Feasibility Assessment of Ecological Outcomes (indicators) proposed for the Basin Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Program

"June 2010".

Project Number: Part 1 - Implementing a systems approach to support adaptive management of river and wetland health in the MDB; Part 2 - Review of Interventions and Development of habitat Preference Curves for biota at Murray Icon Sites; Part 3 - Natural versus Artificial watering of floodplains and wetlands - M/BUS/248.

MDFRC item.

1 of 4 reports associated with project see (Ecosystem Services and Productive Base for the Basin Plan), (Clarification of Definitions in the Water Act 2007), and (‘Natural’ versus ‘Artificial’ watering of floodplains and wetlands).

The purpose of this report is to determine the feasibility of developing standardized monitoring protocols for reporting under the Basin Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Program. The Independent Sustainable Rivers Audit Group (ISRAG 2009) report identified 75 potential ecosystem responses of relevance to the Basin Plan actions and objectives (physicochemical, biological and ecosystem condition) and has provided a scoping of existing supporting services, datasets, development of indices and protocols as well as constructing metamethods for an overall recommended approach toward each. Of these, 18 have been short listed for review and appear in Appendix 1. The ISRAG report recommendations were used to determine the metamethods for which the least information was available. These metamethods were noted as requiring substantial R&D and/or expert advice as well as little or no known datasets or protocols being available. Consequently, ISRAG noted the capacity to conduct these methods as poor or unknown. The following four metamethods identified for the feasibility study in this report were: The mosaic of floodplain and wetland hydrological types. Magnitude and spatial pattern of vegetation physiological condition (e.g. “greenness’ for selected native species or communities). Array of network distances for key biota. Patterns and extent of hydrological connectivity (across floodplains and within groundwater target areas). There has been substantial R&D outside of monitoring frameworks and there exists a range of relevant scientific protocols which are primarily research tools. These were considered for incorporation into the monitoring and evaluation program. Where no standard methods currently exist, this report short lists methods currently being trialled, along with their key outcomes and notes principal investigators, reports and publications for future R&D and review.