Koehn J.D. Nicol S.J.
Cooperative Research Centre for Freshwater Ecology, Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, 123 Brown St., Heidelberg 3084, Australia
ABSTRACT
The Native Fish Strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin is a substantial shift in the restoration and conservation of native fish in Australia. It engages community ownership in the restoration of fish populations in large river systems that cross jurisdictional boundaries. The strategy is long-term (50 years) but operates as a series of 10-year ‘working documents’. It introduces a management structure, which includes a scientific reference committee and a community advisory committee that includes representatives of many stakeholders groups, including indigenous peoples. The Murray-Darling is one of the world’s largest catchments, covering more than 1 million km2 and one seventh of the Australian landmass. This system flows over 2 500 km from source to the sea and produces agricultural produce to the value of $Aus 1 billion each year. The basin crosses the boundaries of four states and together with the Commonwealth encompasses five legislative and many governmental jurisdictions. The natural ecological functioning of the Murray-Darling rivers is at risk. Native fish communities are only 10 percent of those prior to European settlement. Eight of the 35 native fish species are nationally threatened and 16 species are listed as threatened regionally. Eleven alien species of fish are now present and comprise 95.6 percent of the total catch in the Murray River region. Commercial fisheries are no longer viable and the recreational fishery has substantially declined. Without intervention the levels of native fish populations in the basin are expected to fall in the coming 40 to 50 years. The Native Fish Strategy seeks to rehabilitate fish populations to 60 percent of their estimated pre-European settlement levels after 50 years. Native fish management in the past has generally been single issue dominated and has been undertaken on an individual state-by-state basis. This new strategy is ecosystem based and uses on-ground management, not only to improve the status of native fish populations in the basin but also to increase understanding of the system. Factors contributiong to the deterioration of native fish populations and fish habitats include: flow regulation, habitat degradation, lowered water quality, man-made barriers to fish movement, the introduction of alien fish species, fisheries exploitation, the spread of diseases and translocation and stocking of fish. The Strategy delivers specific goals and targets through a series of strategic actions that involve government agencies, regional catchment organisations and a wide range of community groups.
INTRODUCTION
The Murray-Darling Basin is one of the world’s largest catchments, covering more than 1 million km2 and one seventh of the Australian landmass (Figure 1). This river system flows over 2 500 km from source to the sea and produces agricultural produce to the value of $Aus 1 billion each year. The basin crosses the boundaries of four states and a territory and together with the Commonwealth encompasses six legislative and many governmental departmental jurisdictions. Whilst water use has been coordinated across jurisdictions through the Murray-Darling Basin Commission (MDBC), native fish management has generally been single issue dominated and undertaken on an individual state-by-state basis. The draft Native Fish Strategy (Murray-Darling Basin Commission (MDBC) 2002) addresses this lack of coordination with its implementation facilitated by the MDBC. It is ecosystem based with a fundamental approach that uses on-ground management not only to improve the status of native fish in the Basin but also to increase our systems understanding. This Strategy has fish as its focus, rather than being an added component to other strategies (e.g. wetlands, salinity) and is a commitment between all jurisdictions to addressing their problems.
Figure 1. Map of the Murray-Darling Basin, southeastern Australia.
THE NEED FOR ACTION
The health of populations and communities of native fish species in the Murray-Darling Basin is an indicator of the overall health of the basin and its rivers (Harris 1995). If there is a decline in the native fish communities, this provides a warning that the natural ecological functioning of the rivers is at risk. The current poor status of native fish populations in the Murray-Darling Basin is alarming, with several indicators demonstrating the urgency of the current situation:
Localised extinction of some native fish species (see Cadwallader and Gooley 1984);
Threats to other species: eight of the 35 native fish species in the basin are nationally ‘threatened’ (Australian Society of Fish Biology 2001) and at least two are ‘critically endangered’; 16 species are listed as threatened under state jurisdictions;
Rapid decline in the conservation status of ‘flagship’ species such as silver perch Bidyanus bidyanus (Mitchell), freshwater catfish Tandanus tandanus (Mitchell) and Murray cod Maccullochella peelii peelii (Mitchell) across the basin (Cadwallader and Gooley 1984; Clunie and Koehn 2001a, 2001b);
Presence of 11 alien species of fish that now make up a quarter of the basin’s total fish species - carp Cyprinus carpio (L.) now make up an estimated 60 to 90 percent of the total fish biomass at many sites, with densities as high as one carp per square metre of river surface area (Harris and Gehrke 1997);
Presence of two native fish species that are not native to the basin rivers (broad-finned galaxias Galaxias brevipinnis Gunther and spotted galaxias Galaxias truttaceus Valenciennes (Waters, Shirley and Closs 2002; P. Humphries, pers comm.);
Loss of most commercial fisheries (Reid, Harris and Chapman 1997) (Figure 2); and
Observed declines in recreational angling success - native fish species make up just 4.4 percent of the total catch in the Murray River region (Harris and Gehrke 1997).
Figure 2. Declines in catches per unit effort of the Murray cod, silver perch and freshwater catfish in New South Wales between 1947 and 1996 (data source: Reid et al. 1997).
If native fish in the Murray-Darling basin are to be rehabilitated to ensure viable populations, urgent action is needed to remediate existing threats. Actions must be coordinated and consistent across state boundaries. They need to build upon the knowledge gained through past research and management to rehabilitate fish habitats and to protect existing viable populations. Emphasis needs to be placed on rehabilitation rather than maintaining the status quo that would inevitably result in continuing declines and loss of species (Figure 3). As declines have taken place over many years, so must rehabilitation be undertaken over a similar timeframe - fifty or more years. The level of rehabilitation required to reverse declines will vary with species, communities and areas and should be assessed over the medium and longer terms.
A panel of fish experts has estimated that native fish populations within the Murray-Darling basin are currently at about 10 percent of their pre-European settlement levels (Figure 3). Without any intervention this is likely to fall to 5 percent over the next 40 to 50 years. This panel believed that if only one strategic intervention were to occur, such as allocation of environmental flows, this may help to recover native fish populations to about 25 percent of their estimated pre-European settlement levels. They agreed that the actions detailed in the Strategy must be undertaken in an integrated way if they are to be effective. If undertaken singularly, the capacity of these interventions to recover the native fish populations of the basin beyond 25 percent of their pre-European level is questionable. The actions will also assist (at least in part) with the restoration of listed threatened fish and fish communities. Greater resourcing for developing a system of aquatic reserves and managing other alien fish species will also ensure a greater level of success with this approach.
Figure 3. Cumulative impact curves of actions to rehabilitate native fish communities in the Murray-Darling Basin as determined by an expert panel.
A STRATEGIC APPROACH TO ACTION
The vision of this Native Fish Strategy is that the Murray-Darling basin sustains viable fish populations and communities throughout its rivers. The overall goal of this Strategy is to rehabilitate native fish communities in the Murray-Darling Basin back to 60 percent or better of their estimated pre-European settlement levels after 50 years of implementation. This means rehabilitating aquatic habitats and ecological processes in the Murray-Darling basin through management actions designed to restore healthy native fish communities. The improved status of native fish populations in the Murray-Darling basin will be the key criterion by which the public will judge the success of this Strategy.
This Strategy targets the causes as well as the symptoms of declining native fish species and focuses on long-term rehabilitation rather than restoration. As part of the Integrated Catchment Management Policy Statement for the basin (MDBC 2001), this Strategy provides a framework for improved management of native fish in the basin rather than prescribing specific management practices. The framework outlined in this Strategy will evolve with better knowledge and new research outcomes. Inter-state cooperation and coordination of actions and policies is an essential ingredient of the Strategy’s framework. While the Strategy provides a 10-year framework, a sustained commitment needs to be maintained for the next 50 years. It provides direction of investment in on-ground fish management activities and associated research and investigations.
STRATEGY OBJECTIVES
The Strategy will address its goal and targets through strategic actions designed to achieve 13 objectives directed at improving the status of native fish populations in the basin. These objectives are to:
1 Repair and protect key components of aquatic and riparian habitats;
2 Rehabilitate the natural functioning of wetlands and floodplain habitats;
3 Improve key aspects of water quality that affect native fish;
4 Modify flow regulation practices;
5 Provide adequate passage for native fish;
6 Devise and implement recovery plans for threatened native fish species;
7 Create and implement management plans for other native fish species and communities;
8 Control and manage alien fish species;
9 Protect native fish from threats of disease and parasites;
10 Manage fisheries in a sustainable manner;
11 Protect native fish from the adverse effects of translocation and stocking;
12 Ensure native fish populations are not threatened from aquaculture; and
13 Ensure community and partner ownership and support for native fish management.
The MDBC has developed a standard for the development of all natural resource management strategies within the basin under its Integrated Catchment Management (ICM) Policy (MDBC 2001). The ICM policy is a commitment by governments and the community of the Murray-Darling basin to do all that needs to be done to manage and use the resources of the Basin in a way that is ecologically sustainable.
The ICM policy is based on setting targets for catchment health and building the capacities of governments and the basin community to achieve these targets (MDBC 2001). The approach will take another ten years to build. It will require substantial government, community and industry leadership and commitment and will significantly test the capacities of everyone to manage the natural resource base for the benefit of present and future generations.
The Native Fish Strategy is a work-in-progress and will address the following actions through a costed implementation plan. The implementation plan will be guided by the ICM policy principles related to investment (MDBC 2001):
The economic, environmental and social benefits of the investment must be greater than the costs;
Government investment will be used to stimulate private investment and to prevent unacceptable levels of resource degradation;
Alternative investments will be considered and evaluated;
Joint-venture partnerships with the community will be the preferred government investment approach; and
Strong institutional arrangements, knowledge, sound planning and adequate monitoring, evaluation and reporting systems will support on-ground investment.
Implementing the driving actions of this Strategy will require a targeted and sustained effort across governments, catchment management organisations and communities. It is imperative to define the actions and associated responsibilities required within each catchment. This will need to be done in collaboration with government agencies and catchment groups in those catchments.
The prime responsibility for managing rivers falls to state governments. Many of the in-stream interventions needed to improve conditions for fish in rivers will require funding from the states. This will also be the case for any interventions on state-owned land. However, the Commonwealth through its funding programs may supplement state funds for these actions. Where interventions are required on private land, such as stream banks, states may use a number of mechanisms to encourage changes to the way land managers use and manage land and water resources. These mechanisms range from financial incentives through to regulation.
It is recommended that a new, inter-state management and science committee be established by the MDBC to draw all partners and managers together to achieve the Strategy’s implementation plan. Implementation of the Native Fish Strategy requires a partnership between governments and the wider basin community. Important roles in the implementation of the Strategy will be held by individual landholders, indigenous communities, landcare groups, catchment management organisations, waterway managers, urban and rural community groups, local, State and Commonwealth Government agencies and the MDBC.
The use of targets is a way to measure progress towards achieving the Strategy outcomes. Partners to the Murray-Darling Basin Initiative use targets to ensure their own accountability for implementing the Strategy and to give the community confidence that the outcomes of the Strategy will be achieved. Targets will guarantee that all partners can agree on how healthy the native fish populations should be and how to measure trends in native population status, knowing the full costs associated with achieving this. Targets ensure the Strategy remains on track in reaching its long-term objectives for 50 years and beyond.
DRIVING ACTIONS
These 13 objectives identified will be achieved by implementing six key driving actions that include management, research and investigation and community engagement interventions:
Rehabilitating fish habitat - helping to achieve objectives 1-8;
Protecting fish habitat - helping to achieve objectives 1-8;
Managing riverine structures (e.g. weirs and dams) - helping to achieve objectives 4-8;
Controlling alien fish species - helping to achieve objectives 6-9;
Protecting threatened native fish species - helping to achieve objectives 6 and 10; and
Managing fish translocation and stocking - helping to achieve objectives 9-12.
All of the driving actions include a community engagement component designed to achieve objective 13.
MONITORING, EVALUATION AND REVIEW
The implementation of the driving actions will not see an immediate return on investment. While the rehabilitation of fish habitat and the management of riverine structures should result in changes within the next 10 to 15 years to native fish communities, the other driving actions are likely to take considerably longer before benefits become obvious. However, if this investment is delayed it will prove more costly to rehabilitate the basin’s native fish communities. It is also important to provide additional knowledge to support the ongoing needs of the Strategy.
About 10 percent of the total budget allocated to implementing this Strategy will be used for monitoring, evaluation and review. This will seek to:
Report annually against accountability indicators;
Evaluate at any time the progress in achieving the Strategy’s 13 objectives against process and implementation indicators;
Audit cumulative actions every five years against the overall goals of rehabilitating the abundance and distribution of native fish populations to 60 percent of their estimated pre-European settlement levels; and
Conduct an overall strategy review after five and ten years.
AUDITING CUMULATIVE ACTIONS AND THEIR IMPACTS ON FISH POPULATIONS
Assessment and monitoring are essential to determine the status of native fish populations and provide knowledge for the development and evaluation of indicators. There is a need to:
Collate existing baseline data and new data for the establishment of long-term data sets;
Develop a database/library that can catalogue data/results/outputs from projects;
Develop a basin-wide fish distribution database;
Undertake oral history projects, including collection of knowledge from indigenous communities, focusing on fish and fish habitats in an attempt to gain a historical perspective not available from other data sources;
Assess ongoing condition of fish populations;
Standardise the collection of data so that comparisons can be made both across the basin and over time;
Collect scientifically valid data and provide scientific interpretation;
Consider the timing and cost effectiveness of data collection (for example, it may be better to collect data only annually rather than seasonally, depending on the reason for collection);
Use data collected by recreational and commercial fishers to assess and monitor fish populations; and
Ensure data and information is shared with all stakeholders.
It is imperative that the key skills, resources and capacity to undertake monitoring and associated research are identified, developed and maintained across all partners, including the community. Review of the Strategy will involve using resource condition indicators that demonstrate improvement in the sustainability of native fish populations, including:
major reviews of progress to be undertaken by external referees after five and ten years (specifically, the Strategy should be externally audited in 2007 and 2012); and
evaluation of the science, objectives and milestones, to provide a better Strategy.
The central question is: Has the Strategy provided a strategic platform for the rehabilitation of native fish populations in the basin?
BEYOND THIS STRATEGY
The life of this Strategy extends to 2012. However, native fish management is a long-term challenge that will extend well beyond that date. As this Strategy is implemented, consideration will be given to the most appropriate framework for native fish management beyond 2012. In 2011, it will be important to finalise development of the 2012-22 Native Fish Strategy to ensure a Basin-wide approach to native fish management into the foreseeable future.
KNOWLEDGE GENERATION AND EXCHANGE
As fish are hidden under water, the general public awareness and understanding of issues relating to them is often less than for more visible and identifiable terrestrial animals. There is a clear need for the community to be educated about native fish, their status, importance and threats to them. A communication strategy will be developed and implemented, focusing on community awareness, consultation and engagement. The use of demonstration reaches where a series of restorative actions can be used to illustrate their value will be created. Prominent and substantial demonstration reaches are useful for integrating all relevant land and water programs into a comprehensive rehabilitation plan that uses the principles of adaptive management. They provide an excellent mechanism for improving public awareness, understanding and support for habitat rehabilitation and the protection of native fish species. In this context this Strategy seeks to:
Engage the community and stakeholders through a comprehensive communication strategy;
Initiate relevant scientific research that will provide new knowledge to support management actions in an adaptive context;
Ensure that the Strategy’s actions are monitored and evaluated to measure its success and provide a basis for adaptive management; and
Demonstrate recovery of native fish through comprehensive rehabilitation of the key factors degrading demonstration river reaches.
Community involvement of this strategy is important. The use of a six-month public consultation period on the draft strategy, combined with a series of public forums in regional centres is evidence of the importance that has been placed on incorporation of the public perspective. The formation of a community advisory group provides an important new component to the management of fish in the Murray-Darling basin. It provides community ownership of actions and priorities and a link to the science underpinning the strategy. Implementation of the Strategy must be underpinned by science, within a framework of adaptive management, which must include the generation of new knowledge.
The Native Fish Strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin provides a substantial shift in the restoration and conservation of native fish in Australia. It is a model for engaging community ownership in the restoration of fish populations that could be used in other large river systems around the world with cross-jurisdictional boundaries. The strategy is long-term (50 years) but is structured as a series of 10-year ‘working documents’. The Strategy introduces a management structure, which includes a scientific reference committee and a community advisory committee that includes representatives of many stakeholder groups, including indigenous peoples, which have always had strong spiritual and physical connections with the environment.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to thank Brian Lawrence and Jim Barrett from the Murray-Darling Basin Commission who funded and supported this document. Thanks to the expert panel of Mike Braysher, John Harris, Terry Hillman, Peter Jackson and Keith Walker and to Jenni Metcalf who edited the Draft Strategy and others who contributed to our writing of it. A full version of the Draft Native Fish Strategy is available at: www.mdbc.gov.au
REFERENCES
Australian Society for Fish Biology 2001. Conservation status of Australian fishes - 2001. Australian Society for Fish Biology Newsletter, 31(2): 37- 41.
Cadwallader P.L. & Gooley G.J. 1984. Past and present distributions and translocations of Murray cod Maccullochella peeli and trout cod M. macquariensis Pisces: Percichthyidae in Victoria. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria, 96: 33-43.
Clunie P. & Koehn J. 2001a. Silver Perch: A Recovery Plan. Final report for project R8002 to Murray-Darling Basin Commission. Canberra.
Clunie P. & Koehn J. 2001b. Freshwater catfish: A recovery plan. Final report for project R8002 to Murray-Darling Basin Commission. Canberra.
Harris J.H. 1995. The use of fish in biological assessments. Australian Journal of Ecology, 201: 65- 80.
Harris J.H. & Gehrke P.C. 1997. Fish and rivers in stress - the NSW rivers survey. NSW Fisheries Office of Conservation & the Cooperative Research Centre for Freshwater Ecology. Cronulla & Canberra.
Murray-Darling Basin Commission 2001. Integrated Catchment Management in the Murray- Darling Basin 2001-2010. Delivering a sustainable future. Canberra, Murray-Darling Basin Commission. (Available at www.mdbc.gov.au)
Murray-Darling Basin Commission 2002. Draft Native Fish Strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin. Canberra, Murray-Darling Basin Commission. (Available at www.mdbc.gov.au)
Reid D.D., Harris J.H. & Chapman D.J. 1997. NSW inland commercial fishery data analysis. FRDC project No. 94/027 Report.
Waters J.M, Shirley M. & Closs G.P. 2002. Hydroelectric development and translocation of Galaxias brevipinnis: A cloud at the end of the tunnel? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 591: 49-56.
