The state of Australia’s Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas

IBAs in Danger: The state of Australia’s Important Bird

and Biodiversity AreasBy Samantha Vine and Guy Dutson

IBAs IN DANGER I 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Summary 3

What are Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas? 4 Important Bird Areas as priority sites for biodiversity conservation 4

IBAs in Danger 6

Invasive alien species 9 IBA in Danger: Norfolk Island IBA 9 Case study: Successful invasive species management — Tasman Island IBA 10

Fire 11 IBA in Danger: Murray Sunset, Hattah and Annuello IBA 12 IBA in Danger: Boodjamulla IBA 13

Unsustainable agricultural practices 14 IBAs in Danger: Patho Plains and Riverina Plains IBAs 14

Infrastructure development 15 IBA in Danger: Lower Hunter Valley IBA 15 Case Study: Successful protection of an IBA under development pressure — Gulf St Vincent IBA 15

Recreational activities 16 Case Study: Successful conservation of an IBA under pressure from recreational activities — Phillip Island IBA 16

Conserving IBAs 17 Protecting the right places: Birds can lead the way 17 There are many different ways to keep IBAs safe 17 IBAs can help Australia meet its national and international commitments 17 Protected Areas need to be managed 18 Case-study: Successful Protected Area management — Macquarie Island IBA 19 Monitoring is essential to determine if IBAs are being adequately managed 19

Summary

BirdLife International, the world’s largest nature conservation partnership, has identified over 12,000 sites of international significance for birds across the world as Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs). The conservation of many bird species, and indeed the diversity of life, depends on protecting these sites.

However, less than 40 per cent of these areas are formally protected. Monitoring reveals that many of the world’s most important bird areas, even those that are supposed to have the highest level of protection, such as national parks, are in danger of losing their natural habitats and the biodiversity that makes them important.

In response, BirdLife International has launched the IBAs in Danger campaign to identify IBAs at severe risk, and target conservation efforts to protect these sites through advocacy and local action.

Australia is in the unenviable position of having 14 IBAs under levels of threat rated as Very High. Five of these have been designated as ‘in Danger’ as part of BirdLife International’s global campaign.

Australia’s IBAs in Danger include sites threatened by inappropriate fire regimes, unsustainable agriculture, industrial development and introduced species. Four of the five Australian IBAs in Danger include national parks. We clearly need to improve the management of Australia’s Protected Area Estate for the benefit of threatened birds.

Each of the IBAs in Danger provides habitat for species that could soon become extinct should the current threats continue.

Fortunately, there are straightforward solutions to recover the values of these IBAs. Some of these are easier to implement than others, but we know enough about the threats and the species at risk to turn things around. We simply need the political will and resources to do what needs to be done.

To address these threats BirdLife Australia is calling on:

1. The Australian Government to implement priority actions to recover the Critically Endangered Norfolk Island Green Parrot.

2. The Australian Government and relevant state governments (VIC, SA & NSW) to resource the implementation of the Threatened Mallee Bird Conservation Action Plan.

3. The Victorian Government to move toward more strategic management of fire to protect life, property and biodiversity.

4. The Queensland Government to improve fire management at Boodjamulla IBA and Buckley River IBA and commit to a 10-year program of early dry season prescribed burning, with annual reporting against specific measurable targets.

5. The Australian Government to prioritise assessment of “Fire regimes that cause

Biodiversity decline” as a Key Threatening Process under national environmental law.

6. The NSW and Victorian Governments to staff a role dedicated to assist local land managers within the range of the Plains-wanderer to manage habitat for the species.

7. The NSW and Australian Governments and Cessnock City Council to permanently protect the important breeding habitat of the Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeater from imminent destruction by development of the Hunter Economic Zone.

This report outlines what needs to be done to save the IBAs in Danger and details case studies where action has successfully addressed threats to our Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas. Since 2008, five IBAs have had threats reduced to the point they are no longer rated as Very High. For example, the Macquarie Island case study (p 19), shows that habitat restoration of an island is possible, and can deliver outstanding results. A similar level of commitment to eradicating pests on Norfolk Island would create a safe haven for the Critically Endangered Norfolk Island Green Parrot and many other threatened species.

Above: Improved fire management in northern

Australia’s Boodjamulla IBA and Buckley River IBAs is

needed to prevent the extinction of the Carpentarian

Grasswren. Photo by Graeme Chapman

AcknowledgementsBirdLife Australia thanks all of the volunteers who contributed their time and expertise collecting data and helping identify Australia’s most Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas. We are extremely grateful to those who continue to monitor IBAs and the valuable contribution it makes to the conservation and management of these areas. We’d also like to thank the regional IBA Coordinators and the IBA Technical Committee.

Rio Tinto funded the original IBA identification work in 2006–09.

The following experts contributed to the case studies and content in this report: Mark Antos, Barry Baker, Allan Briggs, Allan Burbidge, Graham Carpenter, Margaret Christian, Glenn Ehmke, James Fitzsimons, David Baker-Gabb, Stephen Garnett, Bob Green, Graham Harrington, Roger Jaensch, Richard Kingsford, Mike Mathieson, Golo Maurer, Steve Murphy, Mike Newman, Ray Nias, David Paton, Lynn Pedler, Luis Ortiz-Catedra, Sue Robinson, Mick Roderick, Abigail Smith, Keith Springer, Simon Starr, Alan Stuart, Jason van Weenen, Jenny Lau, Aleks Terauds, Eric Woehler and John Woinarski. Thanks also to Sean Dooley, John Peter and Cara Schultz for their editorial and production support and to the many photographers who provided images.

IBAs IN DANGER I 54 I IBAs IN DANGER

KBAs are sites that contribute significantly to the global persistence of biodiversity, building on the criteria that BirdLife International has developed and implemented, through the BirdLife Global Partnership, to identify over 12,000 Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas worldwide. The status and distribution of birds is generally well known, but information for other animals is often poor, making it difficult to identify critical sites. Birds can be effective indicators of biodiversity and thus the conservation of IBAs also ensures the survival of many other organisms. IBAs may, therefore, serve as a useful template for a network of KBAs, allowing sites for other taxa to be added once data becomes available.

What are Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas?

The IBA program is an international, non-governmental conservation scheme led by BirdLife International. IBAs are sites of global importance for bird and biodiversity conservation that are designated based on strict global criteria.

Based on extensive research and expert opinion, 314 IBAs have been identified in Australia, covering 5.7 per cent of the landmass; an additional suite of IBAs is being considered for marine birds at sea. The non-statutory status of IBAs enables an independent, non-government approach to conservation, and appropriate management of these IBAs should

guarantee the survival of almost all of Australia’s bird species. Australian IBAs provide clear direction for community-based organisations, such as BirdLife Australia and its branches and affiliates, plus other local environmental groups, to tackle the most pressing conservation issues, with local actions having a cumulative impact on global conservation.

Important Bird Areas as priority sites for biodiversity conservation

Although Australia’s IBAs have been identified for their importance to birds, most IBAs support important populations of other biodiversity. In other parts of the world, animals and plants, in addition to birds, have been used to identify Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs).

Introduction

Above: The Hunter Valley IBA in NSW

is a vital breeding site for the Critically

Endangered Regent Honeyeater, but

is gravely threatened by industrial

development. Photo by Mick Roderick

IBA crIterIA

The designation of IBAs is based on three criteria:

1. Globally threatened species: IBAs support more than a threshold number (defined for each species) of a species listed as globally Vulnerable, Endangered or Critically Endangered on the IUCN Red List

2. Congregatory species: IBAs support more than 1 per cent of the world population of any shorebird, seabird, waterbird or other congregatory species

3. Endemic species: the network of IBAs includes a representative set of sites for restricted-range species with global ranges of <50,000 km2

IBAs IN DANGER I 76 I IBAs IN DANGER

The focus of the IBA program has shifted from identifying IBAs to ensuring the long-term conservation of their key biodiversity, guided by regular monitoring. Monitoring is essential to track and respond quickly to threats, to understand the status and trends of biodiversity, and to assess the effectiveness of conservation efforts.

The simple monitoring framework used across the BirdLife Partnership allows national data to be pooled and analysed regionally and globally, to inform international conservation advocacy. IBA monitoring provides a standardised method to score the threats to IBAs (‘Pressure’), the condition of IBAs (‘State’) and conservation actions in IBAs (‘Response’), each on a four-point scale. BirdLife International maintains a database of all IBAs, including a summary of their condition and significant threats to key species or habitats.

Each threat is scored on a scale of 0–3 for timing, scope and severity, which are then added together. This is used to categorise the worst threat for each IBA as Low (0–2), Medium (3–5), High (6–7) or Very High (8–9). This scoring system is robust and enables local monitors to undertake threat assessments.

Most IBAs, even those in formally protected areas, are subject to a Low level of threat from a range of continental-scale impacts, such as introduced species; a Medium threat level should act as a trigger for action. However, over half of Australia’s IBAs have a High threat level, each of which is of national concern. Many of these are systemic landscape-scale threats, such as fire and water management, which require national solutions supported by natural-resource users and regulators. Some are specific to individual IBAs and require local solutions.

IBAs with Very High threat levels are rapidly losing their conservation value and require urgent action. These threats are immediate (scoring 3), affecting >50 per cent (scoring 2) or >90 per cent (scoring 3) of the population or habitat, and causing a loss of >10 per cent (scoring 2) or >30 per cent (scoring 3) of the population or habitat over 10 years. If the key bird species are long-lived, the 10-year period is changed to three generations.

1 http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/sowb/casestudy/545;

http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/info/IBAsInDanger

IBAs in Danger

Above: Most of the endangered Plains-

wanderer’s habitat has been destroyed by

cultivation and the conversion of sparse native

grasslands into croplands and dense introduced

pasture. Photo by Dean Ingwersen

Australia in 2008 Australia in 2014 Globally in 2014

Low threat 60 (19%) 60 (19%) 598 (20%)

Medium threat 90 (29%) 83 (26%) 740 (25%)

High threat 158 (50%) 157 (50%) 1108 (37%)

Very High threat 6 (2%) 14 (5%) 570 (18%)

StAte of AuStrAlIA’S IBAS

IBA Name State Key species threatened Threat Threat in 2008 Threat in 2014

Billiatt SA Mallee Emu-wren Fire Medium Very High

Boodjamulla Qld Carpentarian Grasswren Fire Medium Very High

Flinders Ranges SA Short-tailed Grasswren Fire Medium Very High

Gammon Ranges and Arkaroola SA Short-tailed Grasswren Fire Medium Very High

Gawler Ranges SA Short-tailed Grasswren Fire Medium Very High

Little Desert Vic. Malleefowl Fire Medium Very High

Lower Hunter Valley NSW Regent Honeyeater Development Low Very High

Murray-Sunset, Hattah & Annuello Vic. Mallee Emu-wren Fire Medium Very High

Norfolk Island — Norfolk Island Green Parrot Pests Very High Very High

Patho Plains Vic. Plains-wanderer Agriculture Medium Very High

Riverina Plains NSW Plains-wanderer Agriculture Medium Very High

Wandown Vic. Malleefowl Fire Medium Very High

Watervalley Wetlands SA Sharp-tailed Sandpiper Water Medium Very High

Wyperfeld, Big Desert & Ngarkat Vic. & SA Mallee Emu-wren Fire Medium Very High

IBAS wIth Very hIgh threAtS In 2014

Very High Threat

IBAs

In Danger

Christmas Island

Lord Howe island

Norfolk Island

Macquarie IslandHeard Island

IBAs IN DANGER I 98 I IBAs IN DANGER

IBA in Danger State Key species threatened Threat Action needed

1 Norfolk Island — Norfolk Island Green Parrot Invasive alien species Control rats, cats and other introduced species. Establish insurance population

2 Murray-Sunset, Hattah & Annuello (acting as a flagship for other mallee IBAs)

Vic. Mallee Emu-wren; Black-eared Miner

Inappropriate fire regime Strategic risk-based fire management. Urgent recovery action for Mallee Emu-wren

3 Boodjamulla Qld Carpentarian Grasswren Inappropriate fire regime Strategic fire management

4 Riverina Plains (acting as a flagship for Patho Plains)

NSW Plains-wanderer Unsustainable agricultural practices

Targeted vegetation management — grazing

5 Lower Hunter Valley NSW Regent Honeyeater Industrial development Prohibit destruction of breeding habitat

IBAS wIth Very hIgh threAtS In 2014

IBAs in Danger are sites that IBA monitoring has shown are exposed to Very High levels of threat and which are at great risk of losing their key biodiversity assets. BirdLife International’s partners were invited to nominate up to five sites in each country1, with the intention of focusing advocacy and action on the highest priority sites across the BirdLife Partnership. As a result, the list of IBAs in Danger comprises 358 sites in 122 countries and territories, as well as the high seas. Further, as many Australian IBAs are not monitored systematically our list may be incomplete. Thus, the absence of an IBA from the list does not therefore preclude it from facing serious threats.

All of Australia’s IBAs in Danger have Very High threat levels which have worsened since the IBAs

were first identified in 2008. Several of these act as flagships for other IBAs, equally at risk from the same threats, affecting the same key species and requiring the same management.

A total of 14 of the 314 Australian IBAs had Very High threats in 2014. The threats to these IBAs have increased since 2008, with the exception of Norfolk Island which had Very High threats in both 2008 and 2014. Five IBAs with Very High threats in 2008 had reduced threats by 2014.

The biggest improvement to Australia’s IBAs in the last five years has resulted from a combination of environmental water allocations and increased natural rainfall, which have rejuvenated long-dry wetlands. These wetland IBAs are currently not under Very High threat,

but maintaining their condition requires ongoing prioritisation of environmental flows — as we move from La Niña to El Niño regimes, reduced rainfall in south-eastern Australia is likely to put pressure on these fragile systems once more.

Focusing on the five most common threats, we present case studies from some IBAs that are in danger of losing their biodiversity values, as well as some experiencing good management of threats. It should be noted that threats from climate change have been excluded, as there is currently no robust method suitable for this analysis.

Invasive alien species

Invasive alien species, otherwise known as pests and weeds, are introduced plants and animals which cause adverse impacts. Globally, invasive alien species are a primary threat to many native species, especially on islands, and their eradication from islands has become mainstream conservation practice. Where an IBA is a small island, eradication of invasive species and effective biosecurity to prevent re-colonisation can provide an enduring solution with spectacular results.

Predation by cats and rats is believed to have caused bird extinctions and declines on a number of Australia’s offshore islands. Invasive alien species also include invertebrates such as Yellow Crazy Ants, which threaten many species on Christmas Island.

Invasive weeds can render large areas of habitat unsuitable, especially in tropical and sub-tropical habitats such as riparian forests. The impacts of introduced disease on Australian birds are poorly known but could contribute to the decline of some threatened species.

IBA in Danger: Norfolk Island IBA

In 2013, the Norfolk Island Green Parrot again came perilously close to extinction

Four species and five subspecies of birds have previously become extinct on Norfolk Island, a 35 km² island in the Pacific Ocean, between Brisbane and Auckland.

A combination of loss of forest habitat and nesting holes, competition for nest sites from introduced Crimson Rosellas, and predation by introduced cats and rats all contributed to a decline in the population of the Norfolk Island Green Parrot. By the 1980s, only four breeding pairs remained. However, after restoration of nest sites and control of cats and rats, the population increased to about 17 breeding pairs by 1997 and about 160 individuals by 2001. The Green Parrot had its conservation status downlisted in 2000, from Critically Endangered down to Endangered, due to its increasing population. However, a subsequent decline in management efforts caused the population of Green Parrots to fall, and in 2010 it was uplisted back to Critically Endangered again. As the population was not being monitored adequately, its collapse was not detected until it was almost too late.

Num

ber of Australian IB

As (out of 314)

in which each threat w

as recorded in 2014

numBer of IBAS threAtened In 2014Invasive alien species

Innapropriate fire regimes

Recreational activities

Unsustainableagricultural practices

Residential, commercial andtransport development

Water management

Invasive native species

Logging

Mining

Fisheries bycatch

Other - e.g. hunting, pollution

190

96

9086

65

5921

24

26

29

47

Above: Introduced alien species are the biggest threat to

the Green Parrot on Norfolk Island. Photo by Guy Dutson

IBAs IN DANGER I 1110 I IBAs IN DANGER

Fire

‘Fire regime’ refers to the pattern of fires over time and across the landscape, which vary in their ‘patchiness’, frequency, season and intensity. Inappropriate fire regimes, the second-most common threat to Australian IBAs, often result from fire (planned or unplanned) that is too frequent, intense or extensive.

Against a backdrop of climate change, which is expected to increase the frequency and intensity of fires in some parts of Australia, inappropriate fire regimes increasingly pose a threat to birds which inhabit isolated forests, mallee, temperate woodlands, heathlands and northern savannas. Some of these species require mature, long-unburnt habitats and may only recolonise areas decades after the last fire. Recolonisation depends on populations surviving in unburnt areas within dispersal distance of the burnt areas, and may not occur after large-scale fires or where remnant patches of unburnt habitat are too small or isolated.

It should be noted that appropriate fire management has improved the status of some threatened species. Given the complexity of managing fire for threatened species — and biodiversity more generally — BirdLife Australia believes that the Australian Government should display strong leadership in collating and

disseminating the best scientific advice, conduct an audit of the impacts of fire on nationally listed species, broker information sharing about adaptive management, and ensure inappropriate fire regimes do not significantly impact on our most threatened species.

A ‘Threat Abatement Plan’ for fire regimes that adversely affect biodiversity would provide a suitable framework for organising this information. Threat Abatement Plans facilitate the research, management and other actions to reduce the impact of Key Threatening Processes (KTP) on native species and ecological communities under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC Act). The first step in the development of a Threat Abatement Plan is for inappropriate fire regimes to be listed as a KTP. ‘Fire regimes that cause biodiversity decline’ was submitted to the Australian Government as a KTP nomination in 2008, but has not yet been listed.

BirdLife Australia is calling on the Australian Government to prioritise assessment of “Fire regimes that cause biodiversity decline” as a Key Threatening Process under national environmental law.

Based on concerns of a suspected decline in its population, in 2013 an alliance between BirdLife Australia, The Nature Conservancy, Island Conservation and the Norfolk Island Flora and Fauna Society commissioned a survey and management report by parakeet expert Dr Luis Ortiz-Catedral. He estimated that as few as 11 breeding-aged female Green Parrots remained.

Since then, management has improved, with 75 predator-resistant nest sites installed, and 44 Green Parrot chicks fledged in the first half of 2014. However, despite this remedial action, Norfolk Island will remain an IBA in Danger until

the threats are adequately controlled. Priority actions include control of introduced predators and competitors; appropriate governance to ensure the efficacy of future monitoring and management; providing more safe nesting sites; and establishing an insurance population, preferably on predator-free Phillip Island (which is part of the Norfolk Island National Park).

BirdLife Australia is calling on the Australian Government to implement priority actions to recover the Critically Endangered Norfolk Island Green Parrot.

cASe Study: SucceSSful InVASIVe SpecIeS mAnAgement — tASmAn ISlAnd IBA

Tasman Island is a rugged 120-hectare island off Port Arthur in Tasmania. It is designated as an IBA because it supports probably the largest colony of Fairy Prions in Australia, thought to comprise between 300,000 and 700,000 pairs. However, the island also supported a population of feral cats which killed between 30,000 and 60,000 prions each year. Cats were successfully eradicated in 2010, and by 2012 Fairy Prion activity, measured by motion-sensing cameras, had tripled. The numbers and breeding success of Short-tailed Shearwaters on the island also increased significantly. This lasting result was achieved after an investment of $250,000 by the Tasmanian Government and local tour operator Pennicott Wilderness Journeys.

Above: The installation of 75 predator-resistant nest sites on

Norfolk Island IBA has resulted in 44 Critically Endangered

Norfolk Island Green Parrot chicks fledging in the first half of

2014. Photo by Jenny Spry

Above from left: Most of Australia’s threatened mallee birds

require habitat that has remained unburnt for at least 15

years. Photo by Dean Ingwersen

The Endangered Mallee Emu-wren is now largely confined

to the Murray Sunset, Hattah and Annuello IBA, leaving it

vulnerable to extinction from one large, reserve-wide fire.

Photo by Chris Tzaros

IBAs IN DANGER I 1312 I IBAs IN DANGER

IBA in Danger: Murray Sunset, Hattah and Annuello IBA

The semi-arid Murray Mallee of south-eastern Australia provides crucial habitat for a number of globally threatened mallee birds: Malleefowl (Vulnerable), Black-eared Miner (Endangered), Mallee Emu-wren (Endangered) and Red-lored Whistler (Vulnerable), as well as two subspecies that are listed as nationally Vulnerable — Western Whipbird (eastern) and Regent Parrot (eastern). Most of these species depend on mallee habitat that has remained unburnt for at least 15 years. Four large mallee IBAs were designated for their value to at least some of these species: Billiatt; Riverland Murray; Wyperfeld, Big Desert and Ngarkat; and Murray Sunset, Hattah and Annuello IBAs.

Extensive land clearance has left remnant areas of mallee highly fragmented, and its birds extremely susceptible to fire due to their restricted ranges and inability to recolonise isolated patches. Inappropriate fire regimes from unplanned fires (e.g. lightning strikes or escaped campfires) or planned burns (part of a fire-risk management program) may result in large-scale, reserve-wide fires, posing a significant threat to these mallee birds.

Large wildfires have occurred in all mallee IBAs in the last decade. Fires in Ngarkat Conservation Park — a former stronghold of the Endangered Mallee Emu-wren — destroyed all suitable habitat for this species, and in 2014, fires burnt out >90 per cent of Billiatt Conservation Park, probably causing the extinction of the species in South Australia. Since the fire in Billiatt, all Mallee Emu-wrens are now confined to the Murray Sunset, Hattah and Annuello IBA, comprising two largely contiguous national parks in Victoria. The species is now highly vulnerable to extinction from a reserve-wide fire or the impacts of planned burning.

In 2010, the Victorian Government responded to the loss of life and devastation wrought by the 2009 Black Saturday bushfires by adopting a policy of conducting planned burns across 5 per cent of public land each year. However, this policy is not reducing fire risk to life and property in areas of high bushfire risk and it represents a significant risk to the existence of threatened mallee birds that live in the remote Murray Mallee. It is a no-win situation.

Vegetation in the semi-arid mallee landscape recovers slowly after fire and, to be suitable for threatened mallee species, cannot be re-burnt

for at least 15–20 years. If the government’s policy continues, modelling indicates that within the next 20 years virtually all mallee vegetation will be <20 years old, and thus uninhabitable for threatened mallee birds.

BirdLife Australia strongly supports the Victorian Bushfire Royal Commission Implementation Monitor, Mr. Neil Comrie’s, repeated recommendations that the Victorian Government reconsiders its area-based planned burning program and replace it with a more strategic risk-based approach to bushfire management on public land.

BirdLife Australia is calling on the Victorian Government to move toward more strategic management of fire to protect life, property and biodiversity.

As the Mallee Emu-wren survives only in Victoria, the policy may lead the extinction of the species. To date, government agencies have avoided burning habitat known to support Mallee Emu-wrens by undertaking burns in strategic fuel breaks that will reduce the risk of a reserve-wide fire. BirdLife Australia has advocated for the protection of long-unburnt mallee habitat.

In 2014, BirdLife Australia hosted an Emergency Summit in response to the crisis facing threatened mallee birds and has engaged experts and representatives from universities, and state and Australian government agencies to develop a Conservation Action Plan based on the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation.

BirdLife Australia is calling on the Australian Government and relevant state governments (Vic., SA & NSW) to resource implementation of the Threatened Mallee Bird Conservation Action Plan.

IBA in Danger: Boodjamulla IBA

The Carpentarian Grasswren is restricted to spinifex grassland which has not been burned for at least 4 years. In 2008–09, Birdlife Northern Queensland surveyed the entire species’ range from Mount Isa to Borroloola, confirming that it may now be restricted to three populations and that its range has contracted greatly in the north, including in Wollogorang and Boodjamulla IBAs. This decline is most likely due to frequent, large wildfires and targeted burning of spinifex on grazing properties to protect better grazing areas. However, a larger, more widespread population survived further south in the Buckley River IBA.

High rainfall between 2008 and 2011 increased the fuel load, leading to large fires in 2011 and 2012. By the end of 2012, the area of suitable habitat had contracted from a 9-year average of 79 per cent which had not been burned for at least 4 years to 39 per cent. In 2013, enough birds were recorded in the Buckley River IBA to suggest that the population can recover, but none were detected in unburnt areas of Boodjamulla IBA; the viability of that population is uncertain.

BirdLife Australia is calling on the Queensland Government to improve fire management at Boodjamulla IBA and Buckley River IBA, and commit to a 10-year program of early dry season prescribed burning, with annual reporting against specific measurable targets.

The probability of a single fire burning a large area should be reduced by increasing the fire age class heterogeneity of the habitat, with specific management attention directed to areas known to support grasswrens and other fire-sensitive species. Burning is best conducted in the wet season or early in the dry season, when the fires are less intense, leave unburnt patches and are more easily managed.

Opposite from left:

Strategic fire management to maintain healthy

remnant mallee habitat is vital to the future of

the birds and biodiversity in Australia’s mallee

environments. Photo by Dean Ingwersen

Carpentarian Grasswrens cannot utilise their

typical spinifex grassland habitat for at least

four years after a fire. Photo by Paul Campbell

Numbers of Carpentarian Grasswrens are

thought to have plummeted in recent years.

Photo by Mark Sanders (EcoSmart Ecology)

14 I IBAs IN DANGER IBAs IN DANGER I 15

Unsustainable agricultural practices

Habitat degradation and destruction from the expansion and intensification of agriculture is one of the greatest threats to the world’s remaining biodiversity, especially in tropical regions2 .

About 53 per cent of Australia’s total land area is used for agriculture, mostly for grazing livestock3. The largest impact on Australian birds has been clearance of habitat for agriculture and though, to some extent, this had been addressed by regulation, several controls are currently being removed. For example, the Queensland Government is changing its Vegetation Management and Planning Acts substantially to allow greater clearing of vegetation.

High stocking densities in some IBAs on private land, especially during droughts, degrades habitats, particularly those inhabited by ground-dwelling and understorey birds. Some customised grazing practices have been advocated for certain species of birds: for example, the Endangered Golden-shouldered Parrot will survive in the Morehead River IBA (one of only two sites inhabited by the species) if cattle grazing follows specific management practices agreed with the land-holders.

IBAs in Danger: Patho Plains and Riverina Plains IBAs

The Plains-wanderer is one of the most genetically distinct birds in the world. About 80 per cent of the world population of Endangered Plains-wanderers is restricted to the Patho Plains and Riverina Plains IBAs.

The major factor in the decline of the Plains-wanderer has been the loss of habitat due to the cultivation and conversion of sparse native grasslands into croplands and dense introduced pasture. Since European settlement, around 95 per cent of the native grasslands on the Northern Plains has been lost to cultivation and agricultural intensification4.

The replacement of native grasslands with introduced pasture or crops is ongoing. For example, in the Riverina, 20,500 hectares of native grassland were converted to irrigated cereal crops between 1998 and 2001. This area included 587 hectares of primary Plains-wanderer habitat (which is likely to have contained about 100 birds) and 1,473 hectares of secondary habitat. In Victoria, 81 per cent of the 1,080 hectares of Plains-wanderer habitat that was located in the Birchip district had been destroyed when the area was revisited seven years later.

More recently, Plains-wanderer populations declined dramatically after unusually high rainfall caused a substantial increase in the density of their grassland habitat.

In the last 14 years, the Plains-wanderer population declined by 93 per cent in the Riverina Plains IBA, and similar trends were recorded in the Patho Plains IBA, where a 90 per cent decline was recorded in 2010–11. Over 50 Plains-wanderers were recorded in the Patho Plains IBA in 2009–10, but only five were found in 2013–14. Although

recent reports suggest the structure of the habitat is beginning to improve, numbers there remain critically low.

During prolonged drought, light grazing or none at all is required to maintain a suitable sparse habitat structure for Plains-wanderers, while more intense grazing is required during prolonged wet periods. Other management tools, such as burning and slashing, can manipulate the structure and biomass of the habitat, but adequate grazing is most effective. For example, recent improvement of Plains-wanderer habitat in the Patho Plains IBA was largely attributed to careful management through grazing.

With the climate likely to revert to a low rainfall regime, a lack of timely and responsive land management is a severe and ongoing threat to the survival of this

species. The timing of Plains-wanderer habitat management is critically important to maintain suitable grass height and cover. Grass can grow quickly after rain, especially in drought-prone areas; if grazing begins too long after heavy rains, the habitat will quickly become unsuitable. The time taken to adapt grazing agreements and incentives on private land and grazing intensity in national parks has resulted in unacceptable declines and concern for the species’ survival.

Reducing this threat requires adjusting current conservation agreements on private land, including the provision of incentives for land managers to fence areas of red soil with sparse native grasslands to allow greater grazing control and so maintain the grassland structure that Plains-wanderers need during both droughts and very wet periods. A full-time grazing manager is also needed for the Terrick Terrick and Oolambeyan National Parks to respond quickly to changes in vegetation growth, and manage grazing on a smaller scale.

BirdLife Australia is calling on the NSW and Victorian Governments to staff a role dedicated to assist local land managers within the range of the Plains-wanderer to manage habitat for the species.

Infrastructure development

Around the world, infrastructure for housing, industry, water, energy and transport networks is destroying and degrading natural habitats. The expansion of the human-built environment has a significant impact on biodiversity, mainly by destroying, degrading and fragmenting natural habitats. It has been identified as a key threat to many species of birds around the world, with residential and commercial development posing the greatest threat5. Even small-scale, individual proposals can contribute to a cumulative loss of habitat for birds and biodiversity. The global demand for energy, minerals and metals is driving unprecedented growth, and mining developments in particular are expanding into previously intact areas, many of which are important for biodiversity. Many IBAs outside formally protected areas are threatened by development.

IBA in Danger: Lower Hunter Valley IBA

The Regent Honeyeater is a flagship species for the conservation of south-eastern Australian temperate woodlands. It is listed as Critically Endangered on the IUCN Red List and in NSW, where most of the remaining 350–400 birds occur. The Regent Honeyeater is nomadic, following sources of nectar in flowering trees. It breeds regularly only in the Capertee Valley IBA, though occasionally also in four other IBAs (Chiltern, Bundarra-Barraba, Mudgee-Wollar and the Lower Hunter Valley). Non-breeding birds regularly inhabit other IBAs, including Lake Macquarie, Richmond Woodlands, Greater Blue Mountains and South-west Slopes IBAs.

Regent Honeyeater breeding sites occur in protected areas in four of the five IBAs, but in the Lower Hunter Valley IBA the most important habitat, known as the Tomalpin Woodlands, is zoned for industrial development as part of the Hunter Economic

Zone (HEZ). In 2007–08, about 20 nests fledged young — the most significant known recruitment of individuals in recent years. In 2012, around 100 Regent Honeyeaters were recorded in the Lower Hunter Valley IBA, remaining in the HEZ for at least six months, and they may have bred there again (birds were observed constructing nests). In addition, the HEZ is also considered to be the most significant site for the Endangered Swift Parrot in NSW, and it supports breeding populations of several other threatened woodland species. Much of the HEZ is public land and is currently subject to land claim.

It is unconscionable that public land known to support such important breeding habitat of a Critically Endangered species be zoned for industrial development, particularly a site with poor infrastructure and mine subsidence. Given the global responsibility of the NSW Government to ensure the survival of the Regent Honeyeater and its leadership in declaring the 2,800-hectare Capertee Valley National Park in 2010, it is imperative that the HEZ be gazetted as a protected area.

BirdLife Australia is calling on the NSW and Australian Governments, and Cessnock City Council to permanently protect the important breeding habitat of the Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeater from imminent destruction by the development of the Hunter Economic Zone.essure — Gulf St Vincent IBA

cASe Study: SucceSSful protectIon of An IBA under deVelopment

The Gulf St Vincent IBA is an expanse of mudflats and associated wetlands between the northern outskirts of Adelaide and the head of the Gulf. The coastline north of Adelaide has been subjected to ongoing threats from development and recreation that have cumulatively impacted on its ecological viability. In 2014, the South Australian Government addressed the threat of development in the Dry Creek Saltfields — a crucial section of the Gulf St Vincent IBA — by declaring the area a shorebird sanctuary. BirdLife Australia continues to work with the government and community organisations to conserve the biodiversity of this coast, including the development of recreational opportunities elsewhere in the region.

5BirdLife International (2013) State of the World’s birds - Indicators for our changing world. Infrastructure development is a growing problem

http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/sowb/pressure/PRESS5

2BirdLife International (2013) State of the World’s birds - Indicators for our changing world. Unsustainable agricultural practices are the greatest threats to bird species. http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/

sowb/pressure/PRESS3

3Australian Bureau of Statistics 2013b, Agricultural Commodities, Australia, 2011-12, cat. no. 7121, ABS, Canberra. Available at http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/7121.0.

4McDougall and Kirkpatrick (1994), Foreman (2010) in Plains-wanderer surveys and monitoring on the Patho Plains,Victoria, Baker- Gabb (2011).

Above: Around 80 per cent of the world population of Plains-

wanderer is restricted to the Patho Plains and Riverina Plains

IBAs. Photo by Chris Tzaros Above from left: The most significant known Regent Honeyeater

breeding event in recent times occurred within the Hunter Valley IBA,

which is threatened by development. Photo by Mick Roderick

Less than 400 Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeaters remain in

the wild. Photo by Dean Ingwersen

IBAs IN DANGER I 1716 I IBAs IN DANGER

Recreation is generally consistent with the objectives of protected areas. This is an identified threat in many IBAs, but is usually not especially severe. However, an important threat is the disturbance of migratory shorebirds, causing them to spend less time feeding or leave the site altogether, denying the birds the resources they need to fatten up for their arduous migration.

More severe is the impact of recreational activities on birds that nest on beaches. Species such as the Vulnerable Hooded Plover and Fairy Tern often desert their nests if they are disturbed, and their eggs and chicks are

vulnerable to predation by dogs or to crushing by vehicles or underfoot. Beach-nesting birds only breed along the narrow strip of beach between the high-tide line and inland vegetation. These beaches are often heavily used during summer, when the birds breed. Largely due to these threats, the Fairy Tern was listed as a threatened species under the EPBC Act in 2011, and the eastern subspecies of the Hooded Plover was nominated for the list in 2014. They are both classified as Vulnerable by the IUCN. A number of IBAs have ‘High’ or ‘Very High’ threats to these species, but management has been effective in allowing these species to breed.

Protecting the right places: Birds can lead the way

IBAs are designated because they support significant numbers of threatened or congregatory species, regardless of whether they are on public or privately owned land — birds are ‘tenure-blind’. Many IBAs overlap with protected areas that have been established, at least in part, to conserve the same biodiversity values. Others overlap with informal protected areas and Indigenous land. Many identified IBAs include private land.

Permanently protecting areas is one of the most important ways to conserve biodiversity. However, the current Global Protected Area Network cannot shield all of the world’s biodiversity — and many sites of high conservation value are unprotected6.

In Australia, the National Reserve System (NRS) is a network of parks, reserves and protected areas. By overlaying IBAs with Australia’s protected areas we can examine the relationship between the two. This shows important gaps in our protected area network, where key bird species are unprotected or under-protected.

Whilst around half of the IBA estate has some level of protection, (53.75 per cent),

the average overlap of the National Reserve System (NRS) per IBA is less than half (48.74 per cent). However, less than 21 per cent of our IBAs are fully protected (only 66 of 314 IBAs have more than 99 per cent NRS overlap) and almost 17 per cent (53 of 314) of our IBAs have no formal protection within the NRS.

There are many different ways to keep IBAs safe

It may not always be feasible or desirable to incorporate IBAs into formal protected area networks. In fact there may be cases where formal gazetting may disrupt existing traditional land-use practices that are responsible for maintaining a site’s significance7. The most appropriate way to conserve an area’s biodiversity can vary, depending on circumstances.

Since 1998 the number of Indigenous Protected Areas in Australia has increased, with Indigenous landowners managing the conservation of their land as part of Australia’s National Reserve System. There are now more than 60 Indigenous Protected Areas, covering more than 48 million hectares8.

In currently unprotected IBAs, a diversity of approaches should be considered. Whatever

the governance model for an IBA, community engagement and involvement in its conservation is desirable — and often essential. This is increasingly achieved through the actions of local conservation groups, raising awareness in communities near the site and helping to protect and monitor IBAs. Such local involvement can lead to significant conservation benefit, even in difficult circumstances.

IBAs can help Australia meet its national and international commitments

Australia became a Contracting Party to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 1993 and committed to implementing its obligations under the Convention. At the CBD meeting in 2010, a Strategic Plan for Biodiversity was adopted, which provides a framework for the conservation of biodiversity for the entire United Nations system. The Plan includes 20 Global Biodiversity Targets known as the Aichi Targets. ‘Aichi Target 11’ directs us to conserve and manage a network of protected areas that are ecologically representative, an obligation that can be expedited through the conservation of IBAs, which support important biodiversity.

The CBD also includes a Programme of Work on Protected Areas to encourage countries to establish and maintain comprehensive

Recreational activities Conserving IBAs

cASe Study: SucceSSful conSerVAtIon of An IBA under preSSure from recreAtIonAl ActIVItIeS — phIllIp ISlAnd IBA

While Phillip Island IBA was nominated for its importance to Little Penguin, Short-tailed Shearwater and Pacific Gull, it is an important breeding site for the Vulnerable Hooded Plover (eastern). As one of Victoria’s major tourist attractions, the Island is visited each year by tens of thousands of people eager to see Little Penguins or enjoy its windswept beaches. Unfortunately, the Island’s popularity brings people and their pets into close proximity with Hooded Plovers. Between 1982 and 1998, counts of Hooded Plovers on Phillip Island decreased significantly from 26 birds to 11, and it was thought that the breeding success was too low to sustain the local population. However, after more than two decades of management interventions such as temporary beach signage and fencing, monitoring of nests and chicks by volunteers (including BirdLife Bass Coast), pest plant and animal control, dog control measures and public awareness campaigns, the Hooded Plover population on Phillip Island has now increased to around 44 birds.

6Rodrigues, A. S. L., Andelman, S. J., Bakarr, M. I., Boitani, L., Brooks, T. M., Cowling, R. M., Fishpool, L. D. C., Fonseca, G. A. B., Gaston, K. J., Hoffmann, M., Long, J. S., Marquet, P. A., Pilgrim, J. D., Pressey, R. L.,

Schipper, J., Sechrest, W., Stuart, S. N., Underhill, L. G., Waller, R. W., Watts, M. E. J. and Yan, X. (2004) Effectiveness of the global protected area network in representing species diversity. Nature 428: 640–643.

7BirdLife International (2013) State of the World’s birds - Indicators for our changing world. Conserving Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs)http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/sowb/response/RESPO6

8http://www.environment.gov.au/indigenous/ipa/ Last updated: 09-Aug-2013 13:47:41 AEST. Checked:1/10/2014.

Above from left: Vulnerable Hooded Plovers in Victoria’s

Phillip Island IBA have benefited from conservation

interventions protecting them from recreational beach

activities. Photo by Dean Ingwersen

King Penguins enjoy a pest-free Macquarie Island.

Photo by Glenn Ehmke

IBAs IN DANGER I 19

and ecologically representative networks of protected areas. Under this programme of work each government has committed to conduct a gap analysis to determine where their protected area system falls short of protecting its biodiversity9.

IBAs are Key Biodiversity Areas of international significance, identified by BirdLife International using data on birds. The overlay of IBAs with protected areas shows gaps in our protected area network.

In Australia, the Strategy for Australia’s National Reserve System 2009–2030 identifies threatened species’ habitat, refuges, centres of species richness or areas of national importance as priorities for biodiversity conservation. IBAs can direct future investment in developing a comprehensive and representative National Reserve System.

Protected Areas need to be managed

Over half (59 per cent) of Australia’s threatened bird species rely on public land, including protected areas. However, many of these species also utilise private land outside the reserve system to survive. The high proportion of threatened birds on protected public land might imply that they are ‘safe’, but these taxa usually require active management.

Few national parks have the budget for managing threatened birds, with funding largely directed at maintaining built infrastructure and servicing visitors. The threatened species habitat values of some parks are unknown, or have a low priority in park management.

Management plans must address specific threats to birds and biodiversity as well as their other objectives, like visitor experience. Many protected areas are underfunded, but there is a minimum level of investment needed to maintain the biodiversity and other values for which protected areas are designated.

Specific actions for threatened species recovery should be incorporated into the management plans of all properties in the National Reserve System. Indeed, management of threatened species’ habitat and the response of threatened species to management action should be measured as a key performance indicator in the management of Australia’s Protected Area Estate.

Some protected areas require occasional capital investment to improve their value. Funding the permanent eradication of invasive alien species from islands, for example, illustrates the success that is possible with adequate funding.

Monitoring is essential to determine if IBAs are being adequately managed

IBAs are widely recognised as critical for the conservation of both birds and other biodiversity10. Safeguarding the world’s IBAs would make a significant contribution to meeting the Convention on Biological Diversity’s targets on protected areas and threatened species (Aichi Biodiversity Targets 11 and 12).

However, simply identifying priority areas for conservation is not enough. We must also ensure that sites are well managed. Across the BirdLife Partnership, IBA monitoring frameworks help assess the effectiveness of conservation measures and can alert managers to emerging problems. However, few IBAs in Australia have regular, systematic monitoring programs in place to detect significant changes and trigger appropriate management.

The IBAs featured in this report were identified as being ‘in Danger’ predominately because they had local champions dedicated to monitoring birds at these sites. Many of Australia’s IBAs do not yet have systematic monitoring in place. Therefore it is unknown how many other IBAs could also be ‘in Danger’ or rapidly losing the bird and biodiversity values for which they were designated.

BirdLife Australia relies on its network of volunteers and supporters to monitor and care for the most important bird and biodiversity areas in the country. Without this dedicated effort we would not know how many of our IBAs are faring. To get involved, or to find out more about IBAs, contact [email protected] or go to http://www.birdlife.org.au/ibas-in-danger.

Christmas Island

Lord Howe island

Norfolk Island

Macquarie IslandHeard Island

Protected area overlap with IBAs

IBAs outside protected area

AuStrAlIAn IBAS oVerlAp wIth protected AreAS

(2012 CAPAD – TeRReSTRIAl AnD mARIne).

conVentIon on BIologIcAl dIVerSIty AIchI BIodIVerSIty tArgetS

tArget 11 By 2020, at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water, and 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well-connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes.

tArget 12 By 2020, the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained.

9BirdLife International (2011) BirdLife Partners use IBAs to inform an ecologically representative network of protected areas. Presented

as part of the BirdLife State of the world’s birds website. Available from: http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/sowb/casestudy/236.

Checked: 19/10/2014

10Butchart, S. H. M., Scharlemann, J. P. W., Evans, M.I., Quader, S., Aricò, S., et al. (2012) Protecting

important sites for biodiversity contributes to meeting global conservation targets.

PLoS ONE 7(3): e32529.

18 I IBAs IN DANGER

cASe Study: SucceSSful protected AreA mAnAgement — mAcquArIe ISlAnd IBA

After more than a century of being ravaged by introduced pests, Macquarie Island was declared free of rabbits, rats and mice in April 2014.

The introduction of cats, rats, mice and rabbits to this isolated subantarctic island in the 19th century resulted in the extinction of distinctive subspecies of the Buff-banded Rail and Red-crowned Parakeet, the loss of the Grey Petrel (and possibly other species) as a breeding species and confined several other species of small petrels to offshore rock stacks.

The 128 km2 island supports about 3.5 million seabirds, comprising 13 species including the world population of Royal Penguins and more than 1 per cent of the world breeding population of King, Gentoo and Rockhopper Penguins, Light-mantled Albatrosses, Southern and Northern Giant-Petrels, White-headed Petrels and Brown Skuas. They were threatened by introduced predators which preyed on eggs, chicks and adult birds, and rabbits which destroyed the native vegetation in which many birds breed.

Cats and rabbits (and introduced Weka) were managed under an Integrated Vertebrate Pest Management Plan in the 1980s: Weka were eradicated by 1988 and cats by 2000, while rabbit populations were controlled to low levels by myxomatosis. To illustrate the effects of this achievement, in 2000 Grey Petrels bred successfully for the first time in more than a century. However, between 2000 and 2008, the myxoma virus became less effective, and, when combined with the removal of predation pressure by cats, rabbit populations increased, peaking at 150,000 and devastating the island’s vegetation. In 2007, a dedicated campaign by the World Wide Fund for Nature and Peregrine Adventures saw the Australian and Tasmanian Governments commit funding of $24.6 million for an eradication project. Aerial baiting in 2011 was the start of the largest program to eradicate rabbits, rats or mice attempted anywhere in the world. Follow-up monitoring of rabbits and rodents continued for nearly 3 years without any evidence of the animals surviving before the program was declared a success.

The vegetation is now recovering, the number of breeding pairs of Grey Petrels has increased, Blue Petrels have colonised the island and Soft-plumaged Petrels appear to be re-establishing in small numbers. The breeding behaviour of Antarctic Terns has changed, with nearly half their breeding attempts now on cobbled beaches instead of offshore rock stacks. Thanks to the up-front funding commitment and dedicated project staff, this project has been delivered a year ahead of schedule and 20 per cent under budget, and has secured the future of one of Australia’s most important bird and biodiversity areas.

Above: Nesting seabirds have benefited from the elimination

of rabbits, cats, mice and rats from Australia’s subantarctic

Macquarie Island. Photo by Glenn Ehmke

BirdLife International, the world’s largest nature conservation partnership, has identified over 12,000 sites of international significance for birds across the world, called Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs). The conservation of many bird species, and indeed the diversity of life, depends on protecting these areas.

BirdLife Australia has identified 314 IBAs across the country. Of these, 14 are experiencing very high levels of threat and are at risk of losing the values they were nominated for. Five of these IBAs have been designated as ‘In Danger’ as part of BirdLife International’s global campaign.

Australia’s IBAs in Danger include sites threatened by inappropriate fire regimes, unsustainable agriculture, industrial development and introduced species. Each of the IBAs in Danger provides habitat for species that will soon become extinct should the current threats continue.

Fortunately, there are straightforward solutions to recover the values of these IBAs. Some are easier to implement than others, but we know enough about the species at risk to turn things around. We simply need the political will and resources to do what needs to be done.

This report outlines what we can do to save the IBAs in Danger and details case studies where action has successfully addressed threats to our Important Bird and Biodiversity areas.

Cover: Inappropriate fire regimes are the biggest threat to the birds and biodiversity of Australia’s unique mallee ecosystems. Photo by David Bruce.

Copyright: Reproduction in whole or in part may only occur with the written permission of the authors.

Printed on recycled FSC paper