NATURE CONSERVATION IN THE MULGA LANDS

Address to South West NRM Ltd – 22.3.2007

Paul Sattler OAM

paulsattler@bigpond.com Introduction The semi-arid Mulga Lands of Queensland and New South Wales are an extensively degraded landscape. Much of the Mulga Lands show signs of erosion and changed vegetation structure, including increase in woody shrubs and loss of perennial grass species. The condition of natural landscape features of particular importance to biodiversity such as wetlands and riparian zones are declining. A large number of regional ecosystems and species are threatened and their condition continues to decline. The introduction of change in land use and management has been difficult in this region over recent decades. Examples discussed include the gazettal of the first National Parks and legalising kangaroo meat for human consumption. Against this background of an extensively degraded region where land management options are limited, the task faced by regional natural resource managers to achieve sustainability and restoration is very difficult. An overview of the condition, trend and threats to biodiversity is presented together with some of the emerging trends in nature conservation and sustainable natural resource management. A number of key characteristics of other successful natural resource management bodies are described. Consideration of key success factors in natural resource management elsewhere may assist in meeting the challenges faced in this region. Some historical conservation events The first National Parks In 1984, Matt Bolton and his PhD supervisor from the University of Queensland, Professor Ray Specht, carried out a preliminary analysis to identify possible reserve locations of a large area incorporating parts of the Mulga Lands, Channel Country, and Mitchell Grass Downs. This analysis used an early computer based algorithmic approach referred to today as a spatial optimisation tool. This approach was designed to efficiently identify areas to sample ecological diversity in a representative pattern throughout the region in the minimum area (Bolton 1986). Preceding this in 1977, Stanton and Morgan had identified the biogeographic regions or bioregions of Queensland as a planning framework for conservation across all natural environments. On behalf of the then National Parks and Wildlife Service, I suggested that the Bolton-Specht method be

1

applied to a whole bioregion, the Mulga Lands. Dr Rosemary Purdie a botanist, and Ross Blick a zoologist, were asked to ground truth the results of this computer technique and to develop a suite of National Park proposals (Purdie 1986). In 1985, I organised through the Royal Society of Queensland a symposium specifically on the Mulga Lands to draw together the disparate information on management of this region, to argue that nature conservation was a legitimate land use and to promote a protected area plan for the bioregion. This was not without some trepidation as to the risk of publishing a map of possible conservation reserves. Subsequently, two key areas, Thrushton and Idalia, came onto the market and attempts were made by the National Parks and Wildlife Service to purchase these properties from willing vendors. However, the animosity towards establishing National Parks was palpable and included threats to the preselection of the long-standing State government political representative for the area should the government proceed with the purchase of Thrushton. This led to a most complicated offset arrangement by the government with development interests on the Gold Coast who acquired the properties. This arrangement then brought criticism from sections of the conservation movement over the trade-off of coastal land (it was on the site of an old failed canal estate on South Stradbroke Island) for the purchase of ‘worthless sheep properties’. Had this arrangement not occurred, Thrushton would have been cleared and Idalia would have been more intensively developed. Soon after the change of government in 1989, Thrushton and Idalia were gazetted as National Parks together with Currawinya Lakes, Welford, Hell Hole Gorge, Lake Bindegolly, the conversion of Mariala reserve to National Park and subsequently, Culgoa Floodplains and Tregole National Parks. An invitation was forwarded to Buckingham Palace and the Duke of Edinburgh travelled to Australia and officially opened Idalia, the first Mulga Lands National Park. In total, more than two-thirds of the regional park system plan was gazetted and represented the first implementation of a systematically derived park network for a whole bioregion. This was a turning point for nature conservation in Queensland with the beginning of the systematic establishment of parks throughout western Queensland. Incidentally, the development proposed for South Stradbroke Island did not proceed though subsequently, a smaller development did occur. This resistance to the establishment of the first National Parks related to many factors including vested interests and a fear of change, change in traditional land management. Also, concern existed as to the ability of government to manage public lands including management of dingoes, bore drains and boundary fences. Commitments were given by government that the parks would be staffed and staff would work in with neighbours. Thrushton was the home, from the 1920s to 1950s, of Jim Gasteen, a grazier who subsequently worked tirelessly for nature conservation and who has now recorded the early history of this region in his bush memoir Under the Mulga - it is an excellent read (Gasteen 2005).

2

A new kangaroo industry In the early 1990s, the Queensland Government embarked on a rural adjustment programme for the Mulga Lands: this later became the South West Strategy. A number of working groups were established to address specific issues and I chaired a working group that sought to value add to the kangaroo industry to provide economic support to the region and property owners. If sufficient value add could be achieved there was the potential to reduce total grazing pressure on properties. A number of impediments existed to the legalisation of kangaroo meat for human consumption, including objections from the existing red meat industry to any competitive product. In addition, there was an established pet food industry that was comfortable with the existing arrangements. Furthermore, the United States of America banned the importation of kangaroo products as it had listed various macropod species as threatened species. Other practical issues existed such as public acceptance of kangaroo meat given the then relatively low usage of product in South Australia where it had been legalised for some time. Also, there was the possibility of significant opposition from poorly informed parts of the conservation movement should undue attention be drawn to the extent of the sustainable kangaroo quota. The issue was widely debated at a symposium organised by the University of Queensland in 1994 where solid scientific support for the sustainable utilisation of wildlife was forthcoming (Sattler 1994). On a visit to the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife in Washington concerning United States opposition, this department acknowledged the science behind establishing the quota system in Australia. However, the real issue was that it was in no politician’s interest to take to Capital Hill a proposal to amend the threatened species legislation to eat skippy. Eventually opposition to legalising kangaroo meat the human consumption was overcome though market analyses by government of potential markets in Europe did not see the light of day. The then Minister for the Environment and Heritage was prepared to consider taking a proposal to Cabinet to launch kangaroo meat as a good thing for nature conservation rather than having it limp onto the market and not be valued highly, and therefore not achieve its potential for achieving broader conservation outcomes. A proposed budget of $2 million was suggested to promote a new industry. However, allowing an alternative red meat was one thing but to promote it was entirely another thing. It is now heartening to see the expansion of the industry in Charleville but we still have not linked value added kangaroo product to better land management. Planning for nature conservation Effective nature conservation involves a mix of management actions that should be carefully targeted to the characteristics of each bioregion. Elsewhere, it has been proposed that national programs such as the Natural Heritage Trust and National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality would benefit from a systematic assessment of the condition, trend and an analysis of threats to biodiversity in each by bioregion (Sattler

3

2006). Such analysis should identify a cost-effective mix of conservation measures to address biodiversity decline as a key input into development of regional natural resource management plans co-ordinated with other State conservation initiatives. This analysis would allow management decisions including trade-off decisions to be made within a comprehensive knowledge framework. It is noted that the Queensland EPA has described in some detail, the conservation values of this region which is the first step in the development of a comprehensive biodiversity strategy (Environmental Protection Agency 2003). It is important that a business like approach be taken to planning and implementing measures to meet conservation objectives. The typical spectrum of conservation measures includes:

• protected areas both public and private • the recovery of threatened elements at a range of scales including landscape,

ecosystem and species scales • the adoption of sustainable resource management practices, and • for the Mulga lands it is important to add a fourth element, landscape restoration.

Landscape health Degradation in this region has been insidious with significant impacts accumulating since at least the 1890s when stock numbers culminated in a peak of disastrous proportions combined with drought and rabbits. Gasteen (1986) refers to the build up of stock in the 1860s and 1870s when ‘nobody understood the carrying capacity of the region’ and ‘the continuous man made droughts’. He describes: ‘as stock routes were eaten out by travelling mobs, further reduction from drought stricken districts was impossible. As conditions worsened, stock routes and the country for miles around water was severely degraded as the soils were churned into dusty wastes…’. ‘During the 20 years 1880 to 1900, a peak in the collapse of the small land holder was reached as heavily indebted blocks, sometimes having overdrafts exceeding the value of stock and land, changed hands’. This early description sounds all too familiar with the issues faced over recent decades. In an Australian wide comparison of the relative landscape health of subregions, a part of the Mulga Lands bioregion, the West Balonne Plains, fall within the highest continental stress class (Stress Class 1 out of 6 Classes). The condition across subregions within the Mulga Lands does vary however, with the majority of subregions being assessed as Class 3 and the Warrego River Plains assessed as Class 5 (Environment Australia and National Land and Water Resources Audit 2001). This continental stress assessment for the Mulga Lands was based on a range of factors including: • the low biophysical naturalness of the landscape • the poor connectivity of remnants confined mainly to major landscape features in

eastern parts • change in hydrology as a result of changes to infiltration and run-off due to soil

degradation from grazing pressure • extent of threatened biodiversity • the very low proportion of land in protected areas.

4

Protected areas Protected areas are the cornerstone of nature conservation. The National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia's Biodiversity, 1996 (Commonwealth of Australia 1996) states that the protected area system is the central strategy to protect biodiversity in conjunction with sympathetic management of other lands. A recent analysis of the performance of all governments in establishing a representative and well-managed protected area system has been carried out (Sattler and Glanznig 2006). This analysis was based on three criteria:

• comprehensiveness, i.e., how representative is the protected area system in sampling regional ecosystems across each bioregion

• extent, i.e. the size of the protected area system in each bioregion • standard of management, i.e. are protected areas well-managed or is degradation

of biodiversity occurring. The Report card for Queensland and for the Mulga Lands bioregion set against the other State and Territory jurisdictions is shown in Table 1. The standard of the protected area system in the Mulga Lands was assessed as CDC (on a scale of AAA to DDD) which incidentally, is the same report as for Queensland overall. Queensland’s record is the second poorest Australia wide. The specific benchmarks used in this assessment are given in Table 2. Table 1. Australia’s Protected Area System Report Card including the Mulga Lands bioregion State / Territory

Comprehensiveness Extent Management Standard

Australian Capital Territory

A A A

Tasmania A A B Victoria C A B South Australia B/C A C/D* New South Wales

A /D* C C

Western Australia

D B C

Queensland C D C Northern Territory

D D B

Mulga Lands C D C * data deficient.

5

Table 2: Protected Area System Benchmarks Comprehensiveness (% representation of ecosystems across all bioregions)

Extent (% area reserved per State/Territory)

Management Standard Rank

>85 >15 Very good AAA 70-85 10-15 Good BBB 55-<70 5-<10 Fair CCC <55/Unknown <5 Poor/Unknown DDD In the Mulga Lands:

• comprehensiveness of the protected area system is 57% for National Parks with an additional 4% for multiple use protected areas primarily on private lands

• the extent of the National Park system is 2.58% of the region and another 0.32% for other protected areas

• the standard of management across National Parks was assessed as Fair, i.e. biodiversity values and management issues are poorly identified; resource degradation is occurring though retrievable.

Notably the higher standard of comprehensiveness than extent reflects the efficient approach to park selection in the 1980s discussed above. Gaps in the protected area system include the unrepresented subregions of the Warrego River Plains, West Bulloo and its associated Boree ecosystems. Other gaps include the Spinifex and wildflower heath communities and Silver-leaved Ironbark woodlands southeast of Charleville, and extension to Culgoa Floodplains National Park to protect endangered Gidgee ecosystems and wetlands. Internationally, 10% of a region is currently considered a realistic target for a permanent protected area system whilst in Australia, the Regional Forest Agreement process established 15% as a target. As of 2004, 10.52% of Australia was included in protected areas. Considerable expansion of the protected area system in the Mulga Lands will be needed to achieve either of these targets or to approach the national average. Multiple use protected areas Multiple use protected areas that are managed primarily the nature conservation on private lands have expanded considerably in recent years. These protected areas also include very large Indigenous Protected Areas elsewhere in Australia. In 2004, 3.26% of Australia was included in multiple use protected areas out of the total estate of 10.52%. Unfortunately, this large area only represents an increase of 5% in comprehensiveness above the 67% of ecosystems sampled in nature conservation reserves on public lands (National Land and Water Resources Audit 2002). This low contribution to comprehensiveness reflects the initial poor targeting of off-park conservation though undoubtedly, other environmental benefits such as the protection of ecosystem services have occurred.

6

Sufficient experience now exists to also examine the cost of establishing agreements with landholders on private land. Such costs range from $10.31 per hectare in western New South Wales (West 2000 initiative) to $248 per hectare in Victoria with agreements ranging from three year terms to perpetuity (Shepherd 2006). Recently across the border in central north west New South Wales in the Brigalow Belt South and Darling Riverine Plains bioregions, a multiple fixed-price tender system for conservation agreements has been trialled. Agreement areas have included wetlands on fertile alluvial plains, Blue Grass downs on volcanic soils and very infertile eucalypt- Spinifex country. Tenders were assessed against multiple fixed-price benchmarks based on three key criteria: • conservation value • term of the agreement • grazed or ungrazed Table 3 shows a range of benchmarks considered based on a percentage of unimproved property value. The incentive benchmarks ranged from 5% the property valuation per hectare for areas of medium conservation value for a five-year agreement with light or strategic grazing to 66% for an area of high conservation value under perpetual agreement that would not be grazed by livestock. These incentives are in addition to recompensing for any agreed management works. This level of incentive is consistent with incentives of up to 50% of land value though typically in the 30% range offered in Tasmania (Gilfedder, pers. com.). Table 3. Multiple Price Benchmarks based on a percentage of land value,

agreement term and whether the area is grazed for areas of high and medium ecological value.

Term (years) Ungrazed (%) Grazed (%) Perpetual* 66/33** 40/20 15 50/25 30/15 10 33/16.5 20/10 5 16/8 10/5 *Other taxation and local government rate benefits may apply ** High/Medium conservation value This example is provided to indicate that significant resources are necessary to promote off-park conservation, particularly in areas where there is reluctance to manage areas primarily for nature conservation or to deal with government or even regional bodies. Also, such resources are needed if off-park conservation is to effectively target areas of high conservation value to complement the formal protected area system. What is emerging nationwide is that a variety of approaches is required to suit the characteristics

7

of a particular bioregion. Experience with the forest incentive program in Tasmania has shown that such interest does ramp up after initial reluctance (Blake, pers. com.). The Queensland Government has been providing significant financial assistance for perpetual agreements under the Nature Assist program. It is important that any action by regional bodies’ complements this activity and that incentives set for term agreements marry carefully with incentives offered for State perpetual agreements. A key issue associated with the establishment of protected areas on private land, particularly if they continue to be used as multiple use areas, is monitoring. Monitoring allows the assessment of the effectiveness of agreed management in meeting biodiversity objectives and provides the technical basis to negotiate any adjustments required with landholders. The lack of monitoring is currently one of the greatest weaknesses in the establishment of conservation areas on private lands and the provision of stewardship payments. With projected climate change there is an increasing call to expand the protected area estate both through the public land estate and on private lands. Many threats discussed below will be exacerbated by climate change and securing a representative protected area system throughout the extensively grazed semi-arid lands will become increasingly important to protect biodiversity. Designing the expansion of the protected area system will need to further consider ecological criteria such as refugia, environmental gradients and landscape corridors to assist in building resilience and adaptive capacity for biodiversity.

8

Threats to biodiversity across the Mulga Lands Effective nature conservation requires not only knowledge of the conservation values of an area but also a detailed threat analysis to biodiversity at a range of scales. This overview of the threats to biodiversity in the Mulga Lands is drawn from the National Land and Water Resources Audit’s Terrestrial Biodiversity Assessment across Australia in 2002. In particular, I would refer you to the National Land and Water Resources Audit’s Atlas on www.environment.gov.au/atlas (upon entering the web site proceed to vegetation and biodiversity, biodiversity, Queensland, Mulga Lands). The Audit’s assessment at a subregional landscape scale reviews the condition, trend and threats to wetlands and riparian zones, threatened regional ecosystems and threatened species. Conservation responses are identified in terms of protected areas, ecosystem and species recovery and integrated natural resource management. Whilst this assessment provides only a rapid assessment, it does place each of Australia’s 85 bioregions and 385 subregions in a nation-wide context. Wetlands Wetlands, rivers and water courses and their associated riparian zones are essential for the provision of clean water for urban and productive uses and for biodiversity. Other landscape features in the Mulga Lands are also important for biodiversity such as ranges, often impacted by goats, but the naturally watered parts of this semi-arid landscape are critical for the maintenance of much of the region’s biodiversity. There are 59 wetlands of national significance in the bioregion including the ephemeral wetlands and naturally saline lakes. Many of these wetlands as well as being important for resident fauna, act as a critical drought refuge when other parts of inland Australia, e.g. the Lake Eyre system, are experiencing dry conditions. A number of other regionally significant wetlands also occur. The overall condition of wetlands is generally in good condition though the trend in condition is declining. Principal threats result from grazing pressure, feral animals and changed hydrology including sedimentation and eutrophication, refer Figure 1. This includes the serious impacts on mound springs from the drawdown of the Great Artesian Basin through intensive bore development and uncontrolled flows into open bore drains.

9

Figure 1. Frequency of Threatening Processes for Nationally Important Wetlands in the Mulga Lands. (Frequency does not necessarily reflect relative importance).

Riparian zones The riparian zones of the Mulga Lands are generally degraded or at best in fair condition, with the exception of the Northern Uplands subregion where the condition is better. Unfortunately, the trend in condition of all riparian zones across the region is declining. The major threatening processes are fragmentation, assuming recent clearing controls have effectively managed broad-acre clearing, grazing pressure and feral animals, refer Figure 2.

10

Figure 2. Frequency of Threatening Processes on Riparian Zones in the Mulga Lands. (Frequency does not necessarily reflect relative importance).

11

Regional ecosystems at risk Regional ecosystems are a description of vegetation communities in association with the land zone or abiotic environment, and the bioregional environment, within which they occur. By combining biological and non-biological attributes makes for a more robust classification of environmental pattern to assist in planning for biodiversity conservation. Within the Queensland section of the Mulga Lands, six regional ecosystems are classed as endangered with a further 23 assessed as ‘of concern’ or vulnerable (Queensland Herbarium 2007). These threatened (endangered and ‘of concern’) regional ecosystems particularly occur on the more fertile alluvial plains and include various eucalypt woodland communities as well as the regional ecosystems fringing wetlands and lakes. Other threatened regional ecosystems include patches of Brigalow, Belah and Gidgee on clay plains as well as those ecosystems associated with Mound Springs. The major threatening processes are grazing pressure, fragmentation of remnant vegetation and changed hydrology, refer Figure 3.

12

Figure 3. Frequency of Threatening Processes on Endangered and ‘Of Concern’ Ecosystems in the Mulga Lands. (Frequency does not necessarily reflect relative importance).

13

Species at risk There are 58 species listed by Queensland and New South Wales as endangered or vulnerable across the entire bioregion of which 12 are considered endangered and 46 vulnerable (National Land and Water Resources Audit 2002). These threatened species comprise of 24 bird species, eight mammal species, two reptile species and 24 plant species. One reptile in New South Wales, the fierce snake, Oxyuranus microlepidota, and two mammal species, the Bilby and Bridled Nail-tail Wallaby in Queensland are considered extinct to the region. The general trend in populations of threatened species is declining. Key threatening processes are fragmentation and loss of remnant habitat, predation by feral animals, grazing pressure and a broad mix of other threats, refer Figure 4. The significance of the intensification of water availability across this landscape through the extensive artesian bore drain system has not been quantified though such watering of dry landscapes elsewhere has been detrimental to some species whilst favouring other species. The impact of changed fire regimes is also poorly understood. With only 41 mammal species recorded for the Mulga Lands, it is likely that there are a number of unrecorded regional extinctions since settlement and particularly since the impact of peak stock numbers and drought at the end of the 19th century. Elsewhere in Australia, the sub-fossil record and Aboriginal oral history has been available to complete the mammal record (Burbidge pers. com.).

14

Figure 4. Frequency of threatening Processes on Endangered and Vulnerable Species in the Mulga Lands. (Frequency does not necessarily reflect relative importance).

15

Recovery actions for threatened species and regional ecosystems The broad range of recovery actions applicable to threatened species and regional ecosystems is shown in Figures 5 and 6. These figures demonstrate the frequency of recommended recovery actions for threatened species and ecosystems in each subregion. These recovery actions identify the need to significantly expand conservation areas on private lands, protection on other State lands, as well as consolidating the National Park system. Research into understanding species recovery needs and capacity building across the community are other measures frequently identified as well as a range of on farm actions. The Queensland Environmental Protection Agency, Back on Track program, prioritises species conservation and recovery needs based on a multiple species/ecosystem approach to conservation.

16

Figure 5. The Type and Frequency of Recovery Actions required for Threatened Species in the Mulga Lands. (Frequency does not necessarily reflect relative importance).

17

Figure 6. The Type and Frequency of Recovery Actions required for Threatened Regional Ecosystems in the Mulga Lands. (Frequency does not necessarily reflect relative importance).

18

Integrated natural resource management for sustainability and biodiversity conservation The Audit’s Terrestrial Biodiversity Assessment (National Land and Water Resources Audit 2002) asked a number of questions to identify the type of existing projects that were contributing to biodiversity conservation as part of integrated natural resource management, refer Figure 7. These pie charts identify the frequency of projects and do not necessarily represent the relative importance of each measure or project. Most integrated natural resource management actions are limited to capacity building and property management planning activities, refer Figure 7. The Audit’s assessment within an Australian wide context identified that there are significant constraints to integrate conservation with production systems and to achieve species and ecosystem recovery in the Mulga Lands. This assessment related to the extent of past degradation, land capability, property size, social and economic circumstances and the need for structural reform. Stress on this landscape will continue with predicted climate change and the latent effects of past management. The Murray-Darling Basin Commission has identified that a significant loss of water from the Basin will occur over the next 20 years due to climate change. Furthermore, a large increase in salinity in the rivers flowing out of the Queensland section of the Murray-Darling Basin, including the Warrego River in the Mulga Lands, has been modelled by CSIRO to occur as a result of the impact of past clearing (Dawes et al. 2003). This salinisation will be compound by the effects of reduced flows. Importantly, this work identifies that there is a finite timeframe within the next 50 years to take remedial action to keep the salt down in the profile before it is expressed on the surface.

An emerging conservation trend is to consider our ecological footprint i.e. what is the amount of biologically productive land and water area required to produce the resources an individual, population or activity consumes and to absorb the waste they generate – expressed as global hectares (World Wildlife Fund 2006). Such measures call for a cutting of carbon output and the promotion of sustainability. This pressure is likely to grow and will impact on rural industries. Some industries have developed environmental certification mechanisms to promote sustainable produced products such as the Forest Stewardship Council. Many businesses are actively working on environmental accounting systems that include carbon neutral production. Tasmania is selling environmentally friendly wool into the USA marketed as ecomerino wool with the purchaser even taking out green power credits with a local utility to off-set carbon transport costs (Gilfedder, pers. com., www.tekosocks.com ).

19

Figure 7. Frequency of Projects Contributing to Biodiversity Conservation as part on Integrated Natural Resource Management. (Frequency does not necessarily reflect relative importance).

20

On farm carbon accounting is being discussed (Jones 2006) in devising new production systems to achieve the restoration of soil carbon as part of sustainable agricultural production. Seventy-five percent of terrestrial carbon can occur in the soil. If such carbon is considered eligible in any future carbon accounting system perhaps such sequestration may represent a potential source of income to help finance the restoration of extensively degraded areas. In more fertile environments, one grazing regime proposes through cell grazing, to trample and incorporate 20% of biomass for soil carbon replenishment, utilise 60% for production and to retain 20% cover to protect the soil surface and recovery of pasture species. However in the Mulga lands, what potential exists to develop sustainable production systems and new marketing opportunities? What capacity exists to achieve the period of destocking required for restoration under current economic constraints, particularly those faced by private landholders? Across the region there will be a range of management scenarios depending upon the productivity and condition of land. This will range from sustainable production in more favoured parts with good management, through to locations which may become sustainable with assistance, through to those areas where accumulated degradation and low productivity means that it is not economically possible to restore such areas and to achieve sustainability (Sattler 1995). Perhaps a natural resource management body is a well-placed instrumentality to take some submarginal properties into public ownership to trial the requirements for achieving sustainable management including restoration and to assess how a basket of stewardship payments such as biodiversity credits and carbon credits may be accessed and combined with income from kangaroo production and carefully managed wool or beef production. Characteristics of some successful regional bodies In 2006, the Audit commissioned an assessment of a number of the more successful regional bodies in Australia and overseas to look for key success factors (National Land and Water Resources Audit 2006). Based on the case studies evaluated, some of the key success factors included:

• clearly defined vision and focus • strong interagency collaboration including the clarification of roles and

responsibilities. This recognised the large amount of information residing with State agencies vital for strategic review of resource management priorities

• a separate scientific panel and/or linkages with key research bodies to provide scientific advice and to assess and interpret the findings of ongoing monitoring

• a breadth of partnerships contributing to the development of a shared vision • a technical monitoring program supporting decision making and investment.

Such reporting targets strategic outcomes rather than just accounting for outputs. Sustainability reporting was based on partnership arrangements to incorporate

21

other capacity to develop practical robust monitoring methods and the capacity for evaluation and reporting

• engaging the community with technical and non-technical information designed to communicate key messages and to promote an understanding of the inter- relationships of natural resource management issues. Report cards have been a successful tool for non-technical reporting to the community

• maintenance of political support and commitment • in some regions socio- economic indicators were a significant component of

reporting in conjunction with biophysical indicators. Conclusion Change in land use and management in the Mulga Lands has been hard won in the past. To address the challenges associated with the impacts of over a hundred years of pastoralism, the current economic circumstances facing rural production and the significant impacts predicted with climate change, means that future management decisions will be no less difficult. It is a reality that the period of destocking required (plus control of kangaroo grazing) to spell some of the more degraded country to allow restoration is beyond the economic capacity of private landholders. It is important that the primary focus is on management of natural resources towards a sustainable future, as well as caring for the needs of the community, rather than a reliance on short-term fiscal measures to maintain the status quo. It is time to trial different land management arrangements to determine the requirements for restoration and sustainable production, that includes the protection of biodiversity, and to assess how stewardship credits might be accessed. References Bolton, M.P., 1986. Computer Assisted Reserve Selection (CARS). In P.S. Sattler (ed) The Mulga Lands symposium proceedings, p128. Royal Society of Queensland, Brisbane. Commonwealth of Australia, 1996. National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity. Department of the Environment, Sport and Territories, Canberra. Dawes, W., Austin, J., Gilfedder, M., McEwan, K. and Walker, G., 2003. Rapid Assessment of the Impact of Recent Vegetation Clearing on Salinity in the Queensland part of the MDB and projected Scenarios. Murray-Darling Basin Commission and CSIRO, unpublished, Canberra.

Environment Australia and National Land and Water Resources Audit, 2001. Landscape Health in Australia. A Rapid Assessment of the relative Condition of Australia’s Bioregions and Subregions. EA and NLWRA, Canberra. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003. Mulga Lands East Landscape, Biodiversity Planning Assessment, Expert Panel Report. EPA, Brisbane.

22

Gasteen, J., 1986. Historical Trends in the Mulga Lands of South west Queensland. In P.S. Sattler (ed) The Mulga Lands symposium proceedings, pp 72-78. Royal Society of Queensland, Brisbane. Gasteen, J., 2005. Under the Mulga - A Bush Memoir, 318pp. University of Queensland Press, Brisbane. Jones, C., 2006. Recognize, Relate, Innovate. Managing the Carbon Cycle Forums. www.amazingcarbon.com National Land and Water Resources Audit, 2002. Australian Terrestrial Biodiversity Assessment. NLWRA, Canberra. National Land and Water Resources Audit, 2006. Case Studies of Current Regional/Catchment Integrated ssessments. NLWRA, Canberra. Purdie, R.W., 1986. Development of a National Park System for Queensland’s Mulga Region. In P.S. Sattler (ed) The Mulga Lands symposium proceedings, pp122-127. Royal Society of Queensland, Brisbane. Sattler, P.S., 1994. The Greater Conservation Gain from a “new” Kangaroo Industry for the Mulga Lands: Ecologically Sustainable Management. In G. Grigg, P. Hale and D. Lunney (eds) Conservation through the Sustainable Use of Wildlife symposium proceedings, pp176 – 185. University of Queensland Press, Brisbane. Sattler, P.S., (1995). Ecological Sustainable Management and the Protection of Biodiversity in the Mulgalands - the need for, a strategic view. In M. Page and T. Beutel (eds) Ecological Research and Management in the Mulgalands, pp. 1-12. Proceedings of Conference held 5-6 July 1994. University of Qld, Gatton. Sattler, P. S., 2006. Future Proofing Australia (through the development of National Priorities and Bioregional Conservation Strategies). Presentation on behalf of Humane Society International, Spatial Optimisation Workshop proceedings, in press. Department of Environment and Heritage, Canberra. Sattler, P .S. and Glanznig, A., 2006. Building Nature’s Safety Net: a Review of Australia’s Terrestrial Protected Area System, 1991-2000, 117pp. World Wildlife Fund –Australia, Sydney. Shepherd, R., 2006. WEST 2000 Plus - Enterprise Based Conservation Program. Department of Natural Resources, Dubbo. Stanton, J.P. and Morgan, M. G., 1977. The Rapid Selection and Appraisal of Key and Endangered Sites: The Queensland Case Study. A report to the Department of Environment, Housing and Community Development. University of New England, Armidale. World Wildlife Fund, 2006. Living Planet Report-2006. WWF International, Gland. www.wwf.org.au

23