Layout 1

Telstra is a proud partner of the WWF Building Nature's Safety Net initiative.

Editors:
Martin Taylor PhD
Protected Areas Policy Manager
WWF-Australia, PO Box 15404, City East Q4002 (Email: mtaylor@wwf.org.au)

Penelope Figgis AO
Vice-Chair Australia and NZ region
IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas (Email:figdon@ozemail.com.au)

Please cite this publication as: Taylor M. & Figgis P. (eds) (2007) Protected Areas: Buffering nature
against climate change. Proceedings of a WWF and IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas
symposium, 18-19 June 2007, Canberra. WWF Australia, Sydney.

ISBN: 1 921031 20 4

WWF-Australia
Head Office
GPO Box 528
Sydney, NSW, Australia 2001
Tel: +612 9281 5515
Fax: +612 9281 1060
wwf.org.au

Published August 2007 by WWF-Australia. Any reproduction in full or in part of this publication must
mention the title and credit the above-mentioned publisher as the copyright owner.

The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the
views of WWF.

Cover image: Kakadu National Park floodplain © WWF-Canon / James W. THORSELL

World Wide Fund for Nature ABN: 57 001 594 074

Table of contents

Foreword

Acknowledgements

1. Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change~overview and recommendations

Martin Taylor & Penelope Figgis

2. Implications of climate change for the National Reserve System

Michael

Dunlop

3. Managing Australia’s protected areas for a climate shifted spectrum of threats

Graeme

Worboys

4. Climate change and other threats in the Australian Alps

Catherine

Pickering

5. Challenges facing protected area planning for Australian wet-tropical and subtropical forests due to

climate change

David

Hilbert

6. Northern Australia’s tropical savannas and rivers: building climate resilience into globally significant

assets

Stuart

Blanch

7. Climate change: challenges facing freshwater protected area planning in Australia

Jon

Nevill

8. Protected area planning and management for eastern Australian temperate forests and woodland

ecosystems under climate change – a landscape approach

Ian Mansergh & David Cheal

9. Challenges facing protected area planning in the Australian Alps in a changing climate

Keith McDougall & Linda Broome

10. Conservation planning for a changing climate

R.L.

Pressey

11. Climate change, connectivity and biodiversity conservation

Brendan

Mackey

12. How to integrate cost, threat and multiple actions into conservation planning for reserves and
stewardship

Eddie Game, Josie Carwardine, Kerrie Wilson, Matt Watts, Carissa Klein & Hugh Possingham

13. The CAR principle of adequacy of the National Reserve System in the context of climate change

100

Peter Young

14. What do you do when the biodiversity you bought gets up and leaves? Challenges facing protected area

planning for the private land trust sector due to climate change

112

Stuart

Cowell

15. Directions for the National Reserve System in the context of climate change

117

Paul

Sattler

Foreword

Climate change is not new for life on earth. Indeed there was substantial climate change during the
glacial-interglacial swings of the Pleistocene, and biodiversity came through without major
extinctions. In contrast, the present day anthropogenic warming of the planet threatens extinctions of
large numbers of species through negative synergies between climate change and the loss and
fragmentation of habitats from extensive human modification and use of lands and waters.

This is the global conservation challenge confronting countries today and is especially critical to those
countries that are “hotspots” of life on earth. Australia – with its glorious flora and fauna – is one of
only two developed countries considered to be global biodiversity “hotspots”.

Australia has an historic opportunity to become a global leader in providing nature the best chance of
adapting successfully through a climate change rescue package for biodiversity. Australia has the
resources and the skills. It is a world leader in conservation science and still has vast areas of lands and
waters in close to natural condition.

The key message from this meeting of experts is that climate change is already well underway. Indeed
it is coming faster and harder than we realise. There is no time to dither. More than enough is
known already to implement a concrete rescue package quickly.

The first and most important step the experts recommend is rapid expansion of Australia's reserve
system to protect core habitats. Fortunately Australia already has a detailed plan and targets set to do
this. Now all that’s needed is the investment to create new reserves and other protected areas.

Reserves and protected areas are the safe havens that native species need to retain their natural
resilience to climate change. Existing reserves are not in the wrong places. The animals and plants in
them may shift around and new biogeographical patterns may emerge, but the overall value of reserves
for protecting biodiversity will not change. The only shortcoming is that many more reserves are
needed to protect the core habitats like refugia and to provide migration corridors. Protected areas are
the best way to protect core habitats by eliminating threats like land clearing, development and
deforestation. Pervasive threats like weeds, pests and fire do not, however, stop at reserve boundaries,
and will require a lot more effort from reserve managers as climate change unfolds.

The second major step needed is to change land and water use practices in a coordinated way outside
the formal reserve system, to reduce all the major threats and to ensure natural processes and linkages
are retained. A first class reserve system can be undermined by what the neighbours are doing. It’s
best to engage all the neighbours and offer ways and means to move their uses of the land onto a more
sustainable footing.

Payback for prompt and effective action will be enormous. Not only will this save one of the richest
and most unique biotas on our planet, but it will also return billions in ecotourism revenues and
ecosystem services, like clean air, rainfall and clean water, climate and flood control. Delay only
drives up the risk of losing species and the cost of repairing the landscapes and restoring degraded
ecological services for future generations.

The opportunity is Australia's for the taking.

Thomas E. Lovejoy PhD

President of The H. John Heinz III Center For Science, Economics and the Environment, Washington DC

Former Chief Biodiversity Adviser to The World Bank

Canberra, August 2007

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Acknowledgements

WWF and WCPA gratefully acknowledge the Australian Greenhouse Office and the Department of
the Environment and Water Resources for their generous sponsorship of the symposium. We also
gratefully acknowledge Ngunnawal Traditional Owner Louise Brown who welcomed symposium
participants to Ngunnawal country. Special thanks go to Gail Broadbent for symposium logistics.

Lastly we thank all the following symposium chairs, speakers and observers. Papers are presented here
in the order of presentation on the day covering overviews (1, 2), management issues (3, 4), regional
issues (5-9) and reserve system planning issues (10-15) respectively. Some excellent presentations and
important discussion could not be reported more fully in this volume, but we hope are captured
sufficiently in our overview article.

Martin Taylor and Penelope Figgis August 2007

Chairs

Greg Bourne, CEO WWF-Australia
Penelope Figgis AO, Australia and NZ regional vice

chair, IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas

Bruce Leaver, Australian Government Department of

Environment and Water Resources

Peter Cochrane, Australian Government Department of

Environment and Water Resources

Dr Martin Taylor, WWF Australia

Speakers

Jo Mummery, Australian Greenhouse Office
Dr Michael Dunlop, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems
Graeme Worboys, IUCN World Commission on

Protected Areas

Assoc. Prof. Catherine Pickering, Griffith University
Dr David Hilbert, CSIRO Tropical Forest Research

Centre

Dr Stuart Blanch, WWF-Australia
Jon Nevill, OnlyOnePlanet consulting
Dr Ian Mansergh, Victorian Dept Sustainability and

Environment

Dr Linda Broome, NSW Dept Environment &

Conservation

Dr Keith McDougall, NSW Dept Environment &

Conservation

Prof. Bob Pressey, James Cook University
Prof. Brendan Mackey, Australian National University
Eddie Game, Queensland University
Peter Young, Queensland Environmental Protection

Agency

Stuart Cowell, Bush Heritage Australia
Paul Sattler OAM

Observers

Jason Alexandra, Earth Watch
Rosslyn Beeby, The Canberra Times
Tim Bond, National Reserve System
Dr Kerry Bridle, School of Geography and

Environmental Studies, Univ. Tasmania

Gail Broadbent, WWF-Australia
Dr Cassandra Brooke, WWF-Australia
Assoc. Prof. Carla Catterall, Griffith University

Vivienne Clare, Victorian Dept. Sustainability and

Environment

Jim Croft, Australian National Botanic Gardens
Bruce Cummings, National Reserve System
Rob Dick, NSW Dept Environment and Conservation
Gerard Early, Australian Government Dept Environment

and Water Resources

Liz Dovey, Australian Greenhouse Office
Dr Kate Duggan, Griffin NRM consulting
Anna van Dugteren, Australian Greenhouse Office
Anne Duncan, Australian National Botanic Gardens
Tim Ellis, Queensland Environmental Protection Agency
Wendy Frew, Sydney Morning Herald
Andreas Glanznig, WWF-Australia
Stuart Gold, Northern Territory Dept Natural Resources,

Environment and the Arts

Christine Goonrey, National Parks Association of the

ACT

Prof. Iain Gordon, CSIRO Davies Laboratory
John Harkin, Tasmanian Dept Primary Industries and

Water

Rod Holesgrove, adviser to Peter Garrett MP
Jason Irving, SA Dept Environment and Heritage
Sacha Jellinek, Monash Univ.
The Hon. John Kerin
Sharon Lane, ACT government Dept Territory and

Municipal Service

Mikila Lawrence, Hyder Consulting
Dr Michael Looker, The Nature Conservancy Australia

Program

Louise Matthiesson, CSIRO
Dr Ray Nias, WWF-Australia
Sarah Pizzey, Australian Government Dept Environment

and Water Resources

John Ridley, Hyder Consulting
Sabrina Sontag, Australian National Botanic Gardens
Peter Taylor, National Reserve System, Australian

Government Dept Environment and Water Resources

Carrie Thornton, Australian Government Dept

Environment and Water Resources

Dr Barry Traill, Pew Charitable Trust
Dr James Watson, The Wilderness Society
Dennis Witt, Tasmanian Dept Primary Industries and

Water

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

1. Protected

Areas:

buffering

nature against climate change ~
overview and recommendations

Martin Taylor

and Penelope Figgis

WWF- Australia, PO Box 15404, City East Q4002 (Email: mtaylor@wwf.org.au)

Vice-chair Australia and NZ region, IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas

(Email:figdon@ozemail.com.au)

Introduction

On 18-19 June 2007, scientists, non government and government experts were brought together by
WWF and the IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) to find ways to enhance the key
role of Australia’s National Reserve System in enabling biodiversity, our native plants and wildlife, to
adapt to and survive climate change.

Symposium participants agreed that in the national climate change arena there is a critical need for
recognition that we can, and must, take early and practical steps to enhance and recover the natural
resilience to climate change of our ecosystems, plants and animals.

The key policy actions needed are to expand the National Reserve System to meet already agreed
targets; to take rapid action on freshwater protected areas; to reduce threatening processes and enhance
natural processes across the landscape by integrating off-reserve and on-reserve management through
bioregional plans.

In this overview we outline the key issues and draw together the key findings of the symposium into a
series of recommendations.

The focus of the symposium was on the terrestrial and inland aquatic environments. However many of
the same principles apply equally well to marine environments.

Climate change undermines natural resilience

Human forced, rapid climate change is real and is already happening.

There is an urgent, over-riding need for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide.

Even if greenhouse emissions were controlled today however, our planet is already committed to
significant warming.

Australia’s native biodiversity has come through major changes in climate and sea level during
repeated glacial cycles. This “natural resilience” represents the capacity for species to maintain viable
populations and avoid significant extinction risk despite climate change.

However, climate change now is a much more significant problem than in the past due to the pervasive
threats to native species from modification of land and waters by human settlements, pastoralism,
agriculture, logging, invasive pests and weeds, inappropriate fire regimes, land clearing and resulting
fragmentation of natural vegetation (Mackey this volume).

Taylor M. & Figgis P. (2007) Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change ~ overview and
recommendations. In: Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change. Proceedings of a WWF and
IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas symposium, 18-19 June 2007, Canberra. (eds M. Taylor & P.
Figgis) pp. 1-12. WWF-Australia, Sydney.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

These threats erode the natural resilience to climate change of native species by disrupting species
movements and natural ecological processes they depend on, and driving populations down to
unviable levels (Fig. 1). It has been argued that as a result, we are now living in the sixth great
extinction wave in the history of life on earth.

Fig. 1 illustrates how an effective response can recover and enhance resilience and conversely, how
inaction will result in continuing extinctions of native species.

While some estimates of future warming are improving, there remains great uncertainty at the regional
scale of the direction and magnitude of change in rainfall patterns. Consequently, precise predictions
of future ecosystem and species responses await improvements in data collection and modelling.
However, we know enough already about the direction and magnitude of temperature changes to offer
recommendations for planning.

Key directions for buffering nature against climate change

Now is a critical time to ensure that national and state climate change adaptation strategies give top
priority to securing core lands and waters and enhancing resilience across the landscape.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Although governments are developing climate change adaptation strategies, these tend to focus on
socio-economic adjustments, rather than biodiversity. The National Biodiversity and Climate Change
Action Plan 2004-2007 should be revised and incorporated into the larger adaptation agenda.

Species show resilience to climate change because they are able to move or retreat to refugia of
favourable habitat or alternatively, are able to remain and thrive where they are by adapting (Cowell,
Mackey, Mansergh this volume).

Enhancing natural resilience has the following key elements (Fig. 1):

•  Identify and protect climate refugia;
•  Conserve large-scale migration corridors;
•  Maintain viable populations to enable adaptation;
•  Reduce threatening processes at the landscape scale;
•  Conserve natural processes and connectivity at the landscape scale; and
•  Special interventions to avert extinctions.

Identify and protect climate refugia

“Refugia” is the scientific term for places where favourable habitat will persist or develop as the
climate changes. Refugia may exist through natural processes or as a result of human actions (Sattler
this volume).

Refugia may already exist within the current range of a species. Locations that have served as refugia
during past climate changes may serve as refugia for the present period of climate change. As
conditions outside refugia become hostile with changing climate, a species will be lost from the wider
range and persist only in the refugia. For example, fire sensitive plants and trees of moist forests may
be eliminated by drought and bushfire through much of their range, persisting only in deep valleys
where wetter closed forests survive. Fire suppression may help retain wet forest refugia that otherwise
might disappear (McDougall & Broome this volume).

Also, refugia may not currently exist, but may develop outside of the current range of the species as
climate zones shift and ecosystems shift with them. In this case it will be crucial to also identify and
protect these new refugia and migration corridors to them. Identifying new refugia presents significant
methodological hurdles but is an essential job to ensure reserve system decisions are optimal for
enhancing natural resilience (Hilbert this volume).

Conserve large-scale migration corridors

Habitat fragmentation and degradation present significant barriers to species that may need to move to
new habitats and refugia.

Successful migration requires viable source populations and habitats, destination refugia, and large-
scale connectivity in the form of migration corridors or stepping stones between sources and
destinations (Cowell, Mansergh, Mackey this volume).

For example, highland rainforest frog species need sufficiently large source populations to produce
enough colonists to reach distant refugia. They also need stepping stones of streams or wetlands
spaced so that colonists can move safely between them. Alternatively, frog eggs may be carried by
water birds to new habitats. Destination refugia must also be protected with appropriate resources and
natural processes to allow successful growth and reproduction.

Since every species has other species and resources it depends on with similar requirements, whole
communities may need to move together for any given species to survive.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

This kind of biological permeability is needed at large scales with corridors of the order of tens to
hundreds of kilometers across all tenures, to facilitate the migration of animals and plants tracking
shifting climatic zones and generally requires protection of extensive areas with intact native
vegetation cover.

However it important to remember that enhanced connectivity may also favour some native species
perhaps to the detriment of other high conservation value species as well as favouring exotic invasive
species, thus requiring more effort to control weeds and pests. The scale and pattern of connectivity
must be tailored to the needs of priority species, considered on a bioregional basis (Cowell, Dunlop,
Mackey, Sattler this volume).

Maintain viable populations to enable adaptation

Replication of habitats in the reserve system is a vital form of insurance against the risk of extinction
by protecting multiple source populations, climate refugia and migration corridors.

Even without climate change, small isolated reserves lose species over time as the result of chance
events. For example a disease or fire might wipe out a reptile population in a small rainforest patch. If
that is the only remaining habitat, the species is lost forever.

Multiple source populations and destination refugia, and multiple migration routes within large-scale
corridors across the entire geographic range of a species are needed for an acceptably low risk of
extinction in a dynamic landscape. Replication is a central element in determining the Adequacy of the
reserve system (Young this volume). The Representativeness goal of the National Reserve System is
also a means of ensuring replication.

With sufficient replication a species can also remain viable with diverse populations and so retain
capacity to adapt to the new climate to remain where they are. High genetic diversity in source
populations may also permit evolutionary adaptation to changed climate (Mansergh, Mackey this
volume)

For example, multiple refugia for many plants in the Australian Alps are already entirely within the
national park system, highlighting the importance of having large reserves with a great diversity of
habitats (McDougall & Broome this volume). One way to ensure reserve systems capture a great
diversity of habitats, refugia and migration corridors is to ensure reserves encompass significant
environmental gradients of temperature, altitude and rainfall across landscapes (Pressey this volume).

Reduce threatening processes at the landscape scale

Recovering resilience for natural systems requires significant reduction of threatening processes. The
weaker natural systems are from multiple threats, the greater the likely impact of the additional
stresses of climate change.

The major threats impairing natural resilience to climate change are:

•  Land clearing and resulting loss and fragmentation of core habitats and migration corridors;
•  Unsustainable extractive land use activities, primarily livestock grazing and logging;
•  Changed hydrology and extraction of water;
•  Invasive weeds and animal pests;
•  Inappropriate fire regimes (intensities, frequencies and timings).

Climate change may make many existing threats worse:

• Bushfire risk becomes more extreme with climate change-induced drought and high temperatures;
• Exotic species invasions may be enhanced as native ecosystems come under stress;

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

• Escalating economic demands and shifts in human populations due to climate change may result

in more water extraction and conversion of natural areas to agriculture and settlements (Dunlop,
Pickering, Pressey this volume).

In particular the largely intact northern savannas and rivers face renewed efforts to intensity
agriculture as prolonged drought and unsustainable practices reduce production in the southeast of the
country (Blanch this volume).

A precautionary approach requires prevention of land clearing, water diversion and intensification of
uses in remaining natural areas in order to preserve options for a comprehensive climate adaptation
response.

Some of these threats are eliminated by creating protected areas. However protected area boundaries
rarely contain all necessary elements of high conservation value native ecosystems and must be
managed in conjunction with adjoining lands. Some threats like feral pests and weeds can only be
managed both on and off reserves. Continuance of threats through poor management practices on
adjacent off-reserve lands can detract from the protection provided by the reserve system.

To best deal with threats comprehensively, threat management has to be coordinated across land
management agencies at appropriate scales. Bioregional approaches by definition incorporate the full
physical variation of natural environments into landscape planning and so are the most appropriate
tools. For transboundary and whole-of-nation climate change threats to protected areas, a new, co-
operative and integrated management plan is needed, in addition to individual state, territory and
Commonwealth initiatives (Worboys this volume). Given adequate financial resources, this will
ensure that critical climate change threats that affect multiple bioregions and jurisdictions are dealt
with systematically and effectively.

Fire

There is significant pressure to control fires on reserves primarily to protect built assets on
neighbouring lands. Fire management agencies must recognise that the prime purpose of protected
areas is natural asset protection and must adopt an ecological approach driven by scientific evidence,
goal setting, monitoring and evaluation.

Conversely, protected area managers will also have to accept that a new climate may bring a
permanent change to fire regimes and ecosystems (Dunlop, McDougall & Broome this volume). They
must:

• Find ways to manage species “turnover” as a result of changing fire regime, while minimising

losses of key biodiversity assets; and

• Identify and protect fire refugia where natural fire regimes can feasibly be retained.

Invasive species

Invasive weed and pest species are a major threat to Australia’s biodiversity and are expected to be
climate change “winners” in general. They generally demand the greatest management effort of
protected area managers (eg Pickering this volume).

Controlling or eliminating invasive species at a landscape scale by closely coordinating on-reserve and
off-reserve control actions is essential to allow recovery of natural resilience.

At the same time efforts to stop new and emerging invasive species before they become problems need
to be redoubled.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Conserve natural processes and connectivity at the landscape
scale

WCPA has developed the concept of strategic, large-scale “connectivity conservation” in response to
the extinction crisis (Worboys 2007). For example, WCPA supports the recent NSW Government
initiative to create an “Alps to Atherton” climate change corridor in cooperation with neighbouring
states.

Connectivity conservation focuses on maintenance and restoration of ecosystem integrity across entire
landscapes. Connectivity is built around core habitats or refugia protected in reserves which are linked
and buffered across different tenures and land uses in ways that maintain natural ecosystem processes.
Such non-fragmented landscapes will better allow species and ecosystems to survive and move, thus
ensuring that populations are viable, and that both ecosystems and people are able to adapt to land
transformation and climate change. Connectivity conservation is a proactive, holistic, and long term
approach which is achieved by agreements, incentive schemes, land-use planning, philanthropic
actions, business transactions or other appropriate actions.

One element of connectivity is migration corridors allowing species to adapt to shifting climate zones
to climate refugia (see above).

A second element is the maintenance of the natural processes and access to resources that the species
needs to survive when they arrive and establish in those refugia such as:

•  Food and water sources;
•  Pollinators, dispersal agents and other beneficial species;
•  Cover and shelter from enemies and weather;
•  Nest, breeding and germination sites.

The challenges for connectivity conservation are to:

•  Identify and enhance desired flows particularly for keystone, endangered and vulnerable species;
•  Monitor and hinder threatening processes such as feral pests and weeds; and
•  Coordinate these actions across tenures and land management regimes both on and off the reserve

system.

Special interventions to avert extinctions

In some cases, climate refugia or core habitats cannot be maintained or are unlikely to persist
naturally. Moreover, migration may not be possible. In such cases, intensive management may be
needed to ensure valued species or ecosystems are not lost. This is of greatest concern for species
whose high mountain habitats may disappear with climate change, with little chance of successful
natural migration to refugia (Hilbert, Nevill, Pickering, McDougall & Broome this volume). However,
such interventions may be less cost effective and more risky in the long term than protecting intact
natural areas (Mansergh this volume).

Building effective climate response into protected area
policy

The key directions identified above require immediate policy action at all levels. They certainly
require the recognition that action is urgent and requires significant investment if Australia is to retain
the natural wealth of its species and ecosystems and all the benefits they provide.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Many vital climate refugia, core habitats and migration corridors may presently occur outside reserves.
Protected areas provide the most secure option for saving such important habitats. It is imperative
therefore, that such critical habitat resources be identified and brought into the National Reserve
System.

Where this is neither feasible nor cost effective, conservation actions outside the reserve system, that
are well integrated with biodiversity protection and reserve system goals, have a valuable contribution
to make.

Policy actions across five areas form the basis of our recommendations:

•  Meet National Reserve System targets;
•  Identify climate refugia and refine reserve system goals;
•  Develop the inland aquatic reserve system;
•  Integrate management across the landscape; and
•  Sustain a high standard of reserve management.

Meet National Reserve System targets

Australia’s national system of protected areas, the National Reserve System, is already making a vital
contribution to a national climate adaptation strategy by: protecting source populations, refugia and
migration corridors; reducing threats; and enhancing natural processes.

Meeting National Reserve System targets within agreed time frames plays the central role in
enhancing natural resilience. These targets have already been agreed by Commonwealth, State and
Territory governments. Securing Australia’s biodiversity assets - native species, ecosystems and
ecological processes- is a major national strategic issue, yet funding remains inadequate to service the
commitments already made.

Major funding increases are vital as recommended by the 2007 Senate Inquiry into National Parks:

“that in the upcoming NHT3 funding round the Commonwealth significantly increase the
funding allocation directed to the NRS Programme” (ECITA 2007 p. vii).

The principal target is to protect representative samples of 80% of regional ecosystems within each
bioregion by 2010-2015, with priority to endangered species and ecosystems.

A minimum cost estimate to meet this key reserve system target (presentation of Game et al. this
volume) is now greater than the $400 million estimate based on land values in 2000 of Possingham et
al (2002). Such figures signal the need for a detailed reevaluation of investment levels required to
meet commitments.

Recommendations

1. Implement the targets for developing a Comprehensive, Adequate and Representative National
Reserve System within timeframes agreed to in the 2005 Directions for the National Reserve System:
A partnership approach, as one of Australia’s priority adaptation responses to climate change.

2. For 2007-2012, all partners to invest at least $400 million in creating new reserves to meet the
Comprehensiveness and endangered species targets for the National Reserve System, with the
Australian Government contributing two thirds of acquisition costs or at least $250 million or $50
million a year.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Identify climate refugia and refine reserve system goals

Targets for Comprehensiveness and Representativeness of the reserve system, meaning the sampling
of regional ecosystems at bioregional and sub-bioregional scales, are thought to be robust to climate
change (Dunlop this volume).

However, selection of reserves needs to be more precisely targeted within this sampling scheme to
protect:

•  Climate refugia;
•  Key ecological processes; and
•  Key migration corridors or stepping stones.

Our understanding of what is an “Adequate” reserve system needs to be more clearly defined in the
light of climate change (Young, Dunlop this volume). In particular:

•  The nature of the protected biodiversity assets and their ecological needs may change;
•  Replication of protected populations and ecosystems will need to increase;
•  Larger reserves will be needed to ensure populations remain viable and to absorb higher levels of

disturbance; and

• Complementary conservation efforts in off-reserve areas will become more important.

Recommendations

3. By 2009 re-evaluate and revise the NRS directions in the light of climate change, using more
detailed modelling and decision analysis to better define:

•  Key source populations and habitat, climate refugia, migration corridors and stepping stones;
•  The resilience to climate change element of reserve system adequacy;
•  Priority bioregions and ecosystems for reservation effort;
•  Priority inland aquatic systems for reservation effort; and
•  Costs and responsibilities for meeting targets.

4. By 2008 the Australian Government to establish a National Climate Refugia Program to identify
past and likely future climate refugia and critical habitats for endangered species and other matters of
national significance, as part of bioregional planning.

Develop the inland aquatic reserve system

Particular attention will be needed for inland aquatic ecosystems. Despite the importance of water in
this driest of inhabited continents, aquatic ecosystems are the most poorly protected in the existing
reserve system (Nevill this volume). Advancing the inland aquatic reserve system is an already agreed
Direction for the National Reserve System.

Recommendation

5. As a matter of urgency, the Australian Government in cooperation with the states and territories to
develop a comprehensive national inventory and conservation status assessment of inland aquatic
ecosystems and initiate a systematic and far-reaching expansion of Australia’s inland aquatic reserve
system.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Integrate management across the landscape

Numerous studies and reports over the last decade have endorsed the integration of off-reserve
conservation initiatives with reserve system directions and management.

A bioregional approach to biodiversity conservation planning and management is needed to coordinate
effective climate responses both on and off the reserve system, tailored to the needs of the plants and
animals of the bioregion (Sattler this volume).

Off-reserve conservation efforts provide an important complement to the reserve system in responding
effectively to climate change. Even if the size of the reserve system doubled overnight, it would still
leave about 80% of the landscape open to development and extractive uses (Hilbert this volume).
Conservation oriented management is urgently needed on public production lands like state forests, as
well as private and leasehold production lands, through:

•  Improved mitigation of production impacts;
•  Stewardship and other conservation incentives; and
•  Fire and invasive species control programs coordinated with programs on reserves.

Such efforts must entail significant land use reform, not the continuation of degrading land/water uses.
They should be guided strategically by the value added to the leading role of the reserve system in
enhancing resilience to climate change.

The degree to which surrounding lands and waters are sympathetically managed for conservation is
recognised as a key contribution to the Adequacy of the reserve system. A comprehensive spatial
database of off reserve conservation effort should be developed as a mechanism to document and
account for this contribution and to facilitate integrated bioregional responses to climate change.

Regional Natural Resource Management (NRM) arrangements set up and funded through Natural
Heritage Trust are a major vehicle for off-reserve conservation effort and land restoration efforts.
There is an urgent need to bring regional NRM into a complementary relationship with the core
activities of reserve system growth and management.

Bioregional planning is widespread but could be greatly expanded with already available tools and
better integrated into NRM planning processes. The same high scientific rigour should drive both
reserve system planning, and off-reserve conservation efforts.

Continental scale connectivity visions are invaluable in mobilising and integrating action beyond the
bioregional scale to help address established biodiversity priorities including reserve system goals.

Examples include:

•  The “Alps to Atherton” connectivity conservation initiative;
•  WWF’s “North of Capricorn” tropical savannas and rivers initiative (Blanch this volume);
•  The Gondwana link project, linking southwestern forests and woodlands;
•  National free flowing rivers legislation (Nevill this volume).

Protected areas are far from “money sinks”. They generate return on investment even in conventional
economic terms, not only from tourism but from ecosystems services. These strengths need to be
reflected better in reserve system planning.

Spending by domestic and overseas visitors to protected areas can be considerable: of the order of
$13.7 billion a year (TTF 2007 p. 20). The 10% of this amount representing Goods and Services Tax
provides base revenue to State and Territory governments.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Protected areas provide ecosystem services such climate control, erosion, water pollution and flood
control, pest control and pollination services which have immense value but generally go unrecognised
by markets and national accounts.

However, tourism and ecosystem services are not the only yardsticks for measuring the value of
protected areas. By far the greater value lies in protection of our nation’s irreplaceable biodiversity
assets. Although currently uncosted by markets, the high value placed on biodiversity protection by
society is expressed through strong public support for government biodiversity investments and
legislation.

Bioregional planning bodies should fully explore “conservation economy” incentives to help realise an
effective climate adaptation response such as payments for biodiversity protection or stewardship
services and ecotourism dependent on protected areas.

Recommendations

6. Evaluate progress on the National Biodiversity and Climate Change Action Plan 2004-2007 and
develop a new practical and concrete action plan based on bioregional planning. The revised plan
should set targets and timelines for implementation, which agency/agencies are responsible, and how
actions will be funded.

7. By 2010, complete bioregional plans in key bioregions for development of the NRS that:
• Anticipate changes in ecosystem dynamics (functions and processes) and species shifts due to

climate change;

•  Coordinate reserve system planning and management and off-reserve conservation efforts;
•  Incorporate conservation economy opportunities to help realise outcomes;
•  Significantly reduce threats to biodiversity assets across all tenures; and
•  Coordinate effectively with climate change responses in other sectors - finance, agriculture, water

use, coastal and marine management, urban and regional planning.

8. By 2020 all jurisdictions coordinate priority bioregional plans including continental connectivity
visions such as the Alps-to-Atherton and North of Capricorn initiatives, to meet established
biodiversity priorities including reserve system goals.

Sustain a high standard of reserve management

The National Reserve System is a cross-tenure system encompassing government reserves, private
land trust reserves, covenanted private lands and Indigenous Protected Areas. Taken together, they
provide the best opportunity for whole-of-landscape conservation.

All these categories have different strengths and weaknesses but all have a role in building the reserve
system as long as all are subject to standardised monitoring and evaluation protocols to ensure
sustained effectiveness of management. National investments are needed to ensure high standards can
be sustained across the reserve system.

Indigenous Protected Areas were recognised in a recent review as a successful formula for meeting
both indigenous aspirations and biodiversity protection goals (Gilligan 2006). However the review
also highlighted the need for a minimum base level of funding for ongoing management of IPAs. This
need will become more acute with climate change.

The leading role of the National Reserve System in enhancing natural resilience of species and
ecosystems to climate change needs to be strongly communicated to the community. The community
also needs to be assured that the reserve system is being effectively managed to achieve climate

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

change adaptation goals through, among other things, State of the Parks reporting at state and national
levels (Worboys this volume). Nationally agreed evaluation areas and indicators would assist.

More frequent and severe flood, storm, and fire incidents will also affect protected areas and
biodiversity assets. Current incident response efforts are generally not driven by biodiversity asset
protection and are generally confined within single agencies. Management of major incidents and
major threats has to be reoriented to biodiversity asset protection and coordinated on and off-reserve
and across jurisdictional boundaries. This is best achieved by cross-agency and cross-jurisdictional
task groups established through bioregional and national scale planning (Worboys this volume).

Recommendations

9. By 2008 Australian Government in collaboration with states and territories supports ongoing
Indigenous Protected Area management through employment and capacity building for IPA rangers.

10. By 2009, all National Reserve System owners and managers adopt management standards, and a
common monitoring, evaluation and reporting process for management of all protected area tenures
in the National Reserve System.

11. By 2008 all National Reserve System partners adopt a State of the Parks reporting system as a
basis for an national State of the Parks report following a common framework of standards and
indicators including the extent to which the Comprehensiveness, Adequacy and Representativeness
goals of the reserve system are being achieved.

12. By 2009, cross-agency threat management taskgroups are established as part of bioregional plans
for key bioregions, and a national, integrated and cooperative plan for the management of national
and transboundary climate change threats has been prepared, funded and is being implemented.

Summary of recommendations

3. By 2009 re-evaluate and revise the NRS directions in the light of climate change, using more
detailed modelling and decision analysis to better define:

5. As a matter of urgency, the Australian Government in cooperation with the states and territories to
develop a comprehensive national inventory and conservation status assessment of inland aquatic

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

ecosystems and initiate a systematic and far-reaching expansion of Australia’s inland aquatic reserve
system.

7. By 2010, complete bioregional plans in key bioregions for development of the NRS that:
• Anticipate changes in ecosystem dynamics (functions and processes) and species shifts due to

climate change;

use, coastal and marine management, urban and regional planning.

9. By 2008 Australian Government in collaboration with states and territories supports ongoing
Indigenous Protected Area management through employment and capacity building for IPA rangers.

References

ECITA (Australian Senate Standing Committee on the Environment, Communication, Information Technology and the Arts)

(2007) Conserving Australia: Australia’s national parks, conservation reserves and marine protected areas.
Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Gilligan B. (2006) The Indigenous Protected Areas Programme: 2006 Evaluation. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Possingham H., Ryan S., Baxter J. & Morton S. (2002) Setting Biodiversity Priorities. Unpublished submission to the Prime

Minister’s Science, Engineering and Innovation Council.

TTF (Tourism and Transport Forum) (2007) Natural Tourism Partnerships Action Plan. Tourism and Transport Forum,

Sydney.

Worboys G. L. (2007) Continental scale connectivity conservation: A background paper. IUCN World Commission on

Protected Areas, Gland.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Implications of climate change
for the National Reserve System

Michael Dunlop and Peter Brown

CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, GPO Box 284, Canberra ACT 2601
(Email:michael.dunlop@csiro.au)

Abstract

Climate change is already having, and will continue to have, many impacts on species and ecosystems.
While the details of future changes are uncertain there are some clear implications for biodiversity
conservation and the National Reserve System (NRS) in Australia. The fundamental goal of
biodiversity conservation needs to be reassessed and changed from, essentially “preserving
biodiversity as is” to “managing changes in biodiversity to minimise losses”. Many of the changes that
will occur to biodiversity would most effectively be managed at the bioregional scales through
coordinated efforts of different conservation programs and activities including protected areas and off-
reserve conservation. Although many species may be threatened by climate change, the framework
used to develop the NRS ensures that it will continue to provide effective and critical protection of a
wide diversity of ecosystems and species. The added pressures on biodiversity suggest greater
conservation effort may be required. Managers of individual reserves will be among the first to be
confronted with many of the impacts. Many threats to biodiversity will change. Four particularly
difficult changing threats will be: altered fire regimes, the arrival of new species, changing land use
and altered hydrology. Managers, researchers and policy developers will all need new types of
information to help them anticipate and respond to climate change.

Introduction

Increases in the atmospheric concentration of CO

and other greenhouse gases will lead to changes in

temperature and rainfall, and the occurrence and intensity of storms, wind, run-off, floods, droughts,
fires, heat waves and other aspects of climate (IPCC 2007).

These changes affect primary productivity and many biological processes; hence there is every reason
to believe many, if not virtually all, species on Earth will be affected. Many different types of impact
have been hypothesised. Extensive modelling and monitoring studies over the last ten years provide
considerable evidence that global climate change is affecting, and will continue to affect many species
and ecosystems, including leading to declines and extinctions of many species (Hughes 2000, 2003;
Walther 2002; Parmesan & Yohe 2003; Root et al. 2003; Lovejoy & Hannah 2005; Parmesan 2006).
However, because of the interacting nature of biological and ecological systems, with their positive
and negative feedbacks, and the multifaceted nature of the environmental changes in response to
climate change and other pressures, it is not immediately obvious what the net impacts on biodiversity
are likely to be.

In short, climate change will affect many aspects of Australia’s biodiversity that are valued by society
including the “look, sound and smell” of ecosystems, tourism and recreational opportunities.
Significant reductions of diversity would be likely to also result in interruption to ecosystem function
and loss of ecosystem services (Chapin et al. 2000). These changes will also have a wide range of

Dunlop M. & Brown P. (2007) Implications of climate change for the National Reserve System. In: Protected
Areas: buffering nature against climate change. Proceedings of a WWF and IUCN World Commission on
Protected Areas symposium, 18-19 June 2007, Canberra. (eds M. Taylor & P. Figgis) pp. 13-17. WWF-
Australia, Sydney.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

impacts on biodiversity conservation and the National Reserve System. These include a need to
reassess some of the fundamental goals of
biodiversity conservation, managing ever
changing biodiversity, dealing with new and
changing threats, and responding to different
information needs.

Impacts of climate change
on biodiversity

We present a scheme for considering the
many different types of impacts on
biodiversity in terms of a “cascade of
impacts” from climate change through
individual organisms, species and ecosystems
to human wellbeing (Fig. 1).

Environmental impacts include the changes
arising from increased greenhouse gas (GHG)
concentrations that drive impacts on
biodiversity; they include changes in CO

temperature and rainfall regimes climate, fire
regimes, and sea temperature, chemistry and
level. These impacts clearly combine with
other non-climate-related environmental
stresses on biodiversity, and are affected by
feedbacks from population and ecosystem
impacts (e.g. affecting hydrology and
flammability - below).

Biological impacts include the direct changes
to organisms arising from environmental
changes; they take in physiological and
behavioural changes and include changes in
the timing of life cycle events (phenology).

Ecological impacts result from changed interactions between organisms and the environment; they
include changes in breeding, establishment, growth, competition, and mortality. These impacts result
directly from climate change related impacts (above), and indirectly via interactions with other species
that are affected by climate change leading to changed competition, food, habitat and predation. These
indirect impacts can be represented as a feedback from population impacts and possibly ecosystem
impacts (below) to ecological impacts. For some species these indirect impacts may be stronger than
direct impacts. Ecological impacts are also affected by how climate change impacts interact with other
stresses.

Population impacts: the ultimate impact on species in terms of changes in abundance and distribution.

Ecosystem impacts: changes in the identity, composition, structure and function of assemblages and
ecosystems.

Value impacts: representing the reason society cares about climate change and biodiversity. These can
be thought of as impacts on human wellbeing and they include:

Fig. 1. Schematic representation of cascading
impacts resulting from environmental changes
caused by climate change. A series of flow-on
effects occur down the figure, but there are
important feedbacks indicated back to earlier
stages of the cascade.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

• Economic and other material benefits derived from consumptive and non consumptive uses of

biodiversity; e.g. production of food and fibre; pollination and pest control, as well as damage and
diseases; regulation of water and air quality; and carbon storage and cycling, and

• Less tangible values such as: concern for the existence of species and ecosystems; a land ethic,

“caring for country,” stewardship of the planet for future generations; and aesthetics and
recreational values.

The downward arrows in Fig. 1 show the direct flow of impacts arising from climate change, some
impacts may be very rapid and others may take decades of centuries to materialise. There are also
many feedbacks that will lead to indirect impacts. Some of these are indicated by the upward arrows
on the right of the diagram.

The dominant impacts on some species will not be direct climate impacts but because species with
which they interact strongly (right-hand arrows) are affected in some way. Feedbacks can also lead to
evolution of the response of species to climate and other environmental parameters, altered habitat and
changed environmental parameters.

Human responses can also be represented as feedbacks, including reductions in greenhouse gas
emissions, ecological management to facilitate adaptation, and altered expectations about the state and
dynamics of biodiversity.

These cascading impacts on biodiversity will interact with other human pressures on biodiversity,
including habitat degradation and loss, extraction of water, alteration of flow regimes and introduction
of exotic species. Not only will climate change impacts add to these other pressures, they will interact,
altering the way species and ecosystems would otherwise respond and adapt.

Implications for biodiversity conservation and the National
Reserve System

In February 2007, a workshop was held at CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems in Canberra drawing
together a diverse group of conservation planners, reserve system managers and stakeholders to
examine the implications of climate change for Australia’s terrestrial reserve system. Following the
workshop a series of key challenges were identified for the National Reserve System (NRS) that are
likely to arise as a result of the many and cumulative impacts of climate change on biodiversity. While
focusing on the implications for the development and management of the NRS, many of the issues
have broader implications for all conservation programs.

The changing nature of biodiversity conservation

Climate change will have a significant impact on biodiversity leading to changes in species and
ecosystems. Some of these changes will result in loss of biodiversity values which will present many
new challenges to Australia’s conservation programs including the NRS. Conserving communities
may no longer be necessary or sufficient for conserving species. Understanding these challenges is a
complex task for planners, managers and conservation stakeholders. Climate change could require a
fundamental change to the very nature of Australia’s conservation goal from “preserving biodiversity
as is” to “managing changes in biodiversity to minimise losses”.

In this context it may be useful to explicitly recognise two complementary goals:

• To facilitate natural adaptation and change in biodiversity; and

• To preserve elements of biodiversity that are threatened by climate change and particularly

valuable to society.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

In some situations these goals might require quite different management responses. For example
increasing connectivity might facilitate the evolution of ecosystems and shifting of species
distributions, but increasing connectivity may also accelerate the demise of vulnerable species by
making it easier for competitors or predators to establish.

Bioregional conservation planning

There would be significant benefit to a coordinated approach, across scales and the diversity of
conservation programs, to address these challenges. The bioregional framework used in the NRS
would provide a solid basis for coordination of goals, assessments of biodiversity condition and
threats, planning, investment prioritisation, and monitoring and evaluation. Then appropriate and
complementary implementation targets could be developed at the scales relevant to each of the
different delivery programs (e.g. NRS, threatened species, Natural Heritage Trust, Landcare, non-
government organisations).

Implications for development of the NRS

There are implications for both development and management of the NRS. The process for achieving
comprehensiveness and representativeness of the NRS provides an excellent basis for developing a
protected area system that practically conserves as many species as possible through providing a
system of areas that will always support a wide diversity of landforms and habitats even as ecosystems
change.

The question of adequacy is much more challenging; in general, larger areas and more populations of
species will be required to provide the same level of viability for species as could be expected without
climate change; however it is probable that some species will become extinct regardless of how much
area is reserved.

In addition, the adequacy of the national conservation program will be enhanced by coordinated
efforts across programs to strategically address landscape scale objectives such as managing
connectivity and threats.

Implications for management of reserves

In the near-term there will probably be greater impacts on reserve management than development of
the reserve system. Managers will be directly confronted with changing species and ecosystems, and
the challenge of managing the changes to minimise losses in the face of considerable uncertainty.
They will also need to manage changing and new threats, and will require new types of information
much of which will not be available, especially in the short term. It will also be managers who face the
impact of institutional lags in responses to the new realities of climate change while society considers
the implications, policies and guidelines are revised and information emerges.

Changing threats to biodiversity

Many threats to biodiversity will change as a result of climate change. Four key changing threats will
be: altered fire regimes; the arrival of new species; changing land use; and altered ground and surface
water systems. Each of these threats has strong biophysical and social dimensions, greatly
complicating management of their impact on biodiversity.

Strategic approaches to managing biodiversity

The changing nature of biodiversity and biodiversity conservation will affect the balance between
single species and strategic conservation programs, with logical arguments for the need to increase
efforts in both.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

There will also be a need to clearly define the role of species, community and ecosystem level
information and aspirations along the conservation “value chain” from: ecological knowledge,
conservation aspirations, planning processes, data, and management goals right through to national
conservation outcomes.

For example, while the close conceptual links between species and communities dissolve over time,
information about the contemporary spatial patterns of communities may still be very useful in
planning for conservation of species as climate changes.

Information needs

Due to the changing nature of biodiversity, new threats and evolving conservation goals, new types of
information will be needed by managers, planners, researchers and the general community to fulfil
their respective roles. Acquiring much of this information will require carefully designed and
concerted monitoring programs. Increasingly, planning will need to consider future changes the details
of which will be quite uncertain.

Conclusion

While there is considerable uncertainty about exactly how species and ecosystems in any specific
region will be affected by climate change, many actions can be undertaken now to begin to address
some of the implications for biodiversity conservation and the National Reserve System.

References

Chapin F. S., Zavaleta E. S., Eviner V. T., Naylor R. L., Vitousek P. M., Reynolds H. L., Hooper D. U., Lavorel S., Sala O.

E., Hobbie S. E., Mack M. C. & Diaz S. (2000) Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature

405, 234-242.

Hughes L. (2000) Biological consequences of global warming: is the signal already apparent? Trends in Ecology & Evolution

15, 56-61.

Hughes L. (2003) Climate change and Australia: trends, projections and impacts. Austral Ecology

28, 423-443.

IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2007) Climate Change 2000: Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and

Vulnerability, Working Group II Contribution to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment
Report Summary for Policy Makers. United Nations, Brussels.

Lovejoy T. E. & Hannah L. J. (2005) Climate Change and Biodiversity. Yale University Press, New Haven.

Parmesan C. & Yohe G. (2003) A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems. Nature

421, 37-42.

Parmesan C. (2006) Ecological and evolutionary responses to recent climate change. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution

and Systematics

37, 637-669.

Root T. L., Price J. T., Hall K. R., Schneider S. H., Rosenzweig C. & Pounds J. A. (2003). Fingerprints of global warming on

wild animals and plants. Nature

421, 57-60.

Walther G. R., Post E., Convey, P., Menzel A., Parmesan C., Beebee T. J. C., Fromentin J. M., Hoegh-Guldberg O. &

Bairlein F. (2002) Ecological responses to recent climate change. Nature

416, 389-395.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Managing Australia’s protected
areas for a climate shifted
spectrum of threats

Graeme L. Worboys

Vice-chair Mountains Biome, IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas
(Email:g.worboys@bigpond.com)

Abstract

Climate change directly and indirectly threatens many of the values of Australia’s more than 7720
protected areas. Management organisations need to respond to such threats to minimise impacts, to
slow change effects and to help build resilience for natural ecosystems. Strategic, tactical and
operational planning responses are needed by individual protected area organisations to achieve
effective threat responses. In addition, because of Australia’s constitutional land management
accountabilities, a supplementary strategic plan is recommended to respond to whole of Australia and
transboundary protected area climate change threats. Such a plan is based on an integrated and
cooperative management approach involving multiple protected area organisations and is modelled on
the cooperative governance method used by the Australian Alps protected area agencies.

This plan needs to consider seven strategies for implementation by the eleven government and other
protected area organisations which include: responding to key threats; an informed Australia; unified
national climate change policies; Australian “State of the Parks” reporting; enhanced research;
targeted greenhouse gas reductions; and, a national incident response capacity. These national
responses would contribute benefits to communities including improved protected areas; better (and
more local) climate change information; improved water catchments; improved fire management; and
the conservation of many of Australia’s iconic species. Given Australia’s comparatively lower average
per hectare investment in protected area management for a developed country, new finances will be
needed to achieve the implementation of such a plan.

Introduction

Protected areas are Australia’s single greatest land-use after agriculture and in 2005 they occupied
10.25% of the continent and included 7720 marine and terrestrial reserves (UNEP-WCMC 2005). All
of these areas required active management to maintain the purposes for which they were established,
and this purpose has been recognised by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature
(IUCN) in their definition of protected areas which states:

“protected areas are an area of land/or sea especially dedicated to the protection and maintenance
of biological diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal
or other effective means” (IUCN 1994).

They are important for society since they help maintain healthy environments and contribute directly
to healthy people. There are multiple threats to such areas, and climate change has exacerbated many
of these as well as introducing new threats. This paper identifies some Australian protected area
management responses to these climate change threats.

Worboys G. L. (2007) Managing Australia’s protected areas for a climate shifted spectrum of threats. In:
Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change. Proceedings of a WWF and IUCN World Commission
on Protected Areas symposium, 18-19 June 2007, Canberra. (eds M. Taylor & P. Figgis) pp. 18-27. WWF-
Australia, Sydney.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Background

Managing protected areas

Australia’s Constitution and federal system of government (essentially) delegates land management to
the eight states and territories. This requirement, as well as the Commonwealth’s responsibilities for
external territories and territorial waters has helped establish eleven government protected area
management organisations (Worboys 2007a). These include eight organisations managed by the States
and Territories as well as Parks Australia, The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority and the
Queensland Wet Tropics Management Authority. The areas managed are dominated by IUCN
Protected Area Categories I-IV (UNEP-WCMC 2005) which means that there is an emphasis on
natural and cultural heritage conservation (IUCN 1994). There are other Australian protected area
governance types and these include Indigenous Protected Areas and Private Protected Areas (Worboys
et al. 2005; Lockwood et al. 2006). A range of use and non-use values are conserved by Australia’s
protected areas.

Values of protected areas

The values of protected areas include use values from direct use and ecosystem services, and non-use,
ecocentric or intrinsic values. Intrinsic values include biodiversity, geo-heritage, soil, water, air,
scenic, amenity (such as areas free of artificial light and noise), natural phenomena (such as fire and
weather), recreation, wilderness, cultural-site, cultural place and spiritual values (Worboys et al.
2005). Many of these values are threatened by climate change and active management can help
maintain their conservation status.

Forecasts of climate change threats to protected area values

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report (IPCC 2007) forecasts a
range of climate changes that will directly and indirectly threaten protected area values. There are
forecast mean temperature increases of 1.3-1.7

C to 2055, (and 1.7-4.0

C to 2095), and sea level rises

of 0.19-0.58 metres by 2100 (IPCC 2007; Pearman 2007). Some of the resulting threats to values
include marine inundation of coastal lowlands; coral bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef; the poleward
shift of plant and animal ranges; the altitudinal shift of animal and plant species such as in the
Australian Alps national parks; impacts by introduced species and more frequent and severe bushfires
(NRMMC 2004; Pittock 2005; Lowe 2005; Lockwood et al. 2006; Steffen 2006; IPCC 2007; Pearman
2007). Substantial changes and impacts to Australian environments and communities may also place
social and political pressure on politicians to change aspects of protected areas and their management.

Context for threat management

Climate change will require astute and responsive management by our protected area leaders and
managers over the next forty years and beyond. Managing the social and political roller-coaster that
parallels climate change impacts to communities will be critical. When climate change impacts are
combined with other global change factors (such as population growth, competition for resources and
post “peak oil” effects) (Lockwood et al. 2006), there will be potential for social instability and
reactive political responses (Mason 2003; Heinberg 2006). A key challenge will be to help achieve a
community view that is supportive, that values protected areas and considers them to be critical for the
long term health and well being of society.

Rationale for responding to climate change threats

A rationale for responding to climate change threats relates to the purpose for which protected areas
are reserved (IUCN 1994; Welch 2005; Worboys 2005; Dunlop 2007a,b). It includes:

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

• Protected areas help conserve natural and cultural heritage values and healthy environments,

including the diversity of life on earth and essential ecosystem services needed for humans such as
clean air and clean water;

• Human-caused climate change or global warming is a world wide phenomenon and introduces

non-natural changes to the values of protected areas;

• Management intervention to minimise threats and maximise resilience to the values of protected

areas will help slow the rate of change, will help conserve species, and will help maintain healthy
environments; and

• Healthy environments maximise opportunities for the provision of ecosystem services and for the

retention of the diversity of life on earth.

Principles of management: responding to climate change threats

Eleven key management principles guide how protected area management organisations can respond
effectively to climate change threats. They are:
• People and governments worldwide have a responsibility to respond to climate change causes, and

to minimise such effects to help retain a healthy, life-sustaining planet;

• Organisational planning for climate change adaptation and responses at strategic, tactical and

operational levels of protected area management are fundamental management responses to
climate change threats;

• Researching, modelling, and forecasting the effects of climate change are essential adjuncts to

such adaptation planning and will assist in minimising surprises;

• Unexpected climate change threats are inevitable, and identifying and monitoring such threats

requires research, the monitoring of key values of protected areas and assessing their change in
their condition over the long term;

• Climate change threats to Australia’s protected areas can be minimised by an effective and climate

change responsive national reserve system design, an expanded reserve system, and by effective
and strategic continental scale connectivity conservation;

• Greenhouse gas emissions can be minimised by protected area organisations by implementing

quantified emission reductions, evaluating performance and instigating adaptive management
improvement responses;

• Climate change induced biome shifts will alter the composition of biodiversity of protected areas,

but the same protected areas will remain critical for conservation of different mixes of natural
habitats and species and will be essential as a continued and integral part of the national reserve
system;

• Climate change biodiversity refugia exist and will require identification and special management

responses;

• Climate change will introduce changes and uncertainty, such that risk management and

anticipatory approaches to management will be important;

• Other special values of protected areas including social, spiritual, cultural and recreational values

may be threatened by climate change and may require particular management responses; and

• Cooperative and integrated management responses to climate change threats will be important at a

range of different levels in Australian society (Welch 2005; Worboys 2005; Worboys et al. 2005;
Dunlop 2007a,b; Pearman 2007;).

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Goals: climate change threat management

Based on the purpose of protected areas and principles of climate change threat management, the key
goals for managing threats include:
• A healthy, resilient, and adaptive National Reserve System that comprehensively, and adequately

represents Australia’s full range of natural environments and other values including ecosystem
services;

• The strategic conservation of large, unfragmented, and interconnected natural landscapes; climate

change refugia; and key protected area values of long term significance to the community;

Strategic

Tactical

Operational

Strategic responses:
(For a national, cooperative and
integrated response by eleven
government and other protected
area organisations)
1. Responding to key threats
2. An informed Australia
3. Speaking with one voice: climate
change response policies
4. Telling it as it is: a national “State
of the Parks” report
5. National research: protected
areas - the coal miner’s canary
6. Leading by example: reducing
greenhouse gas emissions
7. Mobilisation: a national incident
response capacity

Tactical responses:
(For an individual protected
area organisation)
1. Landscape level,
bioregional threat response
planning
2. Protecting water
catchments
3. Preparing for wild fire
events
4. An integrated approach to
pest animal and weed control
5. Responding to incidents
6. Preparing for new tourism
• No

snow

• Bleached

reef

• Eroded

beaches

• Salty

wetlands

• Hot

summers

Protected area organisational levels

Operational responses:
(For an individual protected
area organisation)
1. Baseline and change of
condition research, and
regular state of park
assessment
2. Research, task planning
and adaptive management
that achieves:
• Ecosystem

and

catchment health

• Responsible

fire

management

• Endangered

species

survival

• Pest

animal

reduction

• Weed

reduction

•

Sustainable visitor use.

3. Informing and working with
local communities (especially
for incident management)
4. Investing in staff training
and competencies to deal with
climate change threats
5. Minimising the generation
of greenhouse gases

Fig. 1. Strategic, tactical and operational organisational planning responses to protected
area climate change threats.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

• A national, integrated and principled response to climate change threats by protected area

management organisations and governments; and

• An informed and supportive Australian community.

Climate change threat management

Managing for climate change threats includes the functions of planning, organising, leading and
monitoring (Worboys et al. 2005). This paper focuses on planning at strategic, tactical and operational
levels (Bartol et al. 1998) with action at all three organisational levels required for an effective threat
response by protected area agencies.

Strategic responses

Strategic plans articulate the major long term (greater than three years) actions that are necessary to
deal with climate change threats. For Australia, this includes three types of protected area management
strategic responses:
• Individual organisation responses;
• An integrated, cooperative, whole-of-nation response by many protected area organisations and

governments to transboundary and national climate change threats; and

• International responses such as for international migratory animal species.

For the whole of nation response, seven integrated cooperative strategic responses are recognised as
being critical (Fig. 1) and these are presented in more detail below.

Tactical responses

Tactical planning provides more detailed articulation of climate change threat goals and strategic
actions for an individual organisation and is typically undertaken by middle level managers. Tactical
plans develop integrated responses to threats at a landscape or bioregional scale and often involve a
range of private and government organisations, especially local government. Six key tactical planning
responses for climate change threat management are identified as being needed by individual
Australian protected area management organisations (Fig. 1).

Operational responses

Operational planning is typically undertaken at an individual protected area level and implemented as
individual actions. Cumulatively, the results of these actions help to achieve the planned tactical and
strategic threat outcomes sought by organisations. Five key operational responses to climate change
threats have been identified (Fig. 1).

A national response to protected area climate change
threats

Given that strategic planning for a protected area organisation is important, one type of such planning
is described in greater detail here. There is a need for an Australian response to climate change that
integrates the efforts of all eleven protected area organisations. It is a cooperative response to climate
change threats in addition to individual organisational strategic responses.

One of the great strengths of the Australian Constitution is that it has facilitated a protected area
system managed by eleven separate protected area organisations. For Australia’s huge 7.68 million
km

land area, this ensures local, State and Territory management relevance, and inspires constructive

competitiveness and innovation in protected area management for our nation.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Because of this and our developed status, Australia’s protected area management organisations have
been recognised as world leaders in their field. However, one of Australia’s great national weaknesses
is its current inability to achieve effective national responses to protected area climate change threats
(ECITA 2007).

Models for integrated and cooperative management consistent with Australia’s Constitution, involving
many protected area organisations already exist, such as the Australian Alps Liaison Committee
(Crabb 2003) and could provide guidance for how an integrated approach is achieved. It would need to
involve all eleven state, territory and Commonwealth protected area organisations and would be
guided by a single cooperative strategic plan.

An integrated national plan is recommended as an important response to Australian protected area
climate change threats and seven strategies have been identified for such a plan (Fig. 1). With the
conservation of protected areas as a catalyst and focus for threat responses, the trans-boundary and
national action would be undertaken as a team effort by appropriate protected area organisations. The
actions would operate at a landscape or bioregional scale and potentially would involve many other
organisations, communities and individuals. The seven strategies identified account for some of the
National Biodiversity and Climate Change Action Plan actions (NRMMC 2004) and recognise the
recommendations of the Biological Diversity Advisory Committee’s 2003 climate change report
(CSIRO 2003). They are discussed in more detail below.

Strategy 1: Responding to key threats

Strategic preventative and response actions to climate change threats will help to conserve protected
area values and these are described.

Meet the National Reserve System targets

Building a comprehensive, adequate and representative National Reserve System (NRS), as already
accepted as a target by all Australian jurisdictions, will help Australia minimise climate change threats
to protected areas (Gilligan 2006a,b; Sattler & Glanznig 2006).

Implement continental-scale connectivity conservation

Achieving continental scale connectivity conservation for some of Australia’s very important and very
large remaining natural and interconnected areas (such as the Alps-to-Atherton corridor proposal
“A2A”), in addition to the NRS, will help to minimise climate change threats to protected areas and
help maintain healthy environments (Pulsford et al. 2004; Soule et al. 2006; Worboys 2007b).

Respond to altered fire regimes

More frequent and extreme fire events are forecast (Lucas 2007) and they highly probably will
transgress state and territory boundaries from time to time, as evidenced by the 2003 Australian Alps
fires (Worboys 2003). A national and integrated fire management response for protected areas is
advised to help minimise the impacts to both natural and built assets from the fire event and form
operational responses to the fire.

Manage for healthy catchments and water yield

Managing protected area catchments to help maintain maximum water yield over the long term is a
critical investment. Climate change enhanced threats including fire, pest animals, weed invasions will
need to be managed carefully. Strategic catchments such as the Australian Alps for the Murray Darling
Basin (Williams & McDougall 2007), and A2A for the eastern forests of Australia and its four capital
city and eastern Australian town water storages (Pulsford et al. 2004), are two examples of important
national needs. Managing for the use and recharge of ground water is also important.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Reduce introduced animal and plant impacts

Introduced animals impact most protected areas in Australia and require active management. Many
nationally significant introduced pest animals transcend state and territory borders and have the
potential to expand their impacts with climate change. They need to be targeted and controlled over
the long term using a national response. Actions to deal with new pest animals will also be needed
(ECITA 2004).

Climate change will assist many introduced plants to spread and impact protected areas (Pickering et
al. 2004). They will need to be dealt with at a landscape scale.

Strategy 2: An informed Australia

Changes to protected areas such as vegetation, stream flow and the presence or absence of animals
will happen. This needs to be forecast by scientific modelling and formally identified as changes
happen. Community awareness and understanding is needed to help deal with these changes. Protected
area managers should not be put in the position of being blamed for the consequences of climate
change effects. Communicating climate impacts will be a very long term program and will need
effective two-way communication.

Strategy 3: Speaking with one voice- climate change response
policies

Climate change threats will introduce a range of social and ethical issues that will need to be
addressed. Some of these will have national application, and a common approach by protected area
organisations (“speaking with one voice”) will have benefits. Developing such national policies would
include community consultation and debate. Some policy responses to climate change threats needed
include:
• Establishing conservation priorities amongst alternatives such as the conservation of genetic

diversity, the targeting of specific ecosystems or even specific species (Dunlop 2007ab);

• Identifying if and how carbon trading and water catchment conservation incentives may be used to

resource responses to climate change threats;

• Recognising that protected areas will remain a valuable part of the National Reserve System even

if native ecosystems and species protected might change in type and composition;

• Establishing legal and managerial responses for administering long term tourism leases and

licenses for destinations impacted by climate change (such as snow loss, bleached reef,
salinisation of freshwater wetlands, wildlife decline); and

• Identifying common, baseline standards for greenhouse gas reduction targets.

Such policy statements could be part of a suite of climate change information made available to the
community.

Strategy 4: Telling it as it is: An Australian “State of the Parks”
report

Integrating strategic evaluation information from eleven protected area management organisations
could provide an Australian “State of the Parks” assessment. As exemplified by Parks Victoria’s 2007
State of the Parks report (PV 2007), it could provide a five yearly conservation status assessment for
protected areas and the benefits they are providing for Australians. It could include catchment
protection and water yield, fire management, species management, and responses to climate change
threats reporting. Trends in threats and the conservation status of many key species and climate change
refugia could also be reported. This would require national agreement on evaluation subjects and

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

selected evaluation indicators, but would provide a single source of information needed for Australia’s
five yearly State of the Environment report.

Strategy 5: Research: protected areas, “the coal miner’s canary”

A great deal of Australia’s pre-European biodiversity stabilised over the past 6000 years under a
relatively uniform climate regime and stable indigenous Australian presence and use of the landscape.
Protected areas represent vestiges of such lands. Some high diversity rainforest refugia, such as the
Queensland Wet Tropics (White 1994; McDonald & Lane 2000), the Central Eastern Rainforest
Reserves (Adam 1987) and some valleys of the NSW Wollemi National Park (Jones et al. 1995)
conserve even more ancient habitats and species.

Protected areas therefore provide a perfect baseline to measure changes to the environment, and as
such, can provide a service to the community by providing advice of change in condition from this
measure (Welch 2005). A nationally coordinated and funded approach to such long term monitoring in
protected areas would provide a clear indication of climate change effects for Australians.

Some of this monitoring work is already happening in protected areas. Any serious environmental
shifts would become evident and the overall monitoring information in effect becomes “a coal miner’s
canary” warning system for Australia. Such research information means that managers and local
communities can be better informed about: 1) immediate forecast climate change effects; 2) what
management responses are possible; 3) what benefits existing management responses are providing
and how they can be improved; and 4) the implications of climate change for the longer term (DEH
2002; IPCC 2007).

Strategy 6: Leading by example: greenhouse gas reductions

Australia’s protected area organisations need to lead by example in reducing their greenhouse gas
emissions. They need to assess their emission impacts, establish reduction targets and publish their
reduction results. Targeted reductions for protected area management would need to include big
energy use areas such as for aviation, motor vehicle fleets, heavy plant operations, office air-
conditioning and other (non-green) electricity consumption. However, all aspects of direct and indirect
energy consumption such as waste management and purchasing practices and offsets need to be
considered.

Public scrutiny of greenhouse gas emissions will be heightened with time, and the community will
demand full accountability, especially for environmental management organisations. However,
greenhouse gas reductions will be more difficult when managing for incidents such as fire operations,
given they rely on helicopters and other high energy users. Such consumption may require the use of
responsible offset schemes to achieve targeted reductions, and could include the rehabilitation of
disturbed protected area lands.

Strategy 7: Mobilisation: A national incident response capacity

More frequent and severe flood, storm, and fire incidents are forecast (Dunlop 2007a,b; IPCC 2007;
Pearman 2007). They will impact protected areas, and many incidents will be large, complex and
prolonged and will require substantial staff and equipment resources. If a capacity to mobilise and
share national protected area management resources existed across Australia, it could assist individual
organisations. Major and prolonged incidents can quickly “burn-out” the professional staff available
and relief support would be helpful. Mobilisation of staff and equipment resources already occurs
intrastate and the concept of mobilising interstate protected area management resources could be
developed quickly.

There is potential to achieve such mobilisation. In 2005, the eleven Australian protected area
management organisations employed 5818 people, with most states and territories employing between

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

200 and 1400 staff (Worboys 2007). This would also introduce a new level of professional training
and co-operation between the protected area management organisations of Australia.

Financing an integrated national response plan

In 2005, Australia spent about one third less per hectare on average on protected area management
than other comparable developed countries. The national average level of investment by Australian
governments was estimated from Commonwealth, State and Territory data to be $7.69 per hectare of
protected area (Worboys 2007), and this was lower than world standards where estimates of
approximately $12.50 per hectare were identified as being needed for most developed countries
(James et al. 1999), despite considerable variation in investments by countries (Balmford et al. 2003).
If a national response is to be achieved, it would need to be resourced by new climate change threat
response funds. It is critical that such new resourcing is achieved.

Conclusion

Protected areas will be impacted by climate change threats, and management responses are needed to
mitigate impacts, increase the resilience of healthy environments, help protect water catchments,
conserve key species, provide protection and support to communities and slow the rate of the
inevitable changes that will occur. Management planning responses to these threats are required at
strategic, tactical and operational levels for each of Australia’s eleven government and other protected
area organisations, with an additional national, integrated strategic plan also recommended for a whole
of continent climate change threat response. Seven key national strategies are identified for such a
national cooperative plan. With Australia’s lower than average per hectare protected area funding
investments for a developed country, additional and long term funding investments are needed to
achieve strategic responses to climate change threats.

References

Adam P. (1987) New South Wales rainforests: The nomination for the World Heritage List. New South Wales National Parks

and Wildlife Service, Sydney.

Balmford A., Gaston,K. J., Blyth S., James A. & Kapos V. (2003) Global variation in terrestrial conservation costs,

conservation benefits, and unmet conservation needs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA

100, 1046-

1050.

Bartol K., Martin D., Tein M. & Mathews G. (1998) Management: A Pacific rim focus. (Second edition). McGraw-Hill,

Sydney.

CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation) (2003) Climate change impacts on biodiversity in

Australia: Outcomes of a workshop sponsored by the Biological Diversity Advisory Committee, 1-2 October, 2002.
CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Canberra.

DEH (Department of Environment & Heritage) (2002) Living with climate change: An overview of potential climate changes

in Australia. Australian Greenhouse Office, Canberra.

Dunlop M. (2007a) Impacts of climate change on ecosystems. PowerPoint presentation, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems,

Canberra.

Dunlop M. (2007b) Impacts of climate change on the development and management of the NRS, Report of a meeting

Wednesday 7

Feb. 2007. CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Canberra

ECITA (2007) Conserving Australia: Australia’s national parks, conservation reserves and marine protected areas .

Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

ECITA (The Senate Standing Committee on the Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts)

(2004) Turning back the tide – the invasive species challenge. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Gilligan B. (2006a) The National Reserve System Programme: 2006 Evaluation. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Gilligan B. (2006b) The Indigenous Protected Areas Programme: 2006 Evaluation. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Heinberg R. (2006) The oil depletion protocol: A plan to avert oil wars, terrorism and economic collapse. New Society

Publishers, Gabriola Island, Canada.

IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2007) Fourth assessment report: The physical science basis United

Nations, Brussels.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature) (1994) Guidelines for protected area management categories

IUCN Commission on National Parks and Protected Areas, Gland, Switzerland.

James A. N., Gaston K. J. & Balmford A. (1999) Balancing the Earth’s accounts. Nature

40, 323-324.

Jones W., Hill K. & Allen J. (1995) Wollemia nobilis A new living Australian genus and species in the Araucariaceae.

Telopea

6, 173-176.

Lockwood M., Worboys G. L. & Kothari A. (2006) Managing protected areas: a global guide. Earthscan, London.

Lowe I. (2005) Living in the hothouse: How global warming affects Australia. Scribe Publications, Carlton, Australia.

Lucas C. (2007) Climate, bushfires and the Australian Alps. PowerPoint presentation, Australian Alps climate change

workshop Falls Creek, 16-18 April 2007. Australian Alps Liaison Committee, Canberra.

Mason C. (2003) The 2030 spike: Countdown to a global catastrophe. Earthscan, London.

McDonald G. & Lane M. (eds) (2000) Securing the Wet Tropics? The Federation Press, Annandale.

NRMMC (National Resource Management Ministerial Council) (2004) National Biodiversity and Climate Change Action

Plan 2004-2007. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra

Pearman G. (2007) Global warming overview, PowerPoint presentation to the Australian Alps Climate Change workshop,

Falls Creek, April 2007. Australian Alps Liaison Committee, Bright.

Pickering C. M., Good R. & Green K. (2004) Potential effects of global warming on the biota of the Australian Alps.

Australian Greenhouse Office, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Pittock B. A. (2005) Climate change: Turning up the heat. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne.

Pulsford I., Worboys G. L., Gough J. & Shepherd T. (2004) The Australian Alps and the Great Escarpment of Eastern

Australia conservation corridors, In: Managing mountain protected areas: challenges and responses for the 21

Century.

(eds D. Harmon & G. L. Worboys) pp. 105-197. Andromeda Editrice, Colledara.

PV (Parks Victoria) (2007) Victoria’s State of the Parks Report, May, 2007. Parks Victoria, Melbourne.

Sattler P. & Glanznig A. (2006) Building nature’s safety net: A review of Australia’s terrestrial protected area system, 1991-

2004. WWF-Australia, Sydney.

Soulé M. E., Mackey B. G., Recher H. F., Williams J. E., Woinarski J. C. Z., Driscoll D., Dennison W. C. & Jones M. E.

(2006) The role of connectivity in Australian conservation. In. Connectivity Conservation (eds K. R. Crooks & M.
Sajayan) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Steffen W. (2006) Stronger evidence but new challenges: climate change science 2001-2005. Department of Environment &

Heritage, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

UNEP-WCMC (United Nations Environment Program-World Conservation Monitoring Centre) (2005) World Data Base on

Protected Areas. Online at unep-wcmc.org on 20 Jul 2007.

Welch D. (2005) What should protected area managers do in the face of climate change? The George Wright Forum

22, 75-

93.

White M. E. (1994) After the greening: The browning of Australia. Kangaroo Press, Sydney.

Williams R. & McDougall K. (2007) Possible effects of climate change on ecosystems of the Australian Alps In: Climate

Change: Management Implications for the Australian Alps National Parks. Science Management Workshop, Falls Creek,
16-18 April 2007. Australian Alps Liaison Committee, Bright.

Worboys G. L. (2003) A brief report on the 2003 Australian Alps bushfires. Mountain Research and Development

23, 294-

295.

Worboys G. L. (2005) Climate change and protected area managers: Some contributions that can be made to reducing the

effects of climate change. Online at www.mountain-wcpa.org on 20 Jul 2007.

Worboys G. L. (2007a) Evaluation subjects and methods required for managing protected areas. Ph. D. Thesis, Griffith

University, Gold Coast.

Worboys G. L. (2007b) Continental scale connectivity conservation: A background paper. IUCN World Commission on

Protected Areas, Gland, Switzerland.

Worboys G. L., Lockwood M. & De Lacy T. (2005) Protected area management: Principles and practice. Oxford University

Press, Melbourne.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Climate change and other
threats in the Australian Alps

Catherine Pickering

School of Environment, Gold Coast Campus, Griffith University QLD 4222
(Email:c.pickering@griffith.edu.au)

Abstract

The importance of protected areas will increase with the impact of climate change, with climate
change adversely affecting natural ecosystems in Australia and globally. Unfortunately, climate
change is also likely to show negative synergies with many existing threats to protected areas.

For the Australian Alps National Parks, which conserve most of mainland Australia’s snow country,
predicted increases in temperatures and changes in precipitation will result in a dramatic loss of snow
cover. These changes will increase existing threats associated with loss of biodiversity, intensive fires,
diversity and abundance of feral animals and plants, human demands on ecosystem services and
tourism uses.

By recognising the range of possible negative synergies, managers in these and other protected areas
will be able to prioritise control and amelioration measures. They will also need to reduce their own
contribution to greenhouse gas production, and assist in increasing public awareness of just how great
the threats are from climatic change.

Threats to protected areas in Australia

Globally and in Australia the priority for protected areas is conservation of the natural values
(Lockwood et al. 2006). Threats to these natural values such as those from fire, weeds, pest animals,
urban encroachment and climate change are all core issues for the effective management of protected
areas (Worboys 2007).

Global temperatures have risen by approximately 0.74

C in the past 100 years with the Fourth

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports predicting that without intervention this
trend will continue (IPCC 2007a). By the end of this century global temperatures are predicted to
increase by 1.8

C to 4

C with higher latitudes having the greatest warming (IPCC 2007a). It is

predicted that climate change will cause major environmental and economic impacts particularly from
increases in the frequency of extreme weather events such as bushfire, droughts, floods and heatwaves
in Australia (Hughes 2003; Pittock 2003; IPCC 2007a,b).

In addition to global increases in surface temperatures, climate change is already affecting the alpine
environments including: increase in the size of glacial lakes, reduction in the size and number of
glaciers, increase erosion events in mountains and areas that had permafrost and changes in snow fall
patterns (IPCC 2007a,b). Biological response include changes in the timing of event such as arrival of
birds, butterflies, flowering of plants, changes in the distribution of species and resulting changes in
biodiversity (Hughes 2003; Parmesan & Yohe 2003; Root et al. 2003; IPCC 2007b).

Pickering C. (2007) Climate change and other threats in the Australian Alps. In: Protected Areas: buffering
nature against climate change. Proceedings of a WWF and IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas
symposium, 18-19 June 2007, Canberra. (eds M. Taylor & P. Figgis) pp. 28-34. WWF-Australia, Sydney.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Synergies between climate change and current threats to
protected areas

Climate change will interact with many existing threats to protected areas, unfortunately usually
resulting in even greater negative impacts on the environment. This includes increasing the threat
from:
• Loss of biodiversity from increasing fragmentation of habitat, disturbances to ecosystem processes

and/or alteration to the timing of events critical for species survival (migration patterns etc,
Hughes 2003; Pittock 2003; Parmesan & Yohe 2003; Root et al. 2003; IPCC 2007b).

• Increase in risk of intense fires: Extreme fire events are predicted to increase in Australia as a

result of climate change (Williams et al. 2001; Hughes 2003; Pittock 2003). In Australia the
management of fires is a critical issue for protected areas. Fire directly affects ecosystems, with
some impacts needing management responses. Fire control also diverts resources away from other
management activities. This includes resources used for fighting fires, and also for replacing burnt
park infrastructure and rehabilitating fire trials. There will also be an increased potential for fire to
spread from protected areas into urban areas in high risk periods, with resulting political and
economic repercussions for protected area managers.

• Increase in pests and weeds: Climate change will benefit species best adapted to disturbance

(Hughes 2003). Weeds and feral animals already benefit from disturbance, with their spread in
protected areas directly related to past and current human disturbance (Williams & West 2000).
Climate change will directly alter the areas suitable for exotic species by altering climatic patterns.
It will also result in increase in disturbances that benefit weeds and feral animals (fires and
extreme weather events). Ecosystems will experience increased stress from climate change
increasing their suitability to invasions by exotics.

• Increase in human demands on protected area ecosystem services: Protected areas worldwide and

in Australia provide a wide range of ecosystem services for local and wider communities
(Worboys et al. 2001; Lockwood et al. 2007). In Australia this includes acting as water
catchments with the water then used for generating hydroelectricity as well as for drinking and
irrigation (ISC 2004). They are important sources of soil conservation, preserving existing soils,
and reducing erosion and risks of landslides (ISC 2004). They also act as CO

sinks. All these

services will be put under additional stress by climate change.

• Change in demand for tourism activities: Current visitation to tourism destinations including

protected areas is weather/climate dependent (Maddison 2001). Changes in climate including
increased risk of extreme weather related events will alter the patterns of visitation (Maddison
2001). In some places this may result in reduced usage, or changes in the types of activities that
occur, while in others it may result in increased usage — a “see the Great Barrier Reef while its
still there” reaction (Maddison 2001).

Direct and indirect impacts of climate change on the Australian Alps National Parks illustrate many of
these issues that apply broadly to protected areas in Australia and around the world.

Mountains and Climate Change

Mountains are recognized worldwide for their important economic, cultural and ecological values
(Harmon & Worboys 2004; ISC 2004). For example, they are important water catchments receiving
precipitation and channelling it to lowland areas where it can be used in agriculture, for domestic
services and for industries (UNEP-WCMC 2002). Mountains are also popular tourist destinations
valued for their pristine wilderness, dramatic landscapes and natural beauty. The flora and fauna of
mountains are often rich in endemic species and act as important biodiversity reserves (Harmon &
Worboys 2004).

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Predicted climatic changes may threaten the values of mountain environments (UNEP-WCMC 2002;
IPCC 2007a). Increased temperatures and changes in precipitation have already been documented in
many mountain areas around the world. These are already changing the distributions of animal and
plant species in some protected areas (Nagy et al. 2003; Pauli et al. 2006; IPCC 2007b).

Significance of the Australian Alps

Snow country in mainland Australia occurs in the southern section of the Great Dividing Range in the
southeast of the continent. Known as the Australian Alps, this area is almost entirely conserved in a
series of linked national parks and nature reserves that are cooperatively managed by authorities in
Victoria, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory. The region is considered to be of
world heritage standard (Kirkpatrick 1994), although a proposal for nomination has not yet been made.
The largest of the national parks, Kosciusko National Park (KNP, 690 411 ha), has been classified as a
UNESCO Biosphere Reserve based on the international significance of its natural values (ISC 2004).

As with many mountain regions around the world, there are economic values associated with the
natural assets of the Australian Alps (Good 1992; ISC 2004; Mules et al. 2005). The region is a highly
valued tourist destination, worth the order of $40 billion, with varying estimates of visitor numbers
including over a million visitors to just one park, Kosciuszko National Park. Visitors generate
considerable spill over revenue, supporting local businesses and communities (ISC 2004; Mules et al.
2005). Catchments also provide much of southeastern Australia with clean water, some of which is
channelled into the Murray-Darling Basin (Good 1992b; ISC 2004). The hydroelectricity generated by
water from the region is also a critical resource (ISC 2004).

Predictions of climate change in the Australian Alps

The Australian Greenhouse Office has identified the Australia Alps as particularly vulnerable to
climate change impacts (Green 1998; Hughes 2003; Pittock 2003; Pickering et al. 2004). Snow is
spatially and temporally limited in Australia, compared to Europe, north and south America (Costin et
al. 2000). Approximately 0.15% of the continent receives regular winter snow falls (Costin et al.
2000). The most extensive snow covered areas are in the southeast of the continent in the Snowy
Mountains in NSW, (around 2500 km

). Of this only 1200 km

receives 60 or more days of snow

cover and only 250 km

(or 0.0001% of Australia) is truly alpine (Green & Osborne 1994; Costin et al.

2000).

The latest climate change scenarios for the Australian Alps are based on the CSIRO temperature and
prediction models for 2001 (Table 1). Based on these values, changes in temperature of +0.6

C under a

low impact scenario and +2.9

C under a high impact scenario by 2050 are predicted (Hennessey et al.

2002). Consequent reductions in snow cover resulting from changes in temperature and precipitation
in both scenarios will be dramatic. In the worst case scenario there will be a 96% reduction in the area
that experiences more than two months snow cover a year.

These predictions have important implications for ski resorts with reductions of 30-40 days in the
average season length by 2020 in the worst case scenarios. By 2050 under worst case scenarios, there
are even more dramatic reductions in season duration by around 100 days, with only the highest ski
resorts having season durations of more than ten days.

For the highest peak in Australia, the predicted changes in climate include a change in the duration of
snow cover from around 183 days to 96-169 days by 2050. But even more dramatic is the change in
the peak snow depth from over 2 m to under 50 cm under the worst case scenario by 2050 (Hennessy
et al. 2002). Another way of viewing the change is to consider that +2.9

C is approximately the

equivalent of a 377 m upward shift in the snowline (using a 0.77

C lapse rate: Brown & Millner 1989).

Therefore under the worst case scenario in 43 years, conditions equivalent to the current tree line at
around 1850 m altitude in the Snowy Mountains would be found a meter above the top of continental
Australia’s highest mountain, Mt Kosciuszko (2228 m).

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Table 1. Best and worst case climate change scenarios for the Australian Alps as predicted change
from conditions in 1990 (Hennessy et al. 2002)

Best Case

Worst Case

Change

2020 2050 2020 2050

Temperature +0.2

C +0.6

C +1.0

C +2.9

Precipitation +0.9%

+2.3%

-8.3%

-24%

Reduction in area with snow cover

At least 30 days

14%

30%

54%

93%

At least 60 days

18%

38%

60%

96%

These predicted changes in climate are clearly likely to have dramatic affects on the natural values of
the Australian Alps.

Synergies between climate change and threats in the Australian
Alps

It has been predicted that a temperature increase of just 3

could alter the climate of the area that is

currently alpine, to that of the subalpine (Green et al. 1992). This would result in the loss of the rare
endemic communities such as the groundwater communities (fens, bogs and peatlands: Good 1992)
and the endemic snowbank, feldmark and short alpine herbfield communities (Pickering et al. 2004).
These latter two communities are the only known locations for four plant species endemic to the
Kosciuszko alpine area (Costin et al. 2000). Conversely, higher temperatures are expected to increase
the distribution of the dominant alpine and subalpine plant communities (tall alpine herbfield, heath
and sod-tussock grassland) (Pickering & Armstrong 2003; Pickering et al. 2004).

Climate change in the subalpine or montane areas of the Australian Alps is expected to benefit exotic
species and weeds which may be currently excluded from the alpine zone due to the severe
environmental conditions at higher altitudes (Johnston & Pickering 2001; Pickering et al. 2004; Bear
et al. 2006). With warmer and drier conditions associated with climate change the altitudinal ranges of
some weed species are likely to increase. This invasion process may be facilitated by the predicted
increase in frequency of natural disturbances (bushfire and drought) which reduce the cover of native
vegetation.

The alpine region around Mount Kosciuszko is expected to be particularly vulnerable as it is small
(100 km

) with a limited altitudinal range (400 m from the treeline to the summit of Mount

Kosciuszko at 2228 m) (Pickering et al. 2004). The lack of a permanent nival zone in the Australian
Alps, a region perpetually covered in snow, to act as a refuge for altitudinal succession may limit the
ability of many endemic alpine species to survive (Green et al. 1992; Pickering & Armstrong 2003;
Pickering et al. 2004).

Three examples are used to illustrate the potential synergies between existing threats to the Australian
Alps and climate change.

Direct affects on flora and fauna

Increasing temperatures and decreasing snow cover is likely to result in changes in species richness in
the Australian Alps. Species richness of plants and animals is related to altitude in mountain regions
world wide (Körner 2002; Nagy et al. 2003). In mountains there is a general trend of a decline in
native and exotic plant diversity, and an increase in the proportion of the biota that is endemic with

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

increasing altitude (Körner 2002; Nagy et al. 2003; Pauli et al. 2006). For example in the Australian
Alps, the distribution of many mammal and bird species is strongly effected by snow cover (Green &
Osborne 1994; Green & Pickering 2002). There is already some evidence that there have been changes
in the altitudinal extent and timing of migration into the mountains from the lowlands with reduced
duration of snow cover in the Australian Alps (Green & Pickering 2002; Pickering et al. 2004). For
many species there will be gradual changes in distribution. For others, however, there is a real risk,
particularly for some mammal populations, that this process might be rapid and dramatic. This is
particularly likely where climate change results in a disassociation in the timing between key events
for species.

For the endangered broad-toothed rat, it appears to be the timing of the thaw, and the increased risk of
cold conditions post snow melt. For the endangered Pygmy possums it may be that early thaws result
in the possums emerging from torpor before the arrival of their main food supply, Bogong moths in
spring (Green pers. comm.).

There are also likely to be changes in the distribution of vegetation communities. This may involve
changes in the tree line, both in frost hollows and between the alpine and subalpine zones. There is
also likely to be changes in the distribution of specialist communities adapted to long periods of snow
cover such as those under late-lying snowbanks, but also other communities dependent on snowmelt
such as bogs and fens (Pickering & Armstrong 2003; Pickering et al. 2004). For plants some changes
in distribution may be apparent in the short term, while for others it might be masked. Many alpine
species are long lived perennials. Therefore there may be dramatic reductions in the size of
populations and the cessation of recruitment for many populations, but a few long-lived individuals
may survive for longer, masking the functional loss of the species.

Fires

Fires are likely to be more frequent, more intense and cover greater areas. Fires in the snow country of
the Australian Alps are infrequent with decades or even centuries between fires in some areas prior to
European arrival (Williams & Costin 1994; ISC 2004). The alpine zone can act as a large fire break,
restricting the spread of large scale fires (ISC 2004). However, the intensity, area burnt and the
frequency of fires are all likely to increase with climatic warming of the region (Hughes 2003; ISC
2004; Pickering et al. 2004). Although some of the flora will recover showing many of the adaptations
seen in lower altitude flora for surviving fire, the capacity to survive fires that are more frequent and
more intense is low (Wahren et al. 2001; ISC 2004; Bear & Pickering 2006). For example Snowgums
can regenerate from lignotubers, and over 95% survived the extensive 2006 fires (Pickering & Barry
2005). However, the regenerating tissue is highly susceptible to damage from fires during the
following 20 years. As a result, an increased frequency of fires may result in dramatic increases in tree
death.

Weeds and feral animals

The Australian Alps like most of Australia has already been invaded by a diverse range of weeds and
feral animals. Many of the species are general pests including foxes, rabbits, pigs, horses and hares
(Green & Osborne 1994). Among the plants are some common weeds such as Sheep’s sorrel, Catsears,
Yarrow, White clover, Sweet vernal grass, Dandelion, Cocksfoot and Brown top bent which are also
found in many protected areas including overseas (Bear et al. 2006; Pickering & Hill in press).
Currently the distribution of many exotic plants and animals is limited by climate factors in the
Australian Alps, particularly the duration of snow cover. Therefore, they are likely to directly benefit
from reduced snow cover, resulting in an increase in the diversity and abundance of exotics at any
given altitude (Bear et al. 2006; Green & Pickering 2003, Pickering et al. 2004). They are also likely
to benefit from disturbances associated with climate change including changes in patterns of human
use of the region. This could be changes in visitor use and activities, with an increase in summer
tourism use of walking trails. It could also be due to changes in the ecosystem services of the region
such as a greater priority on harvesting water in the region.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Recommendations

Clearly there is a need for protected area managers to find ways to deal with the impacts of climate
change. This includes recognising how climate change will interact with many current threats to
protected areas. Just some of the things that could be done include:
• Even greater emphasis on the control of weeds and feral animals, particularly those likely to

benefit from climate change.

• Evaluate risk of increased risk of fires on biota and what can be done, which may not be much for

intense fires in extreme fire conditions.

• Manage changes in tourism use and demand. This includes identifying what types of visitor use

are, and will be appropriate in a particularly park. In the Australian Alps this will involve
managing changes in ski tourism as it becomes economically less viable and more dependent on
snow making. However, snow making itself may become less economically, socially and
environmentally feasible with increasing demands on limited water and hydroelectricity supplies
in the region.

• Reducing the management organisations’ own contributions to production of greenhouse gases.

We too must be eco-friendly and contribute to international reductions in greenhouse gas
production.

• Making the community even more aware of the threats and likely impacts some of which are

already occurring from climate change. For the Australian Alps this unique environment is
particularly at risk, and this needs to be part of Australia’s knowledge of what is and will be
happening in a warmer world.

• Research and monitoring of changes in climate, temperature and snow cover and its effects on the

natural environment of the Australian Alps. Currently several long-term monitoring projects have
been established by researchers, several of which are part of international programs.

References

Bear R. & Pickering C. M. (2006) Recovery of subalpine grassland from bushfire. Australian Journal of Botany

54, 451-458.

Bear R., Hill W. & Pickering, C. M. (2006)

Distribution and diversity of exotic plant species in montane to alpine areas of

Kosciuszko National Park. Cunninghamia

9, 559-570.

Brown J. A. H. & Millner F. C. (1989) Aspects of the meteorology and hydrology of the Australian Alps. In: The scientific

significance of the Australian Alps. The proceedings of the first Fenner conference 1988. (ed. R. Good) pp. 297-329.
Australian Alps National Parks Liaison Committee, Canberra.

Costin A. B., Gray M., Totterdell C. & Wimbush D. (2000) Kosciuszko alpine flora. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne.

Good R. B. (1992) Kosciuszko Heritage. National Parks and Wildlife Service of New South Wales, Sydney.

Grabherr G., Gottfried M. & Pauli H. (1994) Climate effects on mountain plants. Nature

369, 448.

Green K. & Osborne W. S. (1994) Wildlife of the Australian snow-country. Reed, Sydney.

Green K. & Pickering C. M. (2002) A scenario for mammal and bird diversity in the Snowy Mountains of Australia in

relation to climate change. In: Mountain biodiversity: a global assessment. (eds C. Körner & E. M. Spehn) pp 239-247.
Parthenon Publishing, London.

Green K. (1998) (ed. ) Snow, a natural history: an uncertain future. Australian Alps Liaison Committee, Canberra.

Green K., Mansergh I. M. & Osborne W. (1992) The fauna of the Australian Alps: conservation and management. Review

Géographie Alpine

2 & 3, 381-407.

Harmon D. & Worboys G. L. (eds) (2004) Guidelines for planning and managing mountain protected areas. IUCN, Gland,

Switzerland.

Hennessy K. J., Whetton P. H., Smith I. N., Batholds J. M., Hutchinson M. F. & Sharples J. J. (2002) Climate Change

Impacts on Snow Conditions in Australia: First Interim Report. CSIRO, Canberra.

Hughes L. (2003) Climate change and Australia: trends, projections and impacts. Austral Ecology

28, 423-443.

IPCC (2007b). Climate Change 2007: impacts adaptations and vulnerability: fourth assessment report of working group II.

United Nations, Brussels.

IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2007a). Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment

report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. United Nations, Brussels.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

ISC (Independent Scientific Committee) (2004) An Assessment of Kosciuszko National Park values. New South Wales Parks

and Wildlife Service, Sydney.

Johnston F. M. & Pickering C. M. (2001) Exotic plants in the Australian Alps. Mountain Research and Development

21, 284-

291.

Kirkpatrick J. B. (1994) The international significance of the natural values of the Australian Alps. Australian Alps Liaison

Committee, Canberra.

Körner C. (2002). Mountain biodiversity, its causes and function: an overview. In: Mountain biodiversity, a global

assessment. (eds Ch Körner & E. M. Spehn) pp. 3-20. Parthenon Publishing, London.

Lockwood M., Worboys G. L. & Kothari A. (eds) (2006) Managing protected areas: a global guide. Earthscan, London.

Maddison D. (2001) In search of warmer climates? The impact of climate change onflows of British tourists. Climatic

Change

49, 193-208.

Mules T., Faulks P., Stoecki N. & Cegielski M. (2005) Tourism in the Australian Alps. Sustainable Tourism Cooperative

Research Centre, Griffith University, Gold Coast.

Nagy L., Grabherr G., Korner C. & Thompson D. B. A. (eds) (2003) Alpine biodiversity in Europe. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

Parmesan C. & Yohe G. (2003) A globally consistent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems. Nature

421, 226-235.

Pauli H., Gottfried M., Reiter K., Klettner C. & Grabherr G. (2006) Signals of range expansion and contractions of vascular

plants in the high Alps: observations (1994-2004) at the GLORIA master site Schrankogel, Tyrol, Austria. Global
Change Biology

12, 1-10.

Pickering C. M. & Armstrong T. (2003) Potential impacts of climate change on plant communities in the Kosciuszko alpine

zone. Victorian Naturalist

120, 263-272.

Pickering C. M. & Barry K. (2005) Size/age distribution and vegetative recovery of Eucalyptus niphophila (Snowgum,

Myrtaceae) one year after fire in Kosciuszko National Park. Australian Journal of Botany

53, 517-527.

Pickering C. M. & Hill W. (in press). Roadside weeds of the Snowy Mountains. Mountain Research and Development.

Pickering C. M., Good R. A. & Green K. (2004) The Ecological Impacts of Global Warming: Potential Effects of Global

Warming on the Biota of the Australian Alps. Australian Greenhouse Office, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Pittock B. (ed. ) (2003) Climate Change - an Australian guide to the science and potential impacts. Australian Greenhouse

Office, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Root T. L., Price J. T, Hall K. R, Schnelders S. H., Rosenzweig C. & Pounds J. A. (2003) Fingerprints of global warming on

wild animals and plants. Nature

421, 57-60.

UNEP-WCMC (United Nations Environment Program, World Conservation Monitoring Centre) (2002) Mountain Watch:

Environmental Change & Sustainable Development in Mountains. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge.

Wahren C. H. A., Papst W. A. &Williams R. J. (2001) Early post-fire regeneration in subalpine heath land and grassland in

the Victorian Alpine National Park, southeastern Australia. Austral Ecology

26, 670 – 679.

Williams A. J., Karoly D. J. & Tapper, N. (2001). The sensitivity of Australian fire danger to climate change. Climatic

Change

49, 171-191.

Williams J. A. & West C. J. (2000) Environmental weeds in Australia and New Zealand: issues and approaches to

management. Austral Ecology

25, 425-444.

Williams R. J. & Costin A. B. (1994) Alpine and subalpine vegetation. In: Australian Vegetation. (ed. R. H. Groves) pp 467 -

500. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Worboys G. (2007) Evaluation subjects and methods required for managing protected areas. PhD Thesis, School of

Environment, Griffith University, Gold Coast.

Worboys G., Lockwood M, & De Lacy T. (eds)

(2001) Protected area management. Oxford University Press, Cambridge.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Challenges facing protected
area planning for Australian
wet-tropical and subtropical
forests due to climate change

David W. Hilbert

CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Tropical Forest Research Centre, Atherton, Qld. 4883.

Abstract

While landscapes and their ecosystems are continuously changing over long time-scales, human
beings have and continue to cause very rapid changes at both regional and global scales. The
magnitude and rate of these changes have created severe challenges for protected area planning. This
brief essay reviews some published research about how climate has affected Australian rainforest over
millions of years, what has been predicted as possible impacts of anthropogenic climate change in the
future, the value of bioclimatic modelling, and briefly discusses a few of the implications of rapid
climate change for management and policy.

Introduction

At short time-scales, landscapes appear to be relatively unchanging but ecological research shows that
landscapes are constantly changing at many temporal and spatial scales. This dynamic is driven by
geological and evolutionary processes, climate change and human impacts of various kinds.

Because of the high rate and extent of landscape change due to human actions, the phrase “global
change” has come into currency.  Describing, understanding, and predicting rapid global change has
become a major scientific pursuit.  Managing protected areas in the face of rapid change has become
both more important and more difficult (Hilbert in press).  Climate change is likely to become the
most significant issue in all of Australia’s rainforest reserves and is exacerbated by the highly
fragmented nature of rainforests at both regional and continental scales

History of rainforest change

In the long-term and at a continental scale, all the remaining rainforests in Australia can be thought of
as refugia, small remnants of once extensive Miocene/Pliocene rainforests. A significant change
coincided with the arrival of humans c. 45 000 yr BP when fire-adapted, sclerophyll forests expanded
greatly and coniferous Araucaria dominated rainforests declined (Kershaw 1986). The result is that
Australia’s rainforests are “naturally” fragmented into a number of small and widely separated units.

Within each rainforest area, rainforest types are further fragmented by local climates that are mainly
caused by topography. For example, cool-temperature adapted forest types occur in the uplands of the
Wet Tropics bioregion where the climate is essentially warm-temperate, while the lowlands
experience a tropical climate and have different rainforest types. Long-term changes in climate
through the Quaternary changed the extent of rainforests as a whole (Fig. 1) and the relative
proportions of the various rainforest types (Hilbert et al. 2007).

Hilbert D. (2007)

Challenges facing protected area planning for Australian wet-tropical and subtropical forests

due to climate change. In: Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change. Proceedings of a WWF and
IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas symposium, 18-19 June 2007, Canberra. (eds M. Taylor & P.
Figgis) pp. 35-40. WWF-Australia, Sydney.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Within the Wet Tropics bioregion, lowland rainforests were very limited in small refugia at the cool,
dry Last Glacial Maximum (LGM, c. 18 000 yr BP) but expanded during the Holocene to their peak
near the beginning of the Holocene (c. 38 000 yr BP). Highland rainforests were restricted to refugia at
LGM but less so than lowland rainforest types. In contrast to other rainforest types, their minimum
extent occurs during the warm-wet Holocene Climatic Optimum (c. 5000 yr BP). For these forests,
interglacial, rather than glacial, refugia were perhaps the most important (Hilbert et al. 2007). Thus,
climate has a strong effect on the extent and distribution of rainforests at both regional and continental
scales.

European settlement and subsequent land-clearing certainly caused the most rapid change to the
landscape and caused further fragmentation within each of the regional rainforest refugia.
Anthropogenic climate change now and in the future is likely to be much more rapid than in the past
and is likely to pose a significant threat to tropical rainforest biodiversity in Australia.

Potential impacts of global climate change

I have estimated the changes in forest environments in the Wet Tropics bioregion due to 1ºC of
warming. The modelling used an artificial neural network that classifies environments (defined by
soil, terrain, and several climate variables) into fifteen forest structural types (Hilbert & van den
Muyzenberg 1999).

Rainforest environments are predicted to respond differentially to future warming. Lowland,
Mesophyll Vine Forest environments increase with warming while Upland, Complex Notophyll Vine
Forest environments respond either positively or negatively to temperature, depending on changes in
precipitation. Highland rainforest environments (Simple Notophyll and Simple Microphyll Vine Fern
Forests & Thickets) are predicted to decrease by 50% with only 1ºC of warming (Hilbert et al. 2001b).
The potential future distributions of upland and highland rainforest types under a climate change
scenario of +1ºC warming and –10% rainfall not only decline, but also become much more fragmented
(Fig. 2). If the upper range of predicted warming occurs (>c. 3.5

C), no appropriate environments are

predicted to remain within the Wet Tropics.

Unfortunately, these upland and highland rainforests are the habitat of most of the bioregion’s local
endemic species (Williams & Hilbert 2006) and iconic species are at risk (Hilbert et al. 2004).
Whether and where appropriate climates might come to exist further to the south, say in the Border
Ranges, is unknown.  However, regional rainfall patterns and topographic constraints imply that such
new habitat would be very far removed from the Wet Tropics.

Forest ecosystems have a large degree of inertia because of their long-lived trees, so actual
replacement of these forest types by others may take a very long time. Meanwhile, these forests are
likely to be quite stressed due to warmer and drier conditions than they are adapted to. Most forests
will experience climates in the near future that are more appropriate to some other structural forest
type. The strongest response to climate change will be experienced at boundaries between forest
classes and in ecotonal communities between rainforest and open woodland (Hilbert et al. 2001b;
Hilbert et al. 2001a). The propensity for ecological change in the region is high and, in the long term
significant shifts in the extent and spatial distribution of forests are likely.

I also investigated how the current spatial arrangement of forest types may limit their response to
future climate change and how transitions might be constrained by geographic, anthropogenic
(clearing), biological, and environmental factors.

Results for the Wet Tropics bioregion indicate that the spatial arrangement of vegetation may impose
relatively little constraint on the region’s potential change in response to small changes in climate
(Ostendorf et al. 2001). However, most other rainforests in Australia are much more fragmented than
the Wet Tropics and historic clearing may impose limits on their adaptation to climate change

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Values and limitations of climate impacts modelling

Projecting the impacts of climate change on vegetation distributions is essential for analyses of
regional and global carbon storage (Solomon & Kirilenko 1997; Solomon & Leemans 1997), the
conservation of biodiversity (Markham 1996), and the establishment of cost-effective monitoring
programs (Baker & Weisberg 1997).

Several types of models are being used to investigate the environmental controls on vegetation
distributions and the potential impacts of climate change, including: several kinds of static,
equilibrium models of the climatic controls on vegetation (Box 1981; Lenihan & Neilson 1993;
Monserud et al. 1996; Hilbert & van den Muyzenberg 1999); simulations of succession and gap-phase
dynamics (Shao et al. 1995); and frame-based simulation models (Chapin & Starfield 1997).

One approach to reduce the complexity and data needs of simulation models is the use of plant
functional types that respond similarly to specific perturbations (Smith et al. 1997; Kursar 1998).
However, species-centred or even community level approaches are rarely possible in the tropics
because of the lack of knowledge of both the distribution and ecological responses of individual
species (Hilbert & Ostendorf 2001).

All modelling methods have particular strengths and weaknesses and the choice of a particular method
is contingent on a number of factors including the specific objectives of the study, the level of
understanding of the particular system, availability of data, issues related to the spatial and temporal
scale, and, not uncommonly, the past experience of the investigators (Hilbert & Ostendorf 2001).

While empirical or correlational vegetation models have been criticised by some authors, they clearly
have been and will continue to be very useful in the context of global climate change. For many
tropical regions empirical approaches are the only possible approach at this time or for the foreseeable
future. These regions are too rich floristically to take a species-centred approach and appropriate plant
functional types have not been defined or their distributions mapped. Careful application of empirical
methods, including the artificial neural networks that I have applied and other machine learning
techniques, provide the possibility to make very useful contributions to the understanding and
conservation of rainforest areas with future climate change.

Management and policy implications

Climate change is a global phenomenon, driven by global patterns of population, fossil fuel use and
deforestation. Reducing the rate or extent of global warming is a global challenge.

However, national and local climate response policies and action plans can and must be developed that
attempt to minimise global warming’s negative impacts on Australia’s ecosystems and unique
biodiversity.

A fundamental difficulty is that political boundaries like national parks or World Heritage Areas are
static while environments and habitats are dynamic, and especially so with rapid climate change.
Thus, conservation of ecosystems and the biodiversity within them is not completely ensured by a
static network of reserves.

Consequently, policy and management needs to be on a large, biogeographic scale and consider land
currently outside the reserve system (Hilbert in press). It is possible that suitable habitat for many Wet
Tropics species will only occur hundreds of kilometres to the south in 50 to 100 years time.

Managers and reserve system planners need to anticipate where this habitat might occur and begin
considering the implications of such changes. Assuming that research identifies regions within the
Wet Tropics that might act as climate refugia - restricted regions where biota can survive despite
warming - these must be protected and managed to enhance their stability.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Similarly, connectivity among suitable habitat areas could be improved and efforts made to minimise
the interacting effects of other, more tractable, global change processes such as land clearing, linear
barriers, weeds and feral animals (Hilbert in press).

Finally, proactive management of the species that are most threatened by warming must be considered.
The possibility and desirability of translocating species to distant suitable areas may need to be
considered. However, these management issues and actions can not be discussed or implemented
before research has begun to fill the current information gaps.

Acknowledgements

Most of this research was carried out in partnership with the Rainforest CRC. Many people
contributed and I particularly acknowledge Mike Hopkins, Andrew Graham and Bertram Ostendorf.
Matt Bradford, Brett Buckley, J. van den Muyzenberg, Trevor Parker and Warwick Sayers provided
valuable technical assistance.

References

Baker W. L. and Weisberg, P. J. (1997) Using GIS to model tree population parameters in the Rocky Mountain National Park

forest-tundra ecotone. Journal of Biogeography

24, 513-526.

Box E. O. (1981) Macroclimate and plant forms: an introduction to predictive modelling in phytogeography. W. Junk, The

Hague.

Chapin F. S. & Starfield A. M. (1997) Time lags and novel ecosystems in response to transient climatic change in arctic

Alaska. Climate Change

35, 449-461.

Hibert D. W., Graham A. W. &. Hopkins M. S. (2007) Glacial and interglacial refugia within a long-term rainforest

refugium: the Wet Tropics Bioregion of NE Queensland, Australia. Palaeogeography Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology

251, 104–118.

Hilbert D. W. & Ostendorf B. (2001) The utility of empirical, artificial neural network approaches for modelling the

distribution of regional to global vegetation in past, present and future climates. Ecological Modelling

146, 311–327.

Hilbert D. W. (in press) The dynamic forest landscape of the Wet Tropics: present, past and future. In: Living in a dynamic

tropical forest landscape. (eds N. Stork N. & S. Turton) Blackwell Publishing.

Hilbert D. W., & van den Muyzenberg J. (1999) Using an artificial neural network to characterise the relative suitability of

environments for forest types in a complex tropical vegetation mosaic. Diversity and Distributions

5, 263-274.

Hilbert D. W., Bradford M., Parker T., & Westcott D. A. (2004) Golden bowerbird (Prionodura newtonia (sic) habitat in

past, present and future climates: predicted extinction of a vertebrate in tropical highlands due to global warming
Biological Conservation

116, 367-377.

Hilbert D. W., Graham, A. & Parker T. (2001a) Tall open forest and woodland habitats in the wet tropics: responses to

climate and implications for the northern bettong (Bettongia tropica). Tropical Forest Research Series. Online at
www.TFRSeries.jcu.edu.au on 20 Jul 2007.

Hilbert D. W., Hughes L., Johnson J., Lough J. M., Low T., Pearson R. G., Sutherst R. W. & Whittaker S. (2007)

Biodiversity conservation research in a changing climate. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Online at
www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/publications/pubs/biodiversity-climate-priorities.pdf on 20 Jul 2007.

Hilbert D. W., Ostendorf B. & Hopkins M. (2001b) Sensitivity of tropical forests to climate change in the humid tropics of

North Queensland. Austral Ecology

26, 590–60.

Kershaw A. P. (1986) Climate change and Aboriginal burning in north-eastern Australia during the last two

glacial/interglacial cycles. Nature

322, 47-49.

Kursar T. A. (1998) Relating tree physiology to past and future changes in tropical rainforest tree communities. Climatic

Change

39, 363-379.

Lenihan J. M. & Neilson R. P. (1993) A rule-based vegetation formation model for Canada. Journal of Biogeography

20,

615-628.

Markham A. (1996) Potential impacts of climate change on ecosystems: a review of implications for policy makers and

conservation biologists. Climate Research

6, 179-191.

Monserud R. A., Tchebakova N. M., Kolchugina T. P. & Denissenko O. V. (1996) Change in Siberian phytomass predicted

for global warming. Silva Fennica

30, 185-200.

Ostendorf B., Hilbert D. W. & Hopkins M. S. (2001) The effect of climate change on tropical rainforest vegetation pattern.

Ecological Modelling

145, 211–224.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Northern Australia’s tropical
savannas and rivers: building
climate resilience into globally
significant assets

Stuart Blanch

WWF-Australia, Level 1, 82 Smith Street, Darwin NT 0800 (Email: sblanch@wwf.org.au)

Abstract

This paper presents a case for building climate resilience into Northern Australia’s tropical savannas
and rivers by establishing a large interconnected network of protected areas and complimentary off-
reserve management to mitigate key threats, such as land clearing, weeds and wildfires.

Covering 111 million hectares of tropical savannas, Northern Australia supports the largest
ecologically intact tropical savanna system left in the world today. Approximately 9.4% is protected
within the National Reserve System, totalling an area of approximately 10.5 million hectares. Eight of
the 17 bioregions in the tropical savannas are very high or high National Reserve System Program
priorities.

Only a small proportion of the 700 tropical rivers and creeks in Northern Australia receive
comprehensive legal protection and effective on-ground management.

A recent study assesses risks from climate change to key ecosystems across Northern Australia as
being medium to high, including tropical savannas, rivers and coastal wetlands. Whilst experts assess
the adaptive capacity of such ecosystems as being low to medium, Northern Australia’s ecosystems
are arguably more resilient to climate shocks due to the relatively intact ecological condition of its
ecosystems.

Climate change is widely seen as a peculiarly southern Australian phenomenon. Northern Australia,
on the other hand, is often seen as escaping the impacts of climate change and a store for many of the
natural and mineral resources increasingly in short supply in the south. There is a risk that resources in
the “Northern Frontier” will be viewed as substitutes to compensate for declining productivity and
increasing scarcity in the south. Some of the major risks to Northern Australia’s ecosystems posed by
society’s responses to climate change are major farm development, piping water to southern Australia,
major liquefied natural gas developments, and uranium exploration and mining.

Introduction

By building a network of protected areas across tenures and including the full range of protected areas
types, through strong support and consent from Traditional Owners and partnerships with land

Blanch S. (2007)

Northern Australia’s tropical savannas and rivers: building climate resilience into globally

significant assets. In: Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change. Proceedings of a WWF and
IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas symposium, 18-19 June 2007, Canberra. (eds M. Taylor & P .
Figgis) pp. 41-46. WWF-Australia, Sydney.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

managers, landscape-scale connectivity and migration pathways could be established across 3000+ km
from Cairns to Broome to secure the long-term future of these globally significant assets.

Such an initiative would provide governments with a cost effective and practical option for both
mitigating the impacts of climate change, by ending major land clearing and abating emissions from
wildfires, and adapting to new climate regimes through investing in natural infrastructure and “Caring
for Country” actions.

As many look to Northern Australia’s water, lands and mineral resources for major development
opportunities, this approach provides an alternative vision for maintaining ecological processes and
developing sustainable livelihood options and strong communities based on a healthy environment.

WWF is working with Traditional Owners, Indigenous organisations, land managers, governments and
other stakeholders to develop this initiative.

Northern Australia’s tropical savannas and rivers

Northern Australia is an area of outstanding natural values and a living culture-scape for Indigenous
Traditional Owners who maintain the world’s oldest living culture. The north is special and unique.
Indigenous people have lived in Northern Australia for over 40 000 years, whereas European
settlement and colonisation has occurred for only the past century and a half.

Covering 111 million hectares of tropical savannas (WWF 2006a), Northern Australia supports the
largest ecologically intact tropical savanna system left in the world today (Woinarski et al. in prep).
There are 700 named rivers and creeks winding through the tropical savannas between Cairns and
Broome. The vast majority remain free-flowing, and unpolluted, and flow through catchments where
most of the native vegetation remains uncleared (ATRG 2004). Of the nearly four million hectares of
nationally important monsoonal wetlands (DEH 2005) and several hundred estuaries across the north
(EA 1996), most retain high levels of ecological integrity.

Protected Areas in Northern Australia

The tropical savannas and river systems of Northern Australia are one of the last great natural areas on
Earth. No other developed country supports such large areas in relatively intact ecological condition.

Based on calculations using the Collaborative Australian Protected Areas Database (DEH 2004) and
the Northern Australia and Trans-Fly savannas ecoregion (WWF 2006a), approximately 9.4% of the
111 million hectares of tropical savannas is protected within the National Reserve System, totalling an
area of approximately 10.5 million hectares. Eight of the 17 bioregions in the tropical savannas are
very high or high National Reserve System Program priorities (NRMMC 2004 p. 28, Sattler &
Glanznig 2006).

These are:
• Very high priority: Central Arnhem, Central Kimberley, Gulf Coastal, Gulf Fall & Uplands.
• High priority: Einasleigh Uplands, Daly Basin, Gulf Plains, Dampierland.

In general these bioregions retain vast areas of relatively intact ecosystems and areas of high
conservation value (Sattler & Creighton 2002). The very high priority bioregions have less than 2% of
their area reserved, whilst the high priority bioregions have 2-5% of their area reserved (NRMMC
2004).

Indigenous land ownership is widespread in Northern Australia. They are not just one of many
“stakeholders” with an interest in land management. The natural and cultural values of the Indigenous
estate are highly significant, but government support for management is often lacking. Indigenous
communities in many regions of Australia have established Indigenous Protected Areas (IPAs) to

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

assist them in caring for their country. Ten IPAs have been declared, or are in the process of being
established, within the tropical savannas region (DEW 2007). The IPA programme has been found to
be highly cost-effective and recent government reviews recommended additional resourcing (Gilligan
2006).

The establishment and management of protected areas, and protected rivers (see below), must respect
and support Native Title rights and the rights of Indigenous people as land owners. The creation of
protected areas must not be used to alienate Indigenous communities from their ancestral lands.

Protected Rivers in Northern Australia

Only a small proportion of the 700 tropical rivers and creeks in Northern Australia receive
comprehensive legal protection and effective on-ground management (Nevill this volume). Some
rivers and major creeks are fully or largely protected within protected areas, such as the South
Alligator River in Kakadu National Park, Prince Regent River in Prince Regent River Nature Reserve
(Kimberley), and the Jardine River in Jardine River National Park (Cape York Peninsula). Yet
effective on-ground management for many such protected areas is lacking.

Cross tenure river protection laws and programs exist or are being developed in Queensland, the
Northern Territory and Western Australia. Four Gulf Country rivers are currently protected under
Queensland’s Wild Rivers Act, with more soon to be protected on Cape York Peninsula (Nevill this
volume). A commitment exists from the Northern Territory Government for a Living Rivers program
and legislative framework, with the Daly River identified as the first river to be protected under this
program (Hansard, 18 August 2005, NT Legislative Assembly). The Government of Western
Australia’s Wild and High Conservation Value Rivers Program has identified 46 rivers and creeks in
the Kimberley region warranting protection. However no legislative protective mechanism currently
exists (DEC 2005).

Rivers are a major element of connectivity in landscapes by enabling aquatic species to move
longitudinally along rivers and laterally onto floodplains (WWF 2006b). River corridors also provide
critical habitat and water during the dry season for many terrestrial species which rely on floodplain
and riparian habitats for migration and dispersal. Tropical rivers often provide the only source of
freshwater for biodiversity during the long dry season (May-Nov). Protecting river systems within the
National Reserve System, through river protection laws, or as National Heritage places, provides a
significant opportunity for building resilience to climate change by removing pressures on riverine
ecosystems. Key threats are dams, weirs and floodplain levees which prevent or reduce the ability of
water, fish and other aquatic species to move along a river system and onto floodplains.

Northern Australia at risk due to climate change

Every major ecosystem type in Northern Australia is at medium or high risk from climate change, and
that none have high adaptive capacity (Hyder Consulting in prep.).

The report however also lays out opportunities to maintain and build resilience through ensuring
decisions made about the north’s future do not degrade the natural capacities of the savannas and
rivers to withstand climate-related shocks.

The report shows that the story of climate change in Northern Australia is about much more than just
the three iconic examples: the Great Barrier Reef, Kakadu wetlands and the Wet Tropics.

These icons are relatively well known, partly due to their economic importance to tourism and fishing
industries (PMSEIC 2007), but a conservation focus demands that we consider all ecosystems at risk.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Hyder Consulting (in prep.) is using existing information and expert opinion to assess climate change
risk, major impacts and adaptive capacity for major ecosystem types across the north. The key climate
change impacts are:
• Coastal low-lying wetlands in general, not just those in Kakadu National Park, which cover

perhaps three million hectares across the north, will be mostly impacted by sea level rise and
storm surge.

• Tropical coral reefs, not just the Great Barrier Reef but also those in the Gulf of Carpentaria and

off the coast of the Top End and Kimberley, are vulnerable to increasing ocean surface
temperatures and acidity.

• Tropical savanna woodlands and grasslands covering about 100 million hectares between Cairns

and Broome, are at risk from increases in fire frequency and intensity exacerbated by more exotic
grasses which benefit from elevated CO

concentrations.

• Tropical rivers may be affected by longer and more intense droughts, higher temperatures and

extreme rainfall events.

• Tropical rainforest including the Wet Tropics, but also vine forests and other drier rainforest types

found across the North could be impacted by increased savanna fire intensity and frequency,
increasing temperatures, and increased cloud elevation.

• Small islands face to sea level rise, more and stronger cyclones, and saline groundwater intrusion.

Climate change risk is assessed as high or medium for all these ecosystem types.

The adaptive capacity for each ecosystem type is assessed as being either low or medium. Few of the
major ecosystem types are assessed as being at low risk from the broad range of climate change
impacts. No ecosystems are assessed as having high adaptive capacity.

Depopulation of remote and rural areas may paradoxically undermine the ability of Traditional
Owners to “Care for Country”. The ability of Indigenous Traditional Owners, pastoralists and other
land managers to manage Northern Australia’s lands, rivers and seas will be further challenged by
climate change.

Looming development threat to northern ecosystems

Climate change is widely seen as a peculiarly southern Australian phenomenon.

Northern Australia is promoted as a treasure trove of natural and mineral resources to compensate for
declining productivity, increasing scarcity and resource exhaustion in the south (e.g. The Bulletin, 31
Oct 2006).

Some of the major risks to Northern Australia’s ecosystems are:

• Water diversion for irrigated farming: Rivers identified for major farm development schemes

include the Ord, Daly, Roper, Fitzroy and Flinders rivers (Australian Government 2007).

• Piping northern water south: Diversion of tropical waters south through massive pipelines has

been proposed as “solutions” to climate change-induced water scarcity, over-extraction and
inefficient water use in the south. The Kimberley-to-Perth canal proposal consists of a 3700 km
long canal to supply Perth’s urban and industrial water needs, and those in the mining and
irrigation regions in the Pilbara (Kimberley Expert Panel 2006). Proposals to pipe water from the
Ord River Dam to Perth have been proposed for many years (Osborne & Dunn 2004 p. 98).
Schemes to pipe water from northern Queensland’s rivers to Brisbane, central Queensland mines
and the Murray-Darling Basin are being investigated by the Australian Government’s Northern
Australia Taskforce and the Queensland Government.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

• Land conversion for farming and pastoralism: Savanna lands are seen by many as an opportunity

for a new northern agricultural frontier and a timely replacement for degraded and marginal lands
in southeastern and southwestern Australia beset by lower rainfall, higher evaporation and a
century and a half of development. For example, a major cotton farm development was proposed
for the lower and middle reaches of the Fitzroy River in Western Australia. Subsequently rejected
as infeasible by the Western Australian Government, the proposal included extracting 30% of the
flow in the Fitzroy River to irrigate 200 000 hectares of cotton (Stateline 2004).

• Natural gas extraction: Growing energy demand and moves to cut greenhouse gas emissions

underpin strong demand for liquefied natural gas (LNG) extraction off Northern Australia’s coast,
with tens of billions of dollars of investment in new projects being planned for the Bonaparte
Basin off the Kimberley coast and in the Timor Sea north of Darwin. Fragile coastal ecosystems,
coral reefs and islands, some of which have become refuges for medium-sized mammals and other
fauna now rare on the mainland, are being targeted for development of LNG processing plants and
ports.

• Uranium exploration and mining: Uranium exploration, and potentially mining within the next

decade, is booming across much of the north in response to global energy demand and may also
become a significant direct threat on natural ecosystems.

Building resilience to climate change in Northern Australia

Northern Australia’s ecosystems are at risk from climate change, but are arguably in a better position
to withstand the next century of climate change than are most ecosystems in southern Australia, or
indeed the many tropical areas of the world that have been, or are in the process of being,
unsustainably developed. Intact ecosystems in which native vegetation has been largely maintained
and rivers remain free-flowing provide greater capacity for species to migrate seasonally and move
over longer time scales as climate patterns change than highly fragmented ecosystems.

WWF is developing a North of Capricorn Initiative to promote conservation and sustainable
management of Northern Australia’s globally significant tropical savannas and rivers. Protected areas
must play the leading role, coupled with efforts to establish sustainable livelihoods and development
options that complement protected areas, ensure savannas remain protected from land clearing and
maintain free-flowing rivers.

A large interconnected network of protected areas conserving savannas, rivers and seas and securing
landscape-scale connectivity across the north will maintain resilience for ecosystems at risk of
development and permit species to migrate across this vast landscape.

This network could conceivably complement the recently announced Atherton to Alps corridor to be
established along the Dividing Range of eastern Australia to assist species to move as climate change
pushes many species southwards and to higher altitudes. Such landscape connectivity helps promote
adaptation to climate change not only by assisting species migration, but also by enabling the many
ecological flows and processes that are necessary for healthy ecosystems and biodiversity over the
long-term (Worboys, Mackey this volume).

The initiative is being developed through ongoing consultation and partnerships.

The initiative is of the same scale and global significance as major existing connectivity initiatives
around the world, such as the Amazon Region Protected Areas program, Boreal Forest Conservation
Initiative, Meso-American Biological Corridor, and the Yellowstone to Yukon corridor.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Protected areas alone will not prevent major loss of habitats and species in Northern Australia as
climate patterns change. Major actions required include:
• Maintaining landscape-scale connectivity also requires mitigating and stopping key threats across

entire landscapes both in and outside the reserve system such as major land clearing, altered fire
regimes and invasive species.

• Reinstating Indigenous fire regimes that reduce late dry season wildfires - already being funded as

a carbon abatement scheme.

• Banning the use of highly invasive exotic pasture grasses, such as gamba grass and para grass, is

also necessary to reduce fuel loads and habitat loss.

• Removing grazing from sensitive areas such as riparian zones and sensitive habitats, such as

native grasslands used by the threatened Gouldian finches, is also essential to recover the integrity
of vegetation communities and endangered species habitats.

• Assisting Indigenous communities, pastoralists and catchment groups to conserve and manage

ecosystems and species is fundamental to building the resilience of these ecological assets to adapt
to climate change.

References

ATRG (Australian Tropical Rivers Group) (2004) Securing the north: Australia’s tropical rivers. A Statement by the

Australian Tropical Rivers Group. WWF-Australia, Sydney.

Australian Government (2007) A National Plan for Water Security. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

DEC (Department of Environment and Conservation) (2005) Wild and High Conservation Value Rivers. Government of

Western Australia, Perth.

DEH (2005) Spatial database of Australia’s Nationally Important Wetlands. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

DEH (Department of Environment and Heritage) (2004) Collaborative Australian Protected Areas Database 2004.

Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

DEW (Department of the Environment and Water Resources) (2007) Locations of Indigenous Protected Areas in Australia,

May 2007. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Online at www.environment.gov.au/indigenous/ipa/map.html on 18
Jul 2007.

EA (Environment Australia) (1996) Australian Estuaries Database. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Gilligan B. (2006) The National Reserve System Programme 2006 Evaluation. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Hyder Consulting (in prep.) Assessment of the direct and indirect risks from human induced climate change to key

ecosystems in Northern Australia. WWF-Australia, Sydney.

Kimberley Expert Panel (2006) Options for bringing water to Perth from the Kimberley. Report of an independent review

commissioned by the Department of Premier and Cabinet. Government of Western Australia, Perth. Online at portal.
water.wa.gov.au/portal/page/portal/PlanningWaterFuture/Publications/KimberleyWaterSource/
Content/Finalreport_000.pdf on 13 Jul 2007.

NRMMC (Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council) (2004) Directions for the National Reserve System - a

partnership approach. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Osborne M. & Dunn C. (2004) Talking water. An Australian guidebook for the 21

Century. Farmhand Foundation, Sydney.

PMSEIC (Prime Minister’s Science, Engineering and Innovation Council) (2007) Climate change in Australia: Regional

impacts and adaptation – managing the risk for Australia. Unpublished report, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Sattler P & Creighton C. (2002) Australian Terrestrial Biodiversity Assessment. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Sattler P. & Glanznig A. (2006) Build ing Nature’s Safety Net: A review of Australia’s terrestria l protected area

system, 1991-2004. WWF-Australia, Sydney.

Stateline (2004) Kimberley Cotton: Battle lines drawn. Broadcast 18 June 2004, Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Perth.

Online at www.abc.net.au/stateline/wa/content/2004/s1137654.htm on 17 Jul 2007.

Woinarski J., Mackey B., Nix H., and Traill B. (in prep.) The Nature of Northern Australia. WildCountry Science Council,

Australian National University, Canberra.

WWF (2006a) Northern Australia & Trans-Fly savannas - A Global Ecoregion. WWF International, Gland. Online at www.

panda. org/about_wwf/where_we_work/ecoregions/australia_transfly_savannas.cfm on 18 Jul 2007.

WWF (2006b) Free-flowing rivers: Economic luxury or ecological necessity? WWF International, Gland.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Climate change: challenges
facing freshwater protected
area planning in Australia

Jon Nevill

OnlyOnePlanet Consulting, PO Box 106, Hampton Victoria 3188 (Email: jnevill@netspace.net.au)

Abstract

Temperatures are rising and rainfall declining over much of the Australian continent. Unfortunately,
rainfall declines are most pronounced in areas where water resources are most heavily used. In many
places the waters of our natural ecosystems have already been over-allocated for human use. Declining
rainfall leads to greater declines in stream flow, and this, combined with over-allocation, is placing
freshwater ecosystems under extreme pressure. State government stream flow management is now in
sharp focus, highlighting issues of ethics, competency and compliance.

Against this alarming situation, Australia’s network of freshwater protected areas fails to meet
standards and commitments set many years ago in both international agreements and Commonwealth
and State government policy, and little is being done to remedy the situation. In particular, our present
system is not comprehensive, adequate nor representative. Urgent action is required.

Amongst the recommendations of this paper, five are particularly important:
• Immediate action should be taken to expand Australia’s freshwater protected areas in a way which

is both ethically responsible and systematic.

• A comprehensive national inventory of inland aquatic ecosystems should be developed, leading to

a conservation status assessment of these ecosystems.

• Using information already at hand, action should be taken immediately to increase protection of

the nation’s freshwater ecosystems of highest natural value. Particular attention should be given to
rivers and subterranean ecosystems, partly through the creation of an Australian Heritage Rivers
System.

• A precautionary approach should be applied immediately to the management of the cumulative

impacts of small scale catchment developments, with the aim of capping water infrastructure
development well before the catchment enters a crisis situation.

• Weak development approval planning provisions which are failing to protect important natural

values should be replaced with stronger requirements for decision-makers to “seek to protect”
identified catchment natural values.

Introduction

Climate projections and their likely impacts on freshwater ecosystems are briefly discussed, followed
by a consideration of the problems Australia faces both in terms of protected area management, and in
terms of managing the impacts of developments within the wider landscape on these protected areas.
Most of this paper is devoted to consideration of the first of these latter two issues.

Nevill J. (2007)

Climate change: challenges facing freshwater protected area planning in Australia. In: Protected

Areas: buffering nature against climate change. Proceedings of a WWF and IUCN World Commission on
Protected Areas symposium, 18-19 June 2007, Canberra. (eds M. Taylor & P. Figgis) pp. 47-57. WWF-
Australia, Sydney.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

There is, however, another issue so important that it demands immediate attention and discussion. It is
the wider issue of the ethical stewardship of planet Earth. I suggest that many of the problems which
the planet now faces are directly or indirectly the result of a pervasive moral attitude towards the
planet: we act as if we own it. The current water crisis in the Murray-Darling has brought this ethical
issue into focus.

The paper concludes with a number of recommendations, including the accelerated development of a
comprehensive freshwater ecosystem inventory at the national level, and the development of an
Australian Heritage Rivers System mirroring Canada’s long-established system. While protection of
the best is urgent, we should not neglect the need for widespread restoration which is long overdue
(Lake 2005). The paper also recommends better planning to protect freshwater ecosystems in the
wider landscape, particularly by a precautionary approach to the management of the cumulative effects
of incremental catchment development, and the use of planning provisions obliging decision-makers
to protect identified high-value ecosystems during the planning approval process.

Terminology

In this paper I use the term “freshwater” as shorthand for “inland aquatic”. “Freshwater ecosystems”
encompasses the three major categories of lentic (slow moving), lotic (rivers and streams) and
subterranean ecosystems. The term “reserve” is used here as shorthand encompassing protected area
categories I to IV under the IUCN protected area definition.

The ethics of protected areas

The planet’s biodiversity is in decline, and freshwater ecosystems are in urgent need of protection
(Revenga & Kura 2003). The three greatest immediate threats to freshwater biodiversity in Australia
are: (1) the extraction of water from ecosystems for human use; (2) the destruction of natural values
within catchments, leading to water pollution and changes to water flow regimes and pathways; and
(3) the introduction of alien plants and animals. In many other nations the harvesting of freshwater
plants and animals themselves presents a fourth major threat.

The creation of freshwater protected areas is usually justified in terms of utilitarian needs relating to
the conservation of biodiversity, or the protection and enhancement of cultural, visual or recreational
amenity. Could such reserves also be justified in terms of ethics? In spite of the general absence of
discussion of ethics within areas of aquatic science or reserve management, a substantial and long-
standing literature exists from which an ethical basis for the establishment of protected areas can be
drawn. The landmarks within this literature are discussed by authors such as White (1967), Leopold
(1984) and more recently Callicott (1992).

Australia’s National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity underwent wide
agency consultation prior to publication, and, in its final form, was endorsed by the Australian
Government, all State and Territory governments, and by local government’s peak body. In it we find
a simple but articulate ethical statement (DEST 1996 p. 2):

“There is in the community a view that the conservation of biological diversity also has an
ethical basis. We share the Earth with many other life forms which warrant our respect,
whether or not they are of benefit to us. Earth belongs to the future as well as the present; no
single species or generation can claim it as its own. ”

This clear expression in a widely-endorsed government policy document of the beginnings of a land
ethic provided Australian scientists and natural resource managers with an opportunity to build
discussion and use of deeper ethical positions. Yet almost nothing has happened, and a decade has
passed now since this statement was published. We need to accord a right to peaceful coexistence to at
least a fair proportion of the other living residents of the planet, an approach which aligns with the
scientific recommendations of many conservation biologists.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

The recent water crisis in the Murray-Darling Basin, while exacerbated by climate change, is the direct
result of government water management regimes which are both incompetent and unethical.
Incompetent in so far as the Basin’s waters (both surface and linked groundwaters) have been grossly
over-allocated for human use (Tan 2000; Grafton 2007) and unethical in the sense that adequate
environmental flows, while highlighted in government policy documents, have seldom been delivered
in practice. Ladson & Finlayson (2004) discuss problems with environmental flow delivery
encountered in Victoria, and other States have similar problems.

Very recently this crisis has led to calls, tacitly endorsed by the very agencies responsible for the
crisis, for wetlands to be drained to supply “urgent” human needs within the Basin. This shameful
position typifies the unethical, short-sighted views which, at a wider scale, lie behind the ongoing
destruction of the world’s natural areas and ecosystems, along with the essential life-support services
they supply to planet Earth. We must actively promote the expansion and protection of freshwater
protected areas, at least partly on ethical grounds.

Climate change projections

Overall, Australian surface air temperatures warmed by around 0.9

C over the period 1910 – 2005

(ABS 2006). Analyses of rainfall data for the same period show significant declines over eastern and
southern parts of Australia, the zones where most of Australia’s human population resides. In the
northwest of Australia, rainfall has increased during this period.

Looking to the future, CSIRO climate models predict that rainfall will continue to decline over much
of the continent, especially the southwest (Pittock 2003). Temperature projections will increase,
especially in inland areas. Moisture balance projections predict drying trends over most of the
continent, particularly in inland areas where rainfall declines are expected.

In the southwest of Western Australia, rainfall over the last three decades has been around 15% lower
than historic long-term trends, and in some catchments this has translated into a 20-30% decline in
surface runoff (IOCI 2006). Further declines are predicted, according to Berti et al. (2004): “… an
11% reduction in annual rainfall by the middle of this century could likely result in a 31% reduction in
annual water yield”.

Where soil moisture is in deficit over the larger part of the year, and where surface aquifers are heavily
harvested, declines in rainfall will be amplified sometimes greatly as they translate to declines in
runoff and streamflow. Where surface waters have already been over-committed to extractive use
through binding water licence entitlements, river ecosystems are placed under extreme pressure.
Massive damage to freshwater ecosystems in areas of declining rainfall and high existing extractions,
such as the Murray-Darling Basin, is now taking place, and increasing damage is almost inevitable,
unless governments undertake licence buy-back to supply adequate environmental flows.

The Council of Australian Governments (COAG) Water Framework 1994 required State water
management agencies to undertake integrated management of surface and linked groundwater.
However, State agencies were slow to remedy legal and policy issues, and even slower to institute
practical reforms. In New South Wales for example, although double-counting of surface water and
linked groundwater entitlements has long been recognised, the State government has now been in
negotiation with farmers for licence buy-back for six years, with little progress made in retrieving
over-allocations. It took the Tasmanian Government five years to change legislative arrangements
which had divided management of surface and groundwaters between two separate government
agencies (Nevill & Phillips 2004). Many other examples could be found of government inertia and
incompetence on these issues.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Implications for aquatic ecosystems

Aquatic ecosystems will respond to various aspects of climate change, particularly changes to levels,
seasonality and extreme events, in both temperature and rainfall. Changes to wind, temperature and
cloudiness will influence evapo-transpiration levels. Changes to rainfall levels and intensity will
influence erosion levels and nutrient inputs to aquatic ecosystems. Both salinity and nutrient levels are
likely to increase in some areas, particularly in seasonally land-locked water bodies.

Aquatic vegetation will be reduced in many areas. In the Macquarie Marshes alone, Hassall and
Associates (1998) predict that both semi-permanent and ephemeral wetland vegetation will be reduced
by 20-40% of their original area by 2030 as a direct result of climate change.

Aquatic and semi-aquatic plants and animals will be directly affected by climate change in various
ways. Species with limited mobility, such as obligate freshwater species, will face major problems in
moving to colonise new environments as conditions change, and as a result extinctions are likely
(Hassall & Associates 1998).

Animals living near the limits of their temperature range will face obvious difficulties. Tasmanian
galaxiids, for example, have no southerly habitats available as water temperatures rise, and mountain
species are in an even worse situation. Introduced salmonids thrive in cold water and will face similar
problems and perhaps this may prove a small blessing. Waterbirds and fish dependent on rising flood
levels as breeding stimulus will struggle to maintain populations if flood frequency and intensity
decline.

Floods have many positive ecological functions, particularly in lowland ecosystems (Lake et al. 2006).
Declining river flows will affect native fish, such as the Macquarie Perch, dependent on flowing water
to breed. Some natives, however, are well adapted to drought. The introduced carp a major pest, while
adapted to slow moving turbid waters, also benefits from high flows which expose floodplain habitat.

Rising sea levels will intrude into low-lying coastal freshwater wetlands, causing major destruction of
these ecosystems. While noting multiple causes, Pittock (2003 p. 55) states:

“In some areas of the Northern Territory, dramatic expansion of some tidal creek systems has
occurred since the 1940s. In the Lower Mary River system, two creeks have extended more
than 4 km inland, invading freshwater wetlands (Woodroffe & Mulrennan, 1993; Bayliss et al.
1997; Mulrennan & Woodroffe, 1998). Rates of extension of saltwater ecosystems inland in
excess of 0.5 km per year have been measured (Knighton et al. 1992). The saltwater intrusion
has had dramatic effects on the vegetation of formerly freshwater wetlands with more than
17,000 ha adversely affected and a further 35–40% of the plains immediately threatened
(Mulrennan & Woodroffe 1998)”.

There will of course be winners and losers, ecologically speaking, from these climate-driven changes.
Overall, however, there is no doubt that a great many of Australia’s scarce and poorly protected
freshwater ecosystems face catastrophic damage, exacerbated by the pervasive over-allocation of the
waters of these ecosystems for human use.

Australia’s freshwater protected areas

The history of freshwater protected areas in Australia is, in large part, a story of good intentions not
carried through. There is also a plethora of different conservation tools that can be used to protect
aquatic ecosystems, but have largely remained under-utilised (Nevill & Phillips 2004 ss.1, 5 & 7;
Kingsford et al. 2005; Nevill 2007).

Water regulations and licences have been poorly enforced in all Australian States, and the legacy of
this lax culture remains today, with unfortunate consequences. Where farmers have invested on the

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

assumption that consumption in excess of licence limits will not be penalised, both users and
governments are caught in a no-win situation.

The Australian government can establish protected areas on Commonwealth land, and can encourage
or require limited protective action from the States where values of national importance (eg: Ramsar
sites) are threatened (Nevill & Phillips 2004 s.6.1).

Australia signed the international Ramsar Convention on Wetlands in 1971, which requires the
conservation and “wise use” of all wetlands including rivers, groundwater ecosystems and estuaries.
After 34 years, few Australian rivers have been directly protected under Ramsar, although some have
been listed in the Directory of Important Wetlands in Australia (DIWA) (DEH 2001). The DIWA
contains State-by-State lists of nationally (and internationally) important wetlands, including
Australia’s 64 Ramsar-listed wetlands.

Australia’s obligations under the Ramsar convention include the preparation of ecosystem inventories.
Although none of the State-wide inventories are comprehensive in the sense of containing up-to-date
information on value and condition, work is progressing slowly. New South Wales has digital
coverage of all wetlands including floodplains, and their protective status (Kingsford et al. 2004).
Victoria, Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory also have reasonably good State-wide
inventories of wetlands, with floodplains variously mapped. Other jurisdictions are preparing State
inventories, apart from Western Australia and the Northern Territory where the focus is on regional
inventories (Nevill & Phillips 2004).

Queensland has embarked on the most comprehensive inventory yet attempted in Australia.

State governments have listed some wetlands as Ramsar sites or included them within the DIWA.
Ramsar sites receive limited protection under the Commonwealth’s Environment Protection and
Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, as well as some State legislation such as Victoria’s State
Environment Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria) 2003. DIWA listing constitutes a referral trigger
in Queensland's Integrated Planning Act 1997. While the DIWA itself is not formally linked to any
Commonwealth or State protection policies other than in Queensland, it is taken into account by many
local government and regional resource planning bodies in making land use planning decisions.
Unfortunately, “taken into account” often means little in practice. Also, rivers or underground
ecosystems are not considered in a comprehensive way, despite the broad wetland definition of
Ramsar. Finally, Ramsar sites have also been subject to deliberate habitat destruction by landholders
on a large scale, sometimes followed by court action, and sometimes overlooked by State authorities.

Several discharge springs from the Great Artesian Basin (GAB) as well as four other aquatic
ecosystems are listed as “threatened ecological communities” under the Environment Protection and
Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), another protective mechanism albeit not very
effective at present.

While in theory the EPBC Act can protect against major new developments that may constitute a
direct threat to an area’s values, it cannot force proactive biodiversity management, nor can it control a
multitude of small widespread activities draining water flows from a site. Many GAB springs, known
to include endemics (Ponder 2004), are already extinct as a result of drawdown resulting from over-
use of artesian water. Failure to effectively control the cumulative effects of incremental water
development is causing major problems for biological reserves worldwide (Pringle 2001).

We are not protecting all of our most important aquatic ecosystems. Certainly the existing reserve
system includes some important freshwater areas (e.g. Ramsar sites) and other freshwater ecosystems
are contained within large terrestrial reserves (Nevill 2005). However the reserve system has not been
created with the benefit of a systematic analysis of wetland types, and little published information is
available on the extent to which representative freshwater ecosystems are protected within existing
reserves with the

exception of studies such as those in the Wimmera and northern Victoria (Fitzsimons

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

& Robertson 2003; Robertson & Fitzsimons 2006) and in NSW where there is an analysis of the
conservation status for broad wetland types (Kingsford et al. 2004).

A comprehensive assessment would identify the pre-European extent of different ecosystem types at a
finer level, their current extent, and the degree to which they are now protected (Fitzsimons &
Robertson 2005). The methodology for such studies is well established as similar investigations were
undertaken for forest ecosystems some years ago, as part of the Regional Forests Agreement (RFA)
process. Such a study, based on a national inventory, is urgent and overdue.

A review of the National Reserve System (NRS) using River Environment Types as surrogate riverine
ecosystem types was undertaken by Stein (2006). It is no surprise that this analysis showed that the
NRS has not yet achieved its goal of a comprehensive, adequate and representative protected area
system for riverine ecosystems. While nearly 7% of the stream length (at a map scale of 1:250 000)
falls within protected areas, nearly half of this protected length is potentially threatened by human
activities within unprotected upstream areas. Many of these streams are seasonal or ephemeral.

Few protected areas encompass entire river basins. Only around 2% of total river length lies within
protected areas, with upstream catchments protected, and no downstream dams. Furthermore, the
assessment showed there is significant bias within the NRS (Stein 2006).

While a few river ecosystems are well protected, many others including numerous rare and threatened
types, have very limited or no protection. A recent study undertaken by the Fenner School of
Environment and Society at the Australian National University (Stein et al. unpublished) similarly
found many of the rivers within protected areas in NSW were likely to be stressed due to over
allocation of water upstream.

A Commonwealth/State committee is currently examining options for protecting high value aquatic
ecosystems.

While these issues should be addressed, it will also be important, in the context of climate change, to
consider how aquatic ecosystems may need to change, and to try to facilitate natural change through
corridors and links between protected areas.

State freshwater protected area programs

All States are in theory at least, committed to the establishment of systems of protected areas which
contain representative examples of all major ecosystem types, including aquatic ecosystems. Victoria
has the earliest of these commitments (1987) and South Australia the most recent (2003) (Nevill &
Phillips 2004). Such programs are in line with Australia’s obligations under the World Charter for
Nature 1982 (a resolution of the United Nations General Assembly) and the Convention on Biological
Diversity 1992. However, it is the timing which is at issue. There have been extended delays in
implementing policy. With respect to freshwater protected areas, these obligations have not yet been
carried through in a systematic way in any Australian jurisdiction other than the Australian Capital
Territory.

Protection measures for entire rivers can be devised, but are poorly implemented in Australia. The
Victorian government identified 15 “representative rivers” for protection in 1992. Fifteen years later,
four of these rivers remain without management plans (Nevill & Phillips 2004). Victoria passed a
Heritage Rivers Act in 1992, nominating 18 rivers and 25 “natural catchments” to be protected. The
Act established a management sequence: (1) preparation of draft management plans; (2) public
comment and review; (3) ministerial endorsement of the plans; and (4) implementation. Draft
management plans for these 18 rivers were published for stakeholder comment in 1997. However,
after 10 years, all river management plans remain as drafts without the required ministerial
endorsement (Nevill & Phillips 2004) in spite of a government commitment to have them complete by
1998.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Several States have legislation in place aimed specifically at the protection of threatened species and
ecological communities. However, the area-protection provisions of these statutes have rarely been
used to protect freshwater environments. The “critical habitat” provisions of Victoria’s Flora and
Fauna Guarantee Act 1988, for example, have not yet been used to protect freshwater habitats (Nevill
& Phillips 2004). It is however worth noting that Victoria is the only State so far to extend the concept
of “no net loss” to “net gain” in relation to developments impacting on important areas of native
vegetation, including wetland vegetation (Nevill & Phillips 2004).

In line with the international Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (FAO 1995) Queensland,
New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania all have fisheries legislation providing for
the establishment of aquatic protected areas. Although there has been progress in the marine
environment, none of these provisions have yet been used to protect freshwater habitats (Nevill &
Phillips 2004).

Both Western Australia and New South Wales considered legislation similar to Victoria’s Heritage
Rivers Act 1992, but there was inadequate parliamentary support in the face of opposition by farmer
and fisher groups. Western Australia developed a Wetlands Conservation Policy in 1997 which
covered rivers using the Ramsar definition. However, ten years later, the protective provisions
foreshadowed in this policy have not yet been put in place in a comprehensive way (Nevill & Phillips
2004).

In the mid-1990s New South Wales amended the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 to provide for
the declaration of “wild rivers”. No action was taken until December 2005, when the NSW
Government announced the listing of five rivers, all within existing terrestrial protected areas (Nevill
2005).

The Queensland Government started work on a rivers policy in 2000, which developed into a
commitment to provide legislative protection for wild rivers. Nineteen rivers were proposed for
consideration in 2004, and a policy implementation paper was provided to stakeholders. The Wild
Rivers Act 2005 came into effect on 14 October 2005. It is to be hoped that wild river declarations
under this statute will be fully implemented and effective. So far six rivers have been nominated and
declared under the Act. The recent history of native vegetation protection legislation in several States,
as well as Victoria’s Heritage Rivers Act, has indicated that effective implementation can be a major
stumbling-block, even with legislative protection in place.

South Australia and the Northern Territory (NT) both have government policy statements committing
to the protection of representative examples of all major freshwater ecosystems. However, at this stage
neither jurisdiction has funded a program to carry out these commitments in a systematic way (Nevill
& Phillips 2004). The Northern Territory Parks and Conservation Masterplan 2006 reinforces earlier
commitments, and it is to be hoped that action will now be taken.

In the Northern Territory, as in northern Queensland and Western Australia, significant areas of land
(around 50% in the case of the NT) are Indigenous owned. The Commonwealth’s Indigenous
Protected Area (IPA) program has achieved successes, and could be extended to assist Indigenous
groups protect freshwater ecosystems.

The recent Tropical Rivers Program (a Commonwealth initiative under Land and Water Australia) is
enhancing knowledge of tropical freshwater ecosystems and measures needed to protect them.

Tasmania’s Nature Conservation Strategy 2000 and the subsequent State Water Development Plan
established a government commitment to develop comprehensive protection for all freshwater
ecosystem values, and the program commenced in a systematic way. The Conservation of Freshwater
Ecosystem Values (CFEV) Project undertook the design phase of this work, which, when completed,
will establish the scientific basis for the identification and selection of freshwater protected areas
across the State, as well as providing information for regional natural resource planning initiatives.
The CFEV project was expected to produce its final report in 2005. No specific funds were allocated

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

for project implementation in the 2005/6 or 2006/7 State budgets, in spite of the fact that the project is
expected to identify priority sites for protection.

The above discussion indicates that excellent scientific preparation and good policy development do
not guarantee effective implementation.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Creation of a comprehensive freshwater reserve system is achievable. Techniques are available for
managing highly connected linear reserves (Saunders et al. 2002). There are a variety of under-utilised
conservation tools for protecting and managing Australia’s aquatic ecosystems, including
environmental flows, protected areas, natural resource management plans and landholder incentives
(Whitten et al. 2002; Kingsford et al. 2005).

Governments should implement existing State policies to establish systems of representative protected
areas for freshwater ecosystems, in line with our international commitments under the Convention on
Biological Diversity 1992 (Dunn 2000; Georges & Cottingham 2001; Nevill 2001). Where
rehabilitation is undertaken, restoring water flows and quality must be accompanied by restoration of
riparian and flood plain vegetation (Lake et al. 2007), along with control of alien species if practical.

Urgent action by all three levels of Australian government should encompass:
• Major rivers where ecosystems remain substantially intact should be protected (Morton et al.

2002; Wentworth Group 2002, 2003). Several models of protection have been proposed such as
“heritage rivers” and “conservation rivers” which would both receive special protection (Cullen
2002; Wentworth Group 2003). There is potential for introducing an Australian Heritage River
system loosely based on the Canadian Heritage River System (Kingsford et al. 2005). This system
has worked well in Canada and there is no doubt that it would work effectively in Australia, with
Commonwealth and State government commitment. Some whole catchments already receive some
protection from specific agreements (e.g., Lake Eyre Basin Agreement, Paroo River Agreement).
The inclusion of “representative rivers” within the Ramsar framework should also be promoted
(Nevill & Phillips 2004).

• Ecosystem inventories also need accelerated development to underpin protected area identification

and selection, but also to support sympathetic management of biodiversity values within
bioregional planning frameworks. Classification and mapping techniques must be used
thoughtfully in reserve design and selection (Fitzsimons & Robertson 2005) to ensure an adequate
CAR protected area system. Inventories should be constructed to support a variety of classification
methods (Blackman et al. 1992; Finlayson et al. 2002; Ramsar Secretariat 2002). Aquatic
bioregionalisations should be developed, partly based on a national freshwater ecosystem
database.

• The control of cumulative effects, particularly within catchment-scale management frameworks,

needs much greater attention (Pringle 2001; Collares-Pereira & Cowx 2004). The precautionary
approach, widely accepted but seldom applied, needs strong support especially where high
conservation values remain intact (Nevill 2003).

• Planning procedures where decision-makers are obliged, by law, to “seek to protect” the values of

identified high-conservation status ecosystems, during assessment of proposed developments,
needs to replace existing planning requirements that impacts merely “be taken into account”
(Nevill 2007).

• All Australian jurisdictions should accelerate the development of freshwater protected areas as

recommended by the 2004 Sydney Conference on Freshwater Protected Areas (WWF Australia
and the Inland Rivers Network) (Kingsford & Nevill 2006)

• The rehabilitation of significant aquatic sites should remain a priority (Koehn & Brierley 2000;

Rutherfurd et al. 2000). Restoration of Australia’s degraded aquatic ecosystems, not just
significant sites, is long overdue.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

• Stakeholders with common interests need to start building consensus and raising awareness.

Adequate stakeholder consultation in the selection of protected areas is essential to allow for the
inclusion of local and regional values, and to build community support for protected area
programs and the wider sympathetic management of utilised ecosystems (Kingsford et al. 2005).

• Follow through on the Directions for the National Reserve System (NRMMC 2005), direction

seven of which committed governments to:

“Review the current understanding of freshwater biodiversity in relation to the NRS CAR
reserve system, and finalise an agreed approach, which may include future amendments of the
NRS Guidelines, to ensure freshwater ecosystems are appropriately incorporated within the
NRS”.

This initiative needs to be followed through, as does the Murray Darling Basin Commission’s
native fish strategy (MDBMC 2003). The recommendations of Phillips and Butcher (2005) for
the development of “river parks” within the Basin need urgent additional funding, especially with
regard to community awareness and involvement.

The need to establish comprehensive and representative freshwater protected areas is urgent, given
increasing concerns about limited water availability for Australia’s cities, industries and agriculture
and the ongoing degradation of aquatic ecosystems. This should be accompanied by effective land and
water management that is reoriented to the environmental requirements of aquatic ecosystems.

The most urgent initiative appears to be a National Reserve System gap analysis which would identify
those ecosystems most at risk. A comprehensive national assessment of the conservation status of
freshwater ecosystems should be undertaken immediately. Such a study would provide a platform for
the systematic expansion of the nation’s freshwater protected areas, as well as a catalyst for innovative
bottom-up conservation approaches driven by local stakeholders. This should include establishment of
an Australian Heritage River system, coordinated by governments, and supported by regional
communities.

Acknowledgements

My thanks to all those who contributed to the scientists’ consensus statement on freshwater protected
areas 2005 (available on www.onlyoneplanet.com.au) and especially to Richard Kingsford and Janet
Stein. Special thanks too for constructive comment on this paper in draft from Sam Lake, Brian
Finlayson, Tony Ladson, Michael Dunlop, Liz Dovey and Brendan Ebner.

References

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2006) Climate Change: annual mean temperature anomalies; issues and tends 2006. Online

at www.abs.gov.au on 3 March 07.

Bayliss B. L., Brennan K. G., Eliot I., Finlayson C. M., Hall R. N., House T., Pidgeon R. W. J., Walden D., & Waterman P.

(1997) Vulnerability assessment of predicted climate change and sea level rise in the Alligator Rivers Region, Northern
Territory, Australia. Supervising Scientist Report 123, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Berti M. L., Bari M. A., Charles S. P. & Hauck E. J. (2004) Climate change, catchment runoff and risks to water supply in

the south-west of Western Australia. Western Australia Department of Environment, Perth.

Blackman J. G., Spain A. V. & Whitey L. A. (1992) Provisional handbook for the classification and field assessment of

Queensland wetlands and deepwater habitats. Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage, Brisbane.

Callicott J. B. (1992) Principal traditions in American environmental ethics: a survey of moral values for framing an

American oceans policy. Ocean and Coastal Management

17, 299-325.

Callicott J. B. (2003) Wetland gloom and wetland glory. Philosophy and Geography

6, 33-45.

Collares-Pereira M. & Cowx I. G. (2004) The role of catchment-scale environmental management in freshwater fish

conservation. Fisheries Management and Ecology

11, 303-13.

Cowx I. G. & Collares-Pereira M. J. (2002) Freshwater fish conservation: options for the future. In: Conservation of

freshwater fishes: options for the future. (eds M. Collares-Pereira, I. G. Cowx & M. M. Coelho) Blackwell Science,
Oxford.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Cullen P. (2002) The heritage river proposal; conserving Australia’s undamaged rivers. World Congress on Aquatic

Protected Areas, Cairns Australia, August 14-17 2002. Australian Society for Fish Biology, Perth.

DEH (Department Environment & Heritage) (2001) Directory of important wetlands in Australia; third edition.

Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Online at www.deh.gov.au on 22 Jan 05.

DEST (Department of the Environment, Sport and Territories) (1996) National strategy for the conservation of Australia’s

biological diversity. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Online at www.erin.gov.au/net/biostrat.html on 1 May 2000.

Dunn H. (2000) Identifying and protecting rivers of high ecological value. Occasional Paper 01/00, Land and Water

Resources Research and Development Corporation, Canberra.

Finlayson C. M., Begg G. W., Howes J., Davies J., Tagi K. & Lowry J. (2002) A manual for an inventory of Asian wetlands.

Wetlands International, Kuala Lumpur. Online at www.wetlands.org/awi/AWI_Manual.pdf, on 12 April 05.

Fitzsimons J. A. & Robertson H. A. (2005) Freshwater reserves in Australia: directions and challenges for the development

of a comprehensive, adequate and representative system of protected areas. Hydrobiologia

552, 87-97.

Fitzsimons J. A. & Robertson, H. A. (2003) Wetland reservation status and reserve design in the Wimmera, Victoria.

Ecological Management and Restoration

2, 140-143.

Georges A. & Cottingham P. (2001) Biodiversity in inland waters: Priorities for its protection and management,

Recommendations from the 2001 Fenner Conference on the Environment. Technical Report 1/2002, Cooperative
Research Centre for Freshwater Ecology, Canberra.

Grafton Q. R. (2007) An economic evaluation of the National Plan for Water Security. In: Policy Briefs: Dry Water (eds Q.

Grafton, J. Bennett & K. Hussey). Crawford School of Economics and Government, Australian National University,
Canberra.

Hassall & Associates (1998) Climate change scenarios and managing the scarce water resources of the Macquarie River.

NSW Department of Land and Water Conservation, NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service and CSIRO Atmospheric
Research report to the Australian Greenhouse Office.

IOCI (Indian Ocean Climate Initiative) (2006) Climate overview. Online at www.ioci.org.au/what on 21 Feb 06.

Kingsford R. K. & Nevill J. (2006) Urgent need for a systematic expansion of freshwater protected areas in Australia: a

scientists’ consensus statement. Online at www.onlyoneplanet.com.au on 20 May 07.

Kingsford R. T., Brandis K., Thomas R. F., Crighton P., Knowles E. & Gale E. (2004) Classifying landform at broad spatial

scales: the distribution and conservation of wetlands in New South Wales, Australia. Marine and Freshwater Research

55, 1-15.

Kingsford R. T., Dunn H., Love D., Nevill J. Stein J. & Tait J. (2005) Protecting Australia’s rivers, wetlands and estuaries of

high conservation value: a blueprint. Department of Environment & Heritage, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Knighton

A. D., Woodroffe C. D. & Mills K. (1992) The evolution of tidal creek networks, Mary River, Northern Australia.

Earth Surface Processes and Landforms

17, 167-90.

Koehn J. & Brierley G. (2000) A framework for river restoration. Land and Water Resources Research & Development

Corporation, Canberra.

Ladson A. R. & Finlayson B. L. (2004) Specifying the environment's right to water: lessons from Victoria. Dialogue: Journal

of the Academy of Social Sciences in Australia

23, 19-28.

Lake S. (2005) Perturbation, restoration and seeking ecological sustainability in Australian flowing waters. Hydrobiologia

522, 109-120.

Lake S., Bond N. & Reich P. (2006) Floods down rivers: from damaging to replenishing forces. Advances in Ecological

Research

39, 41-58.

Lake S., Bond N. & Reich P. (2007) Linking ecological theory with stream restoration. Freshwater Biology

52, 597-615.

Leopold A. (1948) A sand county almanac. Ballantine, New York.

MDBMC (Murray-Darling Basin Ministerial Council) (2003) Native fish strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin 2003-2013.

Murray- Darling Basin Commission, Canberra.

Morton S., Cristofani P., Cullen P., Possingham H. & Young M. (2002) Sustaining our natural systems and biodiversity. An

independent report to the Prime Minister’s Science, Engineering and Innovation Council, CSIRO and Environment
Australia, Canberra.

Mulrennan

M. E. & Woodroffe C. D. (1998) Saltwater intrusions into the coastal plains of the Lower Mary River, Northern

Territory, Australia. Journal of Environmental Management

54, 169-188.

Nevill J. & Phillips N. (2004) The Australian freshwater protected areas resource book. OnlyOnePlanet, Melbourne.

Nevill J. (2001) Freshwater biodiversity: protecting freshwater ecosystems in the face of infrastructure development. Water

Research Foundation, Canberra.

Nevill J. (2003) Managing the cumulative effects of incremental development in freshwater resources. Environmental and

Planning Law Journal

20, 85-94.

Nevill J. (2005) Counting Australia’s protected rivers. OnlyOnePlanet, Melbourne. Online at www.onlyoneplanet.com.au on

29 May 05.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Nevill J. (2007) Policy failure: Australian freshwater protected area networks. Australian Journal of Environmental

Management

14, 35-47.

NRMMC (Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council) (2005) Directions for the National Reserve System - a

partnership approach. Department Environment & Heritage, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Phillips B. & Butcher R. (2005) River Parks: Building a system of ‘Habitat Management Areas’ across the Murray-Darling.

An international and national review of freshwater ‘protected areas’ for conserving aquatic biodiversity and river health.
Murray-Darling Basin Commission Publication No. 07/06, Canberra.

Pittock B. (ed. ) (2003) Climate change: an Australian guide to the science and potential impacts. Australian Greenhouse

Office, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Ponder W. F. (2004) Endemic aquatic macroinvertebrates of artesian springs of the Great Artesian Basin – progress and

future directions. Records of the South Australian Museum Monograph Series

7, 101-110.

Pringle C. M. (2001) Hydrologic connectivity and the management of biological reserves: a global perspective. Ecological

Applications

11, 981-998.

Ramsar Secretariat (2002) Resolution VIII. 6 on wetland inventory. Gland, Switzerland. Online at

www.ramsar.org/res/key_res_viii_06_e.htm on 28 Mar 05.

Revenge C. & Kura Y. (2003) Status and trends of biodiversity of inland water ecosystems. Technical Series No. 11,

Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal, Canada.

Robertson H. A. & Fitzsimons J. A. (2006) Wetland reservation on Victoria’s Northern Plains and riverine forests

Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria

11, 139-148.

Rutherfurd I., Jerie K. & Marsh N. (2000) A rehabilitation manual for Australian streams. Land and Water Australia,

Canberra.

Saunders D. L., Meeuwig J. J. & Vincent A. C. J. (2002) Freshwater protected areas: strategies for conservation,

Conservation Biology.

16, 30-41.

Stein J. L., Hutchinson M. F. & Stein J. A. (2007) Statewide modelling of natural flow and upstream water allocations. NSW

Department of Natural Resources, Sydney.

Stein, J. L. (2006) A continental landscape framework for systematic conservation planning for Australian rivers and streams.

Ph. D. Thesis, Australian National University, Canberra.

Tan P. L. (2000) Conflict over water resources in Queensland: all eyes on the Lower Balonne. Environmental and Planning

Law Journal

17, 545-568.

Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists (2002) Blueprint for a living continent: a way forward. WWF-Australia, Sydney.

Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists (2003) Blueprint for a national water plan, WWF-Australia, Sydney.

White L. (1967) The historical roots of our ecological crisis. Science

155, 1203-1207.

Whitten S., Bennett J., Moss W., Handley M. & Phillips B. (2002) Incentive measures for conserving freshwater ecosystems.

Environment Australia, Canberra.

Woodroffe C. D. & Mulrennan M. E. (1993) Geomorphology of the Lower Mary River Plains, Northern Territory. Australian

National University and the Conservation Commission of the Northern Territory, Darwin.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Protected area planning and
management for eastern
Australian temperate forests
and woodland ecosystems
under climate change – a
landscape approach

Ian Mansergh

and David Cheal

Department of Environment and Sustainability, 8 Nicholson Street Melbourne, Victoria. 3002.

Department of Environment and Sustainability, 123 Brown Street Heidelberg, Victoria 3084.

Abstract

The ecological effects of rapid global warming are predicted to be dramatic with mass species
extinctions worldwide. For temperate eastern Australia, a drier and warmer environment will affect
survival, distribution and abundance of species, including exotics, and ecological processes within and
outside reserves. Ecological connectivity and fragmentation, already major conservation issues, will be
exacerbated by climate change and migration will be inhibited where suitable habitat connectivity is
poor or non-existent.

The potential effects of global warming on the reserve system within the eucalypt forests and
woodlands of temperate eastern Australia are examined from ecological and land-use perspectives.
Species may adapt allowing persistence within their existing ranges or be pressured to migrate to new
climatically suitable areas. The current reserve system may be inadequate for one of its key purposes:
long-term conservation of biodiversity assets and ecological processes. Other key findings are:
• Maximise health and robustness of native vegetation using natural processes (e.g. re-colonisation,

natural selection) to facilitate resilience of affected biota.

• Conservation of woodland environments, already very highly depleted and fragmented, require

urgent land-use/management change.

• The reserve system should be expanded and/or augmented through land management change.
• A system of biolinks (restoration of the ecological connectivity, between reserves and climate

refugia), a major new land-use at a continental scale, is required. Ecological space for natural
adaptation requires land-use change.

Adaptation to climate change will become a societal imperative and management of the reserve system
will be seen in the landscape and intergenerational contexts. Emerging trends that may improve the
capacity of the reserve and off reserve systems include the decline of the relative economic importance
of agriculture and emerging socio-economic trajectories of rural landscapes and ecosystem services.

Biolinks are ecological infrastructure to manage a major new risk of this century and provide part of a
new landscape vision - carbon source landscapes of past agriculture would become carbon sinks with
enhanced biodiversity assets.

Mansergh I. & Cheal D. (2007)

Protected area planning and management for eastern Australian temperate

forests and woodland ecosystems under climate change – a landscape approach. In: Protected Areas: buffering
nature against climate change. Proceedings of a WWF and IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas
symposium, 18-19 June 2007, Canberra. (eds M. Taylor & P. Figgis) pp. 58-72. WWF-Australia, Sydney.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Introduction

Climate change is expected to induce major changes to global ecosystems and biodiversity with 15-
37% of the world’s species likely to be “committed to extinction” (Thomas et al. 2004; IPCC 2007).
Bioclimatic modelling suggests that species losses in eastern Australia will fall in this range (Brereton
et al. 1995; Newell et al. 2002). Climate is an abiotic variable that is a major determinant of the
distribution and abundance of biota. Increases in atmospheric CO

concentration and changes in the

spatial distribution of climate variables (temperature, precipitation) will induce changes to a range of
biological and ecological processes in the terrestrial biota including:
•  The structure and function of ecosystems;
•  The physiological, genetic and/or behavioural make up of species;
•  Phenology (flowering, breeding etc.);
•  Growth rates, nutritional value and community structure;
•  Fire and water regimes; and
•  The spatial distribution of species/communities.

Empirical evidence from across the globe indicates many of these changes can now be observed from
the warming of the past five decades, e.g. phenology (Menzel et al. 2006) and gene frequency change
(Umina et al. 2005).

Eucalypt forests and woodlands are the dominant biomes of temperate eastern mainland Australia
supporting a wide range of vegetation communities and variation in this relatively wetter and more
fertile part of the continent (Hobbs & Yates 2000; NLWRA 2001b). Their distribution is coincident
with the most populous and agriculturally rich regions of the continent. Over the past 200 years,
agriculture and forestry have depleted and fragmented natural environments, particularly eucalypt
woodland where there has been a loss of the broad fabric of the landscape (Hobbs & Yates 2000;
NLWRA 2001b).

The southeastern Australian woodland biome has a concentration of bioregions under environmental
stress (NLWRA 2002). The reserve system, although increasing in recent times, was established from
land available only after the needs of agriculture, forestry and settlement were satisfied. Protected
areas thus remain fragmented and include areas that are far from pristine condition as a result of
previous land-uses (e.g. ECC 2002).

This paper examines the potential effects of climate change on eucalypt forest and woodlands in the reserve
system from a broad land-use and management perspective. Using a conceptual framework of species
response and predicted climatic changes it is suggested that although there will be capacity for adaptation
within the reserve system, restoration of the ecological connectivity and habitat matrices between reserves
and climatic refugia are required, to prevent further depletion of native biodiversity (Soulé et al. 2002).
Other environmental factors associated with a warmer and drier climate, such as changed fire regimes and
reduced water availability, will affect the spatial expression of vegetation and habitats over time.

In 2005 agriculture produced 16.8% of Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions (Australian Government
2007). Since 1990, “forest land converted to crop and grassland” provided a substantial input to the net
emissions. However, Victoria and Western Australia have converted this sector from source to sink in 15
years. Agriculture has declined in relative economic importance (see NLWRA 2001a) and current socio-
economic trends in land-use toward “amenity landscapes” (Barr 2005) may be able to promote improvement
in habitat connectivity post-agriculture which could also convert carbon source landscapes to sinks. Markets
for ecosystem services and carbon sequestration and new foci for reserve management such as water
production will be part of adaptation.

Protected Areas: buffering nature against climate change

Species responses to climate change

A conceptual model of species responses to climate change is shown in Figs 1a and b. The response of
ecological communities is likely to be more than the sum of species responses due to interactions and
dependencies among species.

The distribution of a species across its realised range is idealised as a normal distribution with the
majority of the populations in the central parts of the range (Brown 1984). Habitat loss or
fragmentation, introduction of a novel predator or disease within or throughout the range drives down
abundance (Opham & Wascher 2004; Fig. 1a,b). Within the range species fitness (behavioural,
physiological, genetic) is continually being tested and explored through re-colonisation etc. Within a
population there will be genetic or phenotypic variability that allows adaptation to changes in the
biotic and abiotic environment. Australian species have evolved on the driest human-inhabited
continent with highly variable climates. However, vegetation in the southeast already appears water
stressed in a global context (Woodward & Rocheforte 1991). Behind the realised range lies the
potential range. Kearny and Porter (2004) viewed the “fundamental niche” as the set of conditions and
resources that allow a given organism to survive and reproduce in the absence of biotic disturbance.
The range within a fundamental niche (Fig. 1a items e-f) is likely to be broader than existing ranges
due to untapped plasticity and genetic variability.

Under changed climate, populations of a species may respond in two broad ways or a combination of
these at the same time. Firstly, a species may adapt to changed conditions within the existing range
through phenotypic plasticity or evolution (Fig. 1a,b). Umina et al. (2005) have observed frequency
changes in climate sensitive genes of Drosophila equivalent to a 4

latitude southward movement

under the warming that occurred since the 1970s. In the absence of adaptation, populations may
contract to refugia or go extinct within the present range.

Secondly, a species may migrate to keep pace with shifting climatic range (Bennett et al. 1992). This
option is only available if suitable habitat matrices are, or become available, that allow such movement
(Fig. 1b). Brereton et al. (1995) modelled shifts in bio-climatic envelopes of 42 vertebrate species of
south eastern Australia and observed significant range shifts. Changes in species distribution and
abundance will change interactions in the biotic environment (e.g. diseases incidence, flowering time
and breeding, predator-prey interactions).

Each species can adapt only within the potential available to it (Fig. 1a, b) and in interaction with its
biotic community. The relative magnitude of in situ adaptation (including contraction) versus
migration remains unknown for any species.

Changes have already been observed in a range of biological and ecological phenomenon across a
range of environments, both in situ and in experimentally induced elevated CO

and temperature

regimes (e.g. Opham & Wascher 2004). For example, forbs (C3) and grasses (C4) respond differently
to elevated CO

. As a result, the floristic composition of the ground cover under grassy woodlands will

likely favour grasses relative to forbs in a warmer world, with cascading affects up the food chain to
grazers and predators.

About a quarter of eucalypts have a narrow modelled bioclimatic range (<1

C) , with a similar

percentage in a narrow rainfall band (Howden & Gorman 1999). Conversely, common woodland
canopy associates, White box (Eucalyptus albens) and Yellow gum, (E. melliodora), extend from
southeastern Queensland to South Australia (see Landsberg 2000) suggesting a broader plasticity.

These examples suggest a two-tiered risk management approach. Firstly, to make current habitats
including reserves as healthy as possible to reduce the effect of unnatural perturbations and protect
source populations and refugia. Secondly, to ensure connectivity and permeability between habitats.
These two primary strategies are likely to be more effective than reliance on active translocations (see
below).