, immortality ideologies, and human response to climate 

change. Ecol. Soc. 14: 17 

206

DRAFT 


the probability of persistence of native species increases rather than decreases in response to climate 

change mitigation. 

Projected environmental outcomes are known to differ according to whether power within a governance 

framework operates at the local, national or international level and the relative influence of the state or the 

market on society. There has been no previous attempt at climate change mitigation that involves global 

carbon markets but lacks global coordination (Sutherland et al. 2011). 

7.3 Tree decline 

The following is excerpted from an unpublished paper “Climate Change and Declining Forest Ecosystems in South-west Western 

Australia”, by G Hardy, P Barber, B Evans, T Lyons, S Moore, E Veneklaas, P Poot, M Renton, B Dell, T Fleming, R Hobbs, C 

Baudains, R Schibeci, M Buizer, L Valentine, T Moore, G Matusick, M Bader, J Chopard, N Brouwers and T Burgess, from State 

Centre of Excellence on Climate Change, Woodland and Forest Health, Murdoch University and the University of Western Australia. 

Accessed on 2/1/2012 from http://www.foresthealth.com.au/ 

Tree decline is a serious nationwide phenomenon. A number of woodland and forest ecosystems in the 

south-west of Western Australia are suffering from varying degrees of decline. These include Eucalyptus 

gomphocephela (tuart), E. wandoo (wandoo), E. rudis (swamp gum), Agonis flexuosa (WA peppermint), 

Corymbia calophylla (marri) and E. marginata (jarrah). The causes of these decline syndromes are 

complex and it is likely that predisposing (e.g. climate shifts, disturbance regime shifts), inciting (e.g. frost, 

drought, insect defoliation) and contributing issues (e.g. soil-borne and canker pathogens, wood and bark 

beetles) will be different for each of these forest or woodland ecosystems. The decline in rainfall and the 

slight increase in average summer and winter temperatures over the last 30 years could well be playing a 

significant role in helping predispose these ecosystems to decline. These changes together with the longterm 

predictions of a 5-60% decrease in rainfall and a 0.5-6.5 C increase in summer temperatures by 

2070 do indicate that our woodland and forest ecosystems and the ecosystem services they provide are 

under threat. Consequently, we need to be thinking about how to manage our forests given that we are 

already experiencing climate change and that predictions all indicate substantial change for a hotter and 

drier climate. 

The question now needs to be asked ‘have ecological tipping points been reached for any of the woodland 

and forest ecosystems described above’ For example, in areas of the tuart forest such as immediately 

east of Lake Clifton all trees of all age classes are now dead. This is essentially part of an ecosystem that 

has collapsed. The consequences of such a decline on ecosystem function and services, and biodiversity 

values remain largely unexplored, but are likely profound. Seed banks are no longer present and to return 

this area of forest to its former state will require significant management inputs. These would include fire 

for ash beds, planting of tuart seedlings or the manual distribution of seed together with A. flexuosa 

management to reduce competition. However, we still need to understand the causes of tuart decline, 

before we look at active intervention as any attempts to restore the forest might well be unsuccessful. In 

the case of marri, the canker fungi Quambalaria coyrecup (the cause of branch, stem and trunk cankers) 

and Q. piterika (the cause of foliar, flower and fruit blight) are now wide spread and causing profound 

decline and death of marri across most of its range. Q. coyrecup is believed to be an endemic pathogen, 

so why is it now expressing itself as a primary pathogen This could be due to a change in the virulence of 

the pathogen, or to drought or some other change in the abiotic environment that has shifted the ability of 

marri to defend itself from the pathogen. Therefore, for marri unlike for tuart, we have a much clearer 

understanding of the cause of the declines, although we do not know why marri, which has likely evolved 

with Q. coyrecup is now unable to defend itself. Other similar stories and questions can be linked to the 

other woodland and forest ecosystems that are in decline. The most effective way to address these will be 

to develop multi-disciplinary research teams that interact and work closely with stakeholders. 

Many knowledge gaps still exist with regards to climate change and forest health: 

Tree water use - how much does a particular tree species need for survival and what level of a lack of 

sufficient water causes a tree to become stressed 

207

DRAFT 


How do even small changes in climate affect phenological changes (flowering and fruiting) Even 

small changes may escalate into major impacts on forest biodiversity, because co-evolution has 

produced highly specialized interactions between specific plant and animal species. 

How will changes in climate affect insects and pathogens of host species, both exotic and endemic 

What are the climate cues that may make host species more resistant or susceptible to insects and 

pathogens 

What other tree species in the south-west of Western Australia are likely to decline in future given the 

current climate change scenarios 

Where should we be putting our resources with respect to the management of woodland and forest 

declines and to the understanding of how these might impact on biodiversity and ecosystem services 

How and where do we establish long-term monitoring plots to record biotic and abiotic perturbations in 

our forests and how can we use historical records to help monitor alterations in tree and 

pest/pathogen distributions that expose our forests to new or enhanced pressures that will result in 

change or ecosystem tipping points 

What are the best methods and tools to monitor forest health and change remotely 

These and many other questions will need to be asked and addressed to ensure we manage our forest 

and woodland ecosystems and the services they provide in the face of climate change. 

7.4 Emissions trading, carbon tax and related issues 

The Australian Government has set up a number of initiatives to help deal with climate change and its 

effects. As such, they provide significant opportunities for SWCC and its partners to access funding. 

They include: 

1. Biodiversity Fund 

2. Carbon Farming Futures 

3. Indigenous Carbon Fund 

4. Regional Natural Resource Management Planning for Climate Change Fund 

5. Carbon Farming Skills 

6. Carbon Farming Initiative – Non-Kyoto Carbon Fund 

The following information about these has been taken from the Government’s websites. 

1. Biodiversity Fund: An ongoing fund, the Biodiversity Fund (part of the Clean Energy Future Plan) 

aims to support Australia’s farmers and other land managers by supporting projects that establish, 

restore, protect or manage biodiverse carbon stores 

Funding will be allocated to activities to help farmers and land managers store carbon, enhance 

biodiversity and increase resilience across the Australian landscape. The Biodiversity Fund will 

facilitate investment in: 

Biodiverse plantings: Funding will help farmers and other land managers expand native habitat on 

their property through planting mixed vegetation species appropriate to their region. This will help 

build landscape resilience and connectivity. 

Protecting and enhancing existing native vegetation: Funding will support farmers and other land 

managers to protect, manage and enhance high conservation value native vegetation, on their 

land for its carbon storage and biodiversity benefits. 

Managing threats to biodiversity: Funding will support farmers and other land managers to control 

the threat of invasive pests and weeds. 

There have also been some serious questions raised about the fund, see for example 

http://theconversation.edu.au/the-biodiversity-fund-another-missed-opportunity-4889 

208

DRAFT 


2. The Carbon Farming Futures program is designed to assist land owners and users to participate in 

the Carbon Farming Initiative and reduce emissions. This program is itself made up of several 

components: 

Filling the Research Gap (AUD201 million) will fund research into new technologies and practices 

for land managers to reduce emissions and store soil carbon. This program has already 

commenced, building on research undertaken through the Climate Change Research Program. 

The relevant website says, “Projects will target current research gaps around abatement 

technologies and practices. Research priorities are reducing methane emissions, reducing nitrous 

oxide emissions, sequestering carbon and improving modelling capability.” 

Converting research into methodologies (AUD20 million) provides funding to convert research into 

estimation methodologies for use in the Carbon Farming Initiative. This program will commence 

from 1st July 2012 and for those familiar with the processes of the Carbon Farming Initiative and 

its Domestic Offsets Integrity Committee, funding support will be very welcome. 

Action on the Ground (AUD99 million) is designed to assist industry and farming groups test and 

apply research outcomes in real farming situations. The first round of funding applications has 

closed, with successful applicants to be advised in the near future. 

Extension and Outreach (AUD 64 million) to provide information, support and an extension 

network to help farmers take action on the land. Latest information suggests funding will be 

available to organisations in and related to agriculture. 

Refundable Tax Offset (RTO) will provide 15% RTOs for new eligible conservation tillage 

equipment installed between 1 July 2012 and 30 June 2015. This element of Carbon Farming 

Futures is exclusively open to agricultural activities and excludes farming, but may include private 

farm forestry initiatives. 

3. The ongoing Indigenous Carbon Farming Fund will support Indigenous Australians to benefit from 

carbon farming. The Fund will commence from July 2012, and will be delivered in two streams: 

A Research and Development stream ($5.2 million over five years) will provide funding for 

research and reporting tools for Carbon Farming Initiative methodologies. This funding will be 

directed towards low-cost methodologies likely to have high Indigenous participation to help create 

real and lasting opportunities for Indigenous Australians. 

A Capacity Building and Business Support stream ($17.1 million over five years) will help 

Indigenous communities establish or participate in carbon farming projects. 

One can register your interest in receiving email updates about the Indigenous Carbon Farming Fund 

Research and Development stream and other land sector measures by emailing the Carbon Farming 

Administrator - cfi@climatechange.gov.au. 

4. The Regional Natural Resource Management Planning for Climate Change Fund: Regional 

Natural Resource Management (NRM) organisations will be supported to update existing regional 

NRM plans to guide planning for climate change impacts on the land and to maximise the 

environmental benefits of carbon farming projects. 

Around $44m over five years will be utilised for this fund. The fund will help to guide where 

biosequestration projects should be located in the landscape to maximise the benefits for biodiversity, 

water and agricultural production. The fund is divided into two streams: 

Stream 1: Will provide $28.9m over five years to support the 56 regional NRM organisations 

revise existing regional NRM plans to help identify where in the landscape adaptation and 

mitigation activities should be undertaken. This stream will be administered by the Department of 

Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities 

Stream 2: Will provide $15m over five years to support development of regional-level information 

in the form of scenarios about the impacts of climate change (water, temperature, storms) which 

209

DRAFT 


can be used for medium term regional NRM land use planning. This stream will be administered 

by the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. 

For more information on the Regional NRM Planning for Climate Change Fund, please subscribe to 

the Clean Energy Enviro News. 

5. Carbon Farming Skills: The ongoing Carbon Farming Skills initiative will ensure that landholders 

have access to credible, high quality advice and carbon services. This measure will fund: 

development of a new nationally accredited qualification for carbon service providers 

accreditation of carbon brokers and aggregators operating in the Carbon Farming Initiative; and 

information workshops for farm extension officers, catchment authorities and rural service 

providers about carbon farming. 

The program, with funding of $4 million over five years, will commence in July 2012. Carbon Farming 

Skills will be administered by the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. 

You can register your interest in receiving email updates about the Carbon Farming Skills and the 

other land sector measures by emailing the Carbon Farming Administrator - 

cfi@climatechange.gov.au. 

6. The Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI) allows farmers and land managers to earn carbon credits by 

storing carbon or reducing greenhouse gas emissions on the land. These credits can then be sold to 

people and businesses wishing to offset their emissions. http://www.climatechange.gov.au/cfi 

The Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI) is an Australian Government scheme to help farmers, forest 

growers and land managers earn income from reducing emissions like nitrous oxide and methane 

through changes to agricultural and land management practices. 

http://www.daff.gov.au/climatechange/cfi The initiative will achieve this by: 

establishing a carbon crediting scheme - These rule and regulations will be the basis for the 

carbon crediting scheme and developing on farm methodologies for emissions offset activities. 

Landholders undertaking activities that conform to an approved methodology will generate carbon 

credits. These carbon credits could then be sold on domestic or international carbon markets. 

Further information on these rules is available from the Department of Climate Change and 

Energy Efficiency and the CFI brochure. 

developing methodologies for offset projects - Landholders and Indigenous Land Managers 

undertaking projects to credit offsets will need to use an approved methodology in order to 

participate in the carbon offset scheme. All offset methodologies are assessed by the Domestic 

Offsets Integrity Committee (DOIC), an independent committee of experts, to ensure they lead to 

real and measurable emissions reductions. The Committee brings a range of expertise to these 

assessments, including science, technology, legal, methodology development and greenhouse 

gas measurement approaches. A list of proposed methodologies and further information on how 

to submit comments are available on the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency 

website. The Government is continuing to work with stakeholders to develop further 

methodologies for submission to the DOIC. 

providing information and tools to help farmers and land managers benefit from carbon markets 

investing in a CFI Communications Program - The Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI) 

Communications Program will invest $4 million from 2011–12 to 2013-14 to provide farmers, land 

managers and their key influencers with credible, clear and consistent information on the CFI. 

Part of the program will provide targeted grants to each of the 56 Natural Resource Management 

(NRM) regions. This will see Regional Landcare Facilitators (RLFs) work closely with farmers, 

Indigenous Australians and other land managers to identify how they can participate in and benefit 

from the opportunities created by the CFI and carbon farming. RLFs participated in a national 

forum about the CFI in Canberra on 8 and 9 March 2011. They have also attended state and 

210

DRAFT 


territory based workshops delivered by the Australian Government and the University of 

Melbourne. It is expected that RLFs will begin delivering information sessions to farmers and land 

managers from December 2011. 

investing in a Biochar Capacity Building Program 

The implementation of the scheme will be undertaken jointly by DAFF and the Department of Climate 

Change and Energy Efficiency. 

7.5 Changes in approaches to prioritizing assets and threats 

INFFER has been developed as a means to prioritize assets for intervention on the basis of (mainly) 

economic information (see www.inffer.org for a complete description and a brad range of useful 

publications). There have been recent suggestions that the so-called condition-based approach might be 

more effective (Curtis and Lefroy 2010), but this framework requires further development. 

Yet other researchers are developing methods based on those utilised in the health sector to prioritize 

investment into priority health issues (Evans et al 2011) and SWCC should research these carefully before 

going ahead with any system. 

7.6 The emergence of citizen science 

Citizen Science is gaining in popularity as a method of research, and for many good reasons (Cooper et al 

2007). As the term suggests, Citizen Science involves the participation of the wider community 

(particularly non-scientists) in scientific projects. Interestingly, it is nothing new – naturalists were people 

that provided significant inputs to the world of science, including Aristotle, John James Audubon, Charles 

Darwin, Joseph Banks, Alexander von Humboldt, Alfred Russel Wallace, Charles Darwin, Stephen Jay 

Gould, Henry David Thoreau, Theodore Roosevelt, Carl Linnaeus, Georges Cuvier and David Suzuki. 

Proponents of Citizen Science, when listing its benefits, usually begin with how it enables extensive data 

collection. Indeed, this benefit is considerable; but it is the interaction between scientists and the 

community, and the ability for projects to inform both groups, that are perhaps the most exciting outcomes 

of this approach. Further, new ways to conduct and augment Citizen Science projects are being 

developed that are enhancing the potential of this research methodology. 

Developing our scientific understanding of the natural world often requires a great deal of data collection, 

but time and resource availability limit scientists' ability to collect that data. One solution to this problem is 

to have more people collecting data, and this is where Citizen Scientists can assist. Data can be collected 

by the community and submitted via online survey instruments, or materials can be collected and 

delivered to scientists. Scientists benefit from data collected over a large area, or over a long period of 

time. Data and materials can also be collected from areas that are normally difficult to access, such as 

private property. 

Additional benefits: 

There are many other benefits of Citizen Science. By participating in a project, community members get a 

chance to inform scientists, and, in the process, learn more about their environment. Information gained 

through Citizen Science projects can change public perceptions of the natural world, promote interaction 

with nature, and engage the community in the management of natural resources. These natural 

advantages of a Citizen Science program can be augmented by additional education and research 

strategies: 

The inclusion of educational materials for school-based projects, e.g. exercises developed for Barbara 

Hardy Institute Citizen Science projects at the University of South Australia are introducing children to 

animal classification, wildlife observation, collecting data and collating results 

http://www.unisa.edu.au/barbarahardy/research/citizen-science.asp . 

211

DRAFT 


Data can be collected, or self-reported, that concerns the attitudes of the participating Citizen 

Scientists. This collection of attitudinal data enables scientists to examine the influences on people's 

behaviour towards wildlife. 

There are even whole organisations devoted to this e.g. Community Science Institute (CSI) is a not-forprofit 

organization whose mission is to empower local people to understand their environment and 

manage their resources sustainably, particularly water. They recruit, train and support groups of 

volunteers to partner with a state-certified water quality testing lab and monitor streams and lakes over the 

long term. Data produced by the monitoring partnerships with local volunteers fills gaps left by federal, 

state and academic programs, while monitoring results help position local governments to manage water 

resources and distribute costs equitably among stakeholders. By participating directly in the scientific 

process of collecting management-quality data, volunteers become knowledgeable stewards of their 

watersheds (See http://communityscience.org/). 

Taken from: Cooper, CB, J Dickinson, T Phillips and R Bonney 2007 Citizen science as a tool for 

conservation in residential ecosystems. Ecology and Society 12(2):11 Sourced online on 8 th March 2012 

at http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss2/art11/ 

The following also provides further insights: “Building a Sustainable Future Needs More Than Science” by 

Stephen Leahy, who wrote: Contrary to popular belief, humans have failed to address the earth's 

worsening emergencies of climate change, species' extinction and resource overconsumption not 

because of a lack of information, but because of a lack of imagination, social scientists and artists say. 

At a conference for the American Academy for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) here in Vancouver, 

British Columbia, experts argued that the path to a truly sustainable future is through the muddy waters of 

emotions, values, ethics, and most importantly, imagination. 

Humans' perceptions of reality are filtered by personal experiences and values, said David Maggs, a 

concert pianist and PhD student at the Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability at the 

University of British Columbia (UBC). 

As a result, the education and communication paradigm of "if we only knew better, we'd do better" is not 

working, Maggs told attendees at the world's largest general science meeting. "We don't live in the real 

world, but live only in the world we imagine." 

"We live in our heads. We live in storyland," agreed John Robinson of UBC's Institute for Resources, 

Environment and Sustainability. 

"When we talk about sustainability we are talking about the future, how things could be. This is the 

landscape of imagination," Robinson told IPS. "If we can't imagine a better world we won't get it." 

This imagining will be complex and difficult. Sustainability encompasses far more than just scientific facts 

– it also incorporates the idea of how we relate to nature and to ourselves, he said. 

"We haven't yet grasped the depth of changes that are coming." 

Because human decisions and behaviour are the result of ethics, values and emotion, and because 

sustainability directly involves our values and ethical concerns, science alone is insufficient to make 

decisions about sustainability, said Thomas Dietz, assistant vice president for environmental research at 

Michigan State University. 

Information plays a much smaller role than we like to think, Dietz explained. In order to truly address big 

issues like climate change or sustainability, we need to talk at a society-wide scale about our values and 

reach mutual understanding about the values needed for sustainability. 

"However, we don't like to talk about our values or feelings, because it threatens our personal identity." 

Engaging the public 

Treating nature as an object, separate and distinct from us, is part of the problem, said Sacha Kagan, 

sociologist at Leuphana University in Germany. The current environmental crisis results from technological 

thinking and a fear of complexity that science alone cannot help us with, Kagan said. 

212

DRAFT 


The objectification of the natural world began during the Age of Enlightenment about 300 years ago. 

People saw the world and their place in it in very different ways before that, said Robinson. 

Today, he said, sustainability will not be achieved without "engaging people in numbers and at levels that 

have never been done before". 

New social media tools like Facebook may help with such a monumental task, as "people certainly don't 

like to come to public meetings". 

Current approaches to help the public understand the implications of climate change, such as graphs or 

iconic pictures of polar bears, have limitations and are ineffective, said Mike Hulme, a climate scientist at 

the University of East Anglia in the UK. 

"We need to find new ways to think about the future under climate change," said Hulme. 

Art could be one such approach, suggested Dietz. It would serve not as propaganda but as a creative way 

to engage our imaginations. "Art can provoke thinking and actually change people's perceptions of the 

complex issues associated with sustainability science," he argued. 

"When we're considering questions about preserving biodiversity versus creating jobs, art can help us 

examine our values and have a discussion that's broader than just scientific facts." 

It is tempting to believe the arts can help by softening and 'pretty-fying' the message and bringing it to a 

wider audience, said award-winning photographer Joe Zammit-Lucia. 

"We need to go much further to provide a different worldview that can help us re-frame the issues," said 

Zammit-Lucia. 

Society's choices are driven by people's cultural perceptions of reality, which in turn are based on their 

values and their cultural context, he said. While helpful, scientific knowledge and experts are also part of 

the problem: by dominating the sustainability discourse, they narrow people's visions of what's possible. 

"I also don't buy in the idea we need to make the right decisions. What we need is the right process, ways 

in which the public can fully participate," he concluded. 

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.aspidnews=106808 21-2-2012 

7.7 Land use change and development 

The speed of land use change and development in the South West NRM region has accelerated over the 

last decade or so, partly due to the ever-increasing numbers of mining employees on FIFO (fly in-fly out) 

contracts that now call the south west “home”. This naturally puts the environment under increasing 

pressure and demands ever more rapid responses from the NRM community, just to maintain the status 

quo for our most valued NRM assets. 

Of particular importance is the fact that many of the community engagement strategies employed in the 

past may not be as effective as before, as FIFO employees don’t have the same “connection with the 

land” as do people who have lived for generations in the same area, or at least have moved to an area 

with the aim of staying there in the long term. SWCC and its partners will have to deal with this issue, as 

will all other sectors (ranging from health to policing and social welfare). 

7.8 Decreasing resilience in the community 

Resilience is generally said to mean the time it takes for an individual, community or organization to 

recover/rebound from a crisis or disturbance, such as a drought or freak storm, and not effectively resolve 

it but also learn from it, be strengthened and emerge transformed by the experience. That said, it is a 

more “diffuse” issue that is a little difficult to “pin down”, also being closely related to some of the other 

issues, such as globalisation and FIFO contracts, as well as with consumerism and the general decrease 

in personal responsibility and empathy across communities. 

213

DRAFT 


Some of the key responses that have been identified include supporting self-organization; fostering 

learning and education; and encouraging adaptation (Sapirstein – see 

www.oriconsulting.com/social_resilience.pdf). Enhancing Social Resilience requires cooperation and 

collaboration of all stakeholders, including the private sector, government (public sector), Non- 

Governmental Organizations (NGO's) and other community organizations (such as community catchment 

groups), the aim being to increase the strength of the community by increasing the strength and scope of 

the internal connections between the people, organizations and environment that form that society. This 

moving away from the doctrine of independence to embracing a culture of interdependence is the key to 

both harmony and development. 

7.9 Genetic resilience at the edges of range 

It is becoming gradually clearer that the genetic resilience of individuals of a species increases the closer 

to the edge of the range of that species. This is possibly due to the fact that species in those locales are 

subjected to a more hostile environment (for that species) than those living in the centre of their habitat 

range, where conditions are likely to be more “ideal”. This could have a significant influence some of the 

adaptation work proposed in response to climate change, e.g. on relocation and restocking, as individuals 

from the edges of their ranges may be better candidates for these activities, given that their genetics make 

them more disposed to surviving in adverse habitats. At the very least, it highlights the need to use 

individuals from a variety of locales to ensure that as wide a range of genetic diversity is “captured” as 

possible for such work. 

It should be noted that this is not the same as the widely-known “edge of range effect”, where species in 

less favoured habitats are more likely to become locally extinct. 

7.10 Globalisation and the environment 

This is a debate that often becomes very heated. One of the better discussions of the issue was 

published on the web last year by W Yeoh on whydev.org, a collaborative and participatory platform for 

individuals passionate about global issues, allowing them to discuss a diverse range of topics from 

international development and foreign aid to career advice and morality. His paper, sourced on 13/3/2012 

on http://www.whydev.org/globalisation-technology-and-the-environment-a-recipe-for-pollution/ is 

reproduced here: 

Globalisation, technology and the environment – a recipe for pollution 

by Weh Yeoh on November 5, 2010 

The speed at which globalisation has spread has lead to unprecedented impacts on the environment. 

There are two schools of thought however; one group believes that through the spread of economic 

success, knowledge and technology, globalisation will improve the condition of the environment. However, 

the opposite perspective states that the success of globalisation inherently depends on environment 

degradation. 

Optimists believe that globalisation leads to economic growth and higher per capita incomes, which 

creates wealth and political will, two factors necessary to combat environmental damage. They often point 

to the environmental Kuznets curve, which states that along the path of economic growth, there is a 

tendency for temporarily higher pollution levels as a result of the early stages of industrial development. 

However, once a certain level of per capita income is reached, environmental damage decreases (see 

graph below). 

Unfortunately, this view is overly simplistic in that it ignores two powerful reasons why the net 

environmental impact is still higher as income increases. 

Firstly, globalisation facilitates an increase in consumption that occurs as a wider selection of goods 

become available at a lower price. Industrial countries, with 15% of the world’s population, account for 

214

DRAFT 


76% of global consumption expenditure. This brings us to the second argument, which is that as countries 

develop, people tend to shift the production, and hence the pollution, onto less developed nations. This 

creates a gap between consumption and production, which distances the consumer both physically and 

ethically from the negative implications of consumption, further encouraging more consumption. In other 

words, if I don’t see the net effect of my purchases here in Australia, because the factory underpaying the 

workers and producing pollution is in China, I can go out on a spending spree guilt free. 

The Environmental Kuznets curve 

This gap is further highlighted when one considers the inequity in carbon produced between developed 

and developing nations. Current data from the World Bank suggests that the bulk of CO2 emissions 

produced in 2002 overwhelmingly came from countries with a high-income average. This debunks the 

underlying assumption of the environmental Kuznets curve, because clearly, as per capital income 

increases, pollution also goes up and up (see graph below). 

If globalisation was supposed to result in improved technology, which facilitates more efficient and 

pollution-free production, then it is clear that on balance, this has not occurred either. 

The Jevons paradox states that increased efficiency through technological progress leads to increased 

consumption, as human behaviour dictates that an increased demand for a resource occurs as the cost is 

lowered. The classic example used to illustrate this phenomenon is that in creating more fuel-efficient 

cars, you have billions of fuel-efficient cars purchased, rather than millions of inefficient cars. So an 

increase in technology and efficiency through globalisation has the effect of increasing consumption and 

hence environmental degradation. 

Critics also point to the fact that the focus of globalisation is on profit and economic success, through trade 

liberalisation, and the environment necessarily becomes a secondary consideration. As Roe and Eaton 

put it, “WTO rules do not consider the value of such elements as clean air and fresh water”. Globalisation 

inherently causes environmental damage through the increase in transport, goods, infrastructure and 

energy consumption that occurs out of necessity as world markets are linked together. As markets move 

from local to global, the physical space between the consumer and producer increases. This not only 

results in higher transport costs to the environment, but also infrastructure to support the transfer of these 

goods. 

In attempting to combat globalisation’s effect on environmental degradation, a major barrier is the 

increasing number of actors in the global political economy, and their decreasing levels of accountability. 

At the very heart of this problem lies the shift in power that has occurred from states to markets, and the 

215

DRAFT 


increasingly transnational forms of governance that have occurred. Simply put, the lack of an 

intergovernmental body overseeing this area means that growth is unregulated and unsustainable. 

National CO2 emissions per country per capita, click to enlarge. 

Globalisation and the underlying principles of neoliberalism suggest that the natural equilibrium of the free 

market leads to a more efficient and productive society. While this in itself is questionable, it leaves issues 

like the environment in the “too hard” category, because protecting our natural resources is not considered 

as something of major value. This issue brings up many questions surrounding global governance, and 

where responsibilities lie when corporations are left unregulated in the pursuit of profit. For example, what 

challenges would an international organisation charged with regulating environmental degradation face 

Where does the responsibility for solving environmental problems lie – with the state, market or civil 

society Is there hope towards true international regulation, or will it be stymied by the individual agendas 

of each country 

7.11 Intensifying use of marine resources 

The way that humans view and use the sea might be changing dramatically, from a perceived wild space 

that provides resources to an intensively managed space that is “farmed” 

(http://www.conservationmagazine.org/2009/04/taming-the-blue-frontier/). Use of the oceans to generate 

energy, produce food and mitigate climate change is advancing rapidly. Increasingly common forms of 

marine industry include deep-sea fish farming, marine renewable energy generation, floating server plants 

and extraction of rare metals from seawater. 

216

DRAFT 


And then there is aquaculture, which is expected to supply 50% of seafood by 2015. Already the 

abundance of large predators has been reduced in most oceans, with more dramatic declines in 

intensively used areas, such as the North Atlantic. Shallow seabeds are extensively trawled. The rate of 

infrastructure construction, especially for the production of renewable energy, is accelerating. Although 

none of these individual issues is highly novel, these rapid, simultaneous developments across multiple 

sectors will probably have a dramatic impact on the oceans and the species that they support. 

See Sutherland et al. (2011) for further information. 

7.12 Groundwater contamination 

The threat to environmental quality posed by open-cast mining of oil sands has been widely highlighted, 

but comparatively little attention has been paid to the threats arising from hydraulic fracturing (also known 

as “fracking”) to extract natural gas from organic-rich shale basins. This technology is proposed for a 

number of sites across Australia, including some in the south west. 

Depending on site conditions, hydraulic fracturing at a single horizontal well might require pumping of 

8,000-38,000 tons of water-based fracturing fluids at high pressure into the bedrock. The pumping creates 

fractures that enable the subsequent flow of gas out to the wellhead. This generally occurs usually far 

below any aquifers and wells can be effectively sealed to prevent leakage. Nevertheless, there have been 

cases of pollution of both surface water and aquifers, and of gas leakage. 

This is of concern, as fracturing fluids contain several toxic chemicals, including naphthalene, butanol, 

fluorocarbons and formaldehyde, which are considered carcinogenic and are linked to numerous human 

illnesses. Gas companies are not required to disclose the composition of fluids, which could result in less 

effective treatment by wastewater plants. 

The high quantities of water required for fracturing are typically extracted on-site from groundwater or 

nearby streams, and this could affect aquatic ecology and public water resources. The growth of this 

industry across the USA and elsewhere is considerable. This again is of concern, as the spatial reach of 

each well is limited so that a high density of wells, access roads and pipelines is needed for 

comprehensive gas extraction, creating a footprint that is affecting large areas of natural landscapes in the 

USA. 

See Sutherland et al. (2011) for further information. 

7.13 New invasive species 

There are a number of serious pest species that may impact on NRM in the south west in the future. 

These not only include the well-known Cane toad, but also the much less known Asian bee, Apis cerana, 

which has decimated the honey bee industry in the Solomons (reducing hive numbers from >2000 to just 

5). Unfortunately, in February 2011, a decision was taken by a majority of State governments to end 

control efforts (see Cribb 2012, accessed on 17/3/2012 at 

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asparticle=11661). 

Many notable ecologists believe, however, that the case against non-native species is often overplayed 

and that it is time to study each such species on a case by case basis, ensuring that both positive and 

negative impacts are well-known before “damning” the species (Davis et al 2011 – see 

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v474/n7350/full/474153a.html and also 

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v474/n7350/full/474153a.html for a response). 

7.14 Global financial instability 

The recent economic crises around the globe have spooked many investors and reduced the amount of 

investment funding available. Impacts have been largely contained in Australia, probably due to the 

217

DRAFT 


continuing strong performance of the mining sector. That said, the Australian Government is cutting 

funding support for many programs and this may impact on NRM. Additionally, the lack of investor 

confidence means that it may be harder for SWCC and/or its partners to seek non-government funding, if 

they choose to do so. 

7.15 Eco-label fatigue 

Eco-label fatigue is a new term that became widespread in 2011, even acknowledged in the Wikipedia 

description of eco-labels as leading “to some confusion and perhaps fatigue amongst consumers” (see 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecolabel). It refers to the fact that many consumers (and investors) are 

becoming tired/wary of eco-labelling schemes as reports on the misuse of such labels and/or corruption 

within them grows, and the sheer numbers of such schemes grows exponentially as businesses try to take 

advantage of the idea. 

This has serious potential to erode the usefulness of such schemes, and could affect the ability of some 

sectors of NRM in the south west to access funding, e.g. the environmental management systems (EMS) 

schemes. 

Possible impacts are discussed by Joshua Saunders (2010), who shows how this is affecting eco-labels in 

the USA by forcing a process of consolidation and cooperation, whereby the plethora of such labels is 

slowly being reduced to a few that are authoritative, trusted and well-known (“branded”) – see 

http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2010/09/23/are-there-too-many-eco-labels-and-green-ratings. For a 

discussion on how this affects the forest certification industry, see 

http://ipsnews.net/news.aspidnews=55985). 

218

DRAFT 


7. Funding Opportunities 

7.1 Revolving Fund for securing conservation properties 

One example is the “Trust for Nature”, which is an independent, not-for-profit organisation that manages a 

unique Revolving Fund that enables the Trust to quickly purchase significant native habitats. The Fund is 

an example of Trust for Nature's innovative approach to conservation that yields real and long-term 

sustainable conservation outcomes. 

Trust for Nature purchases high-conservation value properties through the Revolving Fund and then onsells 

them with a Conservation Covenant on the title to a caring new owner. All money generated through 

the sale of the properties is wholly returned to the Fund to replenish its reserves and enable future 

purchases. In this way the fund revolves in perpetuity. 

Trust for Nature's Revolving Fund was established in 1989 and has since become a key component to the 

organisation. The idea for the Fund was conceived and implemented by the Board of Trustees and staff in 

response to the need to establish a conservation-based market for real estate buyers. 

Due to the enormous success of Trust for Nature's Revolving Fund, the Fund is now used as a model 

being adopted by kindred land trusts in other states across Australia. Trust for Nature's revolving Fund to 

date has on-sold a total of 41 properties and at value of $3.4 million. 

As a trust, Trust for Nature can accept donations that are tax deductible, while also providing supporters 

an opportunity purchase a Revolving Fund property which helps protect Australia's natural heritage before 

it disappears forever. See http://www.trustfornature.org.au/about-revolving-fund/ 

219

Tender for the Programme - South West Catchments Council

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?