Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin
-
Upload
international-watercentre -
Category
Technology
-
view
351 -
download
0
Transcript of Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin
![Page 1: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Monitoring and evaluating Murray-Darling river health conditions across many state jurisdictions: The Sustainable Rivers Audit (SRA) best practice model
Michael Wilson, Mathew Maliel and Frederick Bouckaert,
![Page 2: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
What is Sustainable Rivers Audit (SRA)?
• Long term, repeatable, transparent
• Reports on themes SRA1: fish, macros, hydrology SRA2: + physical form, vegetation
• Surveillance monitoring and assessment of health of MDB’s riverine ecosystems
• Doesn’t track specific interventions or projects
• Doesn’t identify cause of degradation
![Page 3: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
The SRA partnership
SRA program
team in MDBA
Vic
NSW & ACT
Qld
SA Multi - jurisdictional Working Group
Technical Taskforces
Independent Audit Group (ecologists)
Annual reporting to Council of
Government Ministers
Public release of data and audit reports
Australian Government
SRA program
team
Vic
NSW & ACT
Qld
SA Inter-jurisdictional Working Group
Expert advice (inc external experts)
Independent Audit Group (ISRAG)
Independent reports to The MDBA and the MDB Ministerial Council
Public release of data and audit reports
2. Data
Australian Government
4. Reporting 1. Sampling 3. Analysis
![Page 4: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
SRA Report 1 First report on ‘status’ • Ecosystem health
assessment for all valleys -fish, macros and hydrology
• Limited to river channels • Sampling 2004–2007 • Report released June 2008 • Technical report (396pp) • Summary report (70pp –
including valley report cards)
![Page 5: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Where does SRA work?
• Whole of the MDB – 23 valleys – 1 to 4 zones per valley
• Random sampling sites – 25% fixed, 75% new
• Reporting for Valley and Zone but NOT sites
• SRA1 - riverine zone • SRA2 - will include floodplains
![Page 6: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Data, integration and audiences
![Page 7: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Data, integration and audiences
![Page 8: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Data, integration and audiences
Expert rules
![Page 9: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Rankings and reference
= near reference condition
= moderate difference from reference
= large difference from reference
= very large difference from reference
= extreme difference from reference
SRA assesses condition relative to Reference Condition (no significant human intervention) • benchmark for comparison
• accounts for natural regional and temporal differences(dry/wet)
• not a management target
![Page 10: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Ecosystem health
• Themes are combined using expert rules to give rating for ecosystem health
• Qualitative but repeatable
• Not a simple addition (the indices have different weightings)
![Page 11: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
What does Report 1 say?
![Page 12: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Fish Theme • 487 sites were sampled • 60,600 fish caught (and released)
– 38 species; 28 native, 10 alien • Many native species missing • Aliens dominate:
– two-thirds biomass is alien species
– in every 10 kg of fish, 6 kg is carp – carp, gambusia, goldfish in all
rivers • Most fish communities in Poor, Very
Poor or Extremely Poor Condition • Northern rivers generally better
condition than southern rivers
NSW Fisheries
![Page 13: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Fish Theme: valley condition
![Page 14: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Fish Theme: valley rank
Valleys ranked by Fish Condition Index. Red lines indicate medians; vertical bars indicate 95% confidence limits.
![Page 15: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Macroinvertebrate Theme
• 209,000 animals in 124 families at 773 sites • 23 common, tolerant families in all valleys • 14 families at one site only • Most communities in Poor condition • Generally low diversity
esp. Avoca, Lower Murray, Warrego Valleys • North-south distinction
![Page 16: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Macroinvertebrate Theme
Macroinvertebrate Theme
![Page 17: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Macro Theme: valley rank
Valleys ranked by Macroinvertebrate Condition Index. Red lines indicate medians; vertical bars indicate 95% confidence limits.
![Page 18: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Macroinvertebrate Theme: catch
Rank Scientific name Common name Number of sites Valleys
1 Chironominae Midges 737 23 (all)
2 Corixidae Water boatmen (bugs) 699 23 (all)
3 Leptoceridae Longhorn caddisfly 662 23 (all)
4 Tanypodinae Midges 620 23 (all)
5 Dytiscidae Predaceous diving beetles 574 23 (all)
6 Veliidae Riffle bugs; Broad-shouldered water striders 532 23 (all)
7 Notonectidae Backswimmers (bugs) 530 23 (all)
8 Oligochaeta Freshwater worms 525 23 (all)
9 Acarina Aquatic mites 522 23 (all)
10 Baetidae Mayflies 521 23 (all)
11 Orthocladiinae Midges 517 23 (all)
12 Ceratopogonidae Midges 490 23 (all)
13 Hydrophilidae Water scavenger beetles 483 23 (all)
14 Caenidae Mayflies 481 23 (all)
15 Atyidae Freshwater shrimp 415 23 (all)
![Page 19: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Hydrology Theme • Ecological aspects of flow regime
- volumes and temporal patterns
• Designed to show effects of resource development, not drought (30 – 100 year record)
• Problems with data availability – qualitative assessment - poor spatial
representation – based on modelled data (calibrated using
gauges)
• 33% Valleys in Good Condition,
• 33% Moderate to Good – rating for whole valley including
tributaries – not end-of-valley
![Page 20: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Hydrology Theme
![Page 21: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Valley Report Cards
![Page 22: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Goulburn
![Page 23: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
SRA Report 2 (to be published June 2011)
• Data analysis of fish and macroinvertebrate data 2004-2010 (six years): 2 cycles of fish data and 3 for macroinvertebrates across all 23 valleys of the basin: condition assessments and preliminary trend analysis
• Additional assessments on vegetation and physical form
• Similar sampling design: random site selection but data collected by LIDAR and RBG imagery rather than field data
• Additional hydrology assessments
![Page 24: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Vegetation assessment
• Vegetation assessment at Basin scale (using NVIS mapping data) and at reach scale (using LIDAR)
• Structural, not floristic • Domains of interest:
– Near riparian (200 m channel buffer) – Valley floor – Valley boundary
![Page 25: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Vegetation indicators • Condition:
– Nativeness (NVIS) – Fragmentation (NVIS) – Structure (LIDAR) – Total cover (LIDAR)
• Abundance and diversity: – Abundance (NVIS) – Richness (NVIS) – Evenness (NVIS) – Stability (NVIS)
![Page 26: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Physical form assessment • Using 19 transects at
each ‘site’ • Contouring at 25 cm
height intervals • Automatic extraction of a
range of measurements that will be used to derive variables, metrics and indicators
• Reference condition modelled by including human disturbance variables, and re-setting these to zero
![Page 27: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Physical form indicators • Channel form:
– Planform – Channel slope – Cross section mean width and depth – Cross section variability of width and depth
• Bank dynamics: – Channel bank complexity – reach variability
• River bed dynamics • Floodplain dynamics
![Page 28: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Hydrology
• Additional assessments: – Impacts of farm dams (unregulated areas) – Impacts of land use change (unregulated
areas) – Integration with impacts on regulated areas – Using Flow Stress Ranking metrics – ‘time slices’ analysis most recent 15 years in
3 year time slices (trend)
![Page 29: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
SRA and Basin plan
1. SRA information used to develop Sustainable Diversion Limits (SDL) to achieve Key Environmental Functions (KEF)
2. SRA provides baseline data for comparison against future condition monitoring
3. SRA fulfils some key monitoring requirements under the Water Act 2007
![Page 30: Sra best practice model aecdp feb 2011 fin](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022032714/55aa0f661a28abca6e8b4863/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Reports and more information • MDB Rivers: Ecosystem
Health Check 2004-2007 (summary and valley ‘report cards’)
• SRA Report 1 – full technical report, 396pp
Available on internet at www.mdba.gov.au and in hard copy from MDBA office
Contact: Dr Michael Wilson [email protected]
Murray River near Tintaldra, Vic
Thank you