2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Pressures - Climate Change - Nutrient supply and cycling
Updated: 2016-09-07
The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment "Pressures on the marine environment associated with climate change - nutrient supply and cycling". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the "On-line Resources" section of this record. ---------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE Macronutrient concentrations (e.g. nitrate and phosphate) in the surface ocean play an important role in controlling the ocean’s primary productivity. The oceans account for about half of the earth’s total primary productivity. Surface ocean waters around Australia typically have low macronutrient concentrations for nitrate and phosphate. The key physical processes supplying nutrients to the upper ocean are the seasonal deepening of the ocean surface mixed layer, the upwelling and vertical mixing associated with ocean eddies, and wind-driven coastal upwelling. In the Australian region, the first two processes dominate because conditions that cause wind-induced upwelling are confined to a few regions (e.g. Bonney upwelling off South Australia). As the ocean warms around Australia (Lenton et al, 2015) the upper ocean will become more stratified and the vertical supply of nutrients to the surface ocean could decline (Bopp et al, 2013) reducing primary productivity. However, increased eddy activity due to strengthening of the East Australian Current may compensate for a decline in the vertical nutrient supply in the Tasman Sea and cause an increase in primary productivity with climate change (Matear et al., 2013). DATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT Offshore data from around Australia from the latest CARS compilation (CARS2009a v1.1, as of 12 July 2010). See http://www.marine.csiro.au/atlas/ ---------------------------------------- 2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details] • 2016 • Assessment grade: High impact Assessment trend: Unclear Confidence grade: Evidence and consensus too low to make an assessment Confidence trend: Evidence and consensus too low to make an assessment Comparability: Grade and trend not comparable to the 2011 assessment • 2011 • Assessment grade: Very good Assessment trend: Stable Confidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus Confidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus ---------------------------------------- CHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT Unclear what data were used in the 2011 assessment; the 2016 assessment is based on the latest CARS compilations and so includes observations added to CARS 2011-2016.
Data
- Pressures_climate_change_nutrients_final.pdf
- DATA STREAM USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT - CSIRO Atlas of Regional Seas (CARS) - Oxygen, Nitrate [online access point]
- State of the Environment (SoE) reporting webpage
- Full metadata link
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Expert Assessments and links to Data Streams","recordAbstract":"Every five years the Australian Government conducts a comprehensive review of the state of the Australian environment. National State of the Environment (SoE) reports provide information about environmental and heritage conditions, trends and pressures for the Australian continent, surrounding seas and Australia's external territories. SoE 2016 builds upon the 2011 approach by showing changes over time across the key areas of the environment, including atmosphere, inland waters, land, marine environment, Antarctic environment, biodiversity, heritage, built environment and coasts.\n\nThis parent metadata record links to all Expert Assessments and associated Data Streams (where available) that have contribute to the Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment report."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Effectiveness of Management - Oil and gas extraction and production","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Effectiveness of marine management of oil and gas extraction and production\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE BEING MANAGED, AND ITS IMPACT\nThere is a very good understanding of the pressures and emerging threats from planned oil and gas activities. There is less available information about pressures arising from new technologies such as floating LNG and pressures arising from unplanned activities such as oil spills, however, there is a growing body of information around management of these pressures. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nAll petroleum activities in commonwealth waters. Environment data only spans 2012 – 2015 since NOPSEMA was formed. Combination of qualitative and quantitative data used. Details of the specific data sets used to generate this assessment have not been provided, but all information is available from the NOPSEMA website: https://www.nopsema.gov.au/\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n• Understanding of pressure: Understanding of the impacts of exploration, production and decommissioning activities of the oil and gas industry are well understood.\n• Planning associated with management of pressure: Single national regulator for oil and gas operations in Commonwealth waters. \n• Input for informing management of pressure: Data collected is analysed for trends across industry and used to inform future environmental management improvements and regulatory activity.\n• Processes associated with developing, monitoring, and updating management: Regulatory framework is subject to regular independent review to ensure ongoing effectiveness.\n• Outputs from management framework in place: The assessment and inspection of oil and gas activities is used to inform required areas of industry improvement.\n• Outcomes of management framework in place: Increased level of regulatory oversight ensures effective management of offshore oil and gas activities.\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nSince the 2011 assessment, a national regulator of oil and gas activities has been established as the independent regulator for safety, well integrity and environmental management with its environmental management and approvals endorsed under the EPBC Act. This has introduced an increased level of scrutiny through assessment processes and compliance inspections across the offshore oil and gas industry resulting in high levels of compliance being recorded within the oil and gas regulated community."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Sharks and rays (elasmobranchs)","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of species and groups – sharks and rays (elasmobranchs)\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF TAXONOMIC GROUP FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nConservation of elasmobranchs is an increasing priority as evidence of overexploitation of some species becomes increasingly apparent (e.g., Stevens et al. 2000, Graham et al. 2001, Clarke et al. 2006, Dulvy et al. 2008, Dulvy et al. 2014). Australia has ~307 elasmobranch species that occur in marine environments in all bioregions, with about half being endemic.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nData primarily collected from an expert panel of elasmobranch researchers and fisheries scientists during an IUCN Shark Specialist Group Red List workshop in February 2015 (report still in prep) as part of a FRDC Shark Report Card project (www.sharkreportcard.org)\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nLargely agrees with 2011 SOE assessment, however there are few data available on population abundances or trends for most species so trend can only be regarded as unclear rather than stable."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Pressures - Climate Change - Ocean currents and eddies","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Pressures on the marine environment associated with climate change - ocean currents and eddies\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE\nThe dominant Australian boundary currents are the; East Australian Current (EAC), Indonesian Throughflow (ITF) and Leeuwin Current (LC). \nThe EAC is the western boundary current system of the South Pacific. In the Australian region, it redistributes heat between ocean and atmosphere and the tropics and mid-latitudes.\nThe ITF, a major component of the global ocean circulation, moves water between the Pacific and Indian Oceans. It strongly influences Australian climate and seas off Western Australia. \nThe LC flows southwards off Western Australia redistributing Indian Ocean heat to the mid-latitudes. This differs from the cooler, equatorward flowing currents found along other eastern ocean boundaries. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe assessment is based on the results of analysis published in peer reviewed papers. Details of the specific data sets used to generate this assessment have not been provided.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n• Assessment grade: High impact. Boundary current strength is strongly linked to major climate modes – ENSO, IOD and SAM- whose variability are predicted to increase with climate change.\n• Assessment trend: Deteriorating. Increasing variability of boundary current strength and heat, freshwater, and nutrient transport, will impact coastal circulation, extreme marine conditions, and the marine ecosystem.\n• Confidence grade: <not provided in assessment>\n• Confidence trend: Adequate high-quality evidence or high level of consensus. Observations and models agree that modes of climate variability will be impacted by continued climate change.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nGrade and trends are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Pressures - Renewable energy","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Pressures on the marine environment associated with marine renewable energy generation\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE\nMarine renewable energy generation is a fledgling industry in Australia. Presently, marine energy generator deployments are limited to two pre-commercial scale (small-scale, < 500kW) power stations, and a few experimental / prototype deployments. Any pressures on the marine environment associated with marine renewable energy generation are localised, and sparse. \n\nThe marine renewable energy industry is an emerging industry globally. Numerous ocean energy technologies and devices are being developed around the world, and understanding of the environmental effects of these devices are dispersed among technology developers and countries. The environmental impacts of marine renewable energy are poorly known, and further research and understanding of the issue constitutes a major work programme of the International Energy Agency’s working group on Ocean Energy Systems (IEA-OES Annex IV – Assessment of Environmental Effects of and Monitoring Efforts for Ocean Wave, Tidal and Current Energy Systems) (NOTE: Australia has lapsed membership of IEA-OES). This task has focused on three interactions between marine energy devices and the marine environment: 1) The physical interactions between animals and tidal turbines; 2) The acoustic impact of marine energy devices on marine animals; and 3) the effects of energy removal on the physical environment. This task has identified and documented a growing database on the environmental effects of marine energy development. However, the working group summarise their Stage 1 final report by stating that ‘there continues to be a dearth of quantitative environmental information from tidal and wave devices that have been deployed in coastal waters’. Furthermore, they conclude ‘there are inadequate research and modelling data to adequately characterise the potential effects of marine energy devices, particularly at the large commercial scale’. \n\nThe Australian marine renewable energy sector is predominantly focused on wave energy, with the focus being the large resource along the southern temperate coasts of Australia. There is a smaller tidal energy sector, where the predominant resource is located in tropical Northern waters (aside from localised areas adjacent to Bass Strait Islands). Through a number of commonwealth and industry funded activities, Australia is endeavouring to improve the knowledge base of the environmental effects of wave energy devices in these temperate environments. Whether these activities are applicable to large scale deployment (>100 MW capacity) is currently unclear. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nAssessment of impacts of marine renewable energy is an emerging science. Few deployments are available in Australia, and assessment is largely derived from review of international scientific literature.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Very low\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Evidence and consensus too low to make an assessment\nComparability: Grade and trend are comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Very low\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Evidence and consensus too low to make an assessment\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nNo change."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Effectiveness of Management - Marine mining and industry","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Effectiveness of marine management of marine mining and industry\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE BEING MANAGED, AND ITS IMPACT\nThe potential for a wide variety of mineral resources exists within Australia’s maritime jurisdiction (see Table 1 in attached Expert Assessment). However marine mining and related industries remain an “emerging industry” and there is currently a low level of understanding of pressures and management strategies. Globally, the marine mining industry is more advanced and is supported by a growing body of research investigating the likely environmental impacts and mitigation strategies. \n\nCurrently there are no offshore mining activities in Australia other than the well-established shell sand mining operation in Cockburn Sound (Fremantle, WA) and sand mining in Moreton Bay (Queensland). Both operations were granted extraction licences by state departments subject to strict environmental controls particularly relating to seagrass meadow replanting (Cockburn Sound) and sediment plumes (Moreton Bay). Other submissions to state and federal governments to explore and potentially exploit seafloor resources elsewhere in Australia, have been rejected or stalled due to the lack of existing base line knowledge, lack of community support, and poor understanding of the potential social and environmental impacts of such activities.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nPublished papers and reports (assessment has been conducted by literature review).\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n• Understanding of pressure: Marine mining occurs on a local scale. Likely environmental impacts unclear with only ad hoc baseline information.\n• Planning associated with management of pressure: Resource assessment and planning is ad hoc and conducted on local scales, driven by commercial constraints and community pressures.\n• Input for informing management of pressure: Limited data available. International studies and established marine mining codes of conduct can inform understanding and planning.\n• Processes associated with developing, monitoring, and updating management: Federal and state regulatory framework largely untested except where the marine mining is established. State-level decisions limited to temporary moratoria.\n• Outputs from management framework in place: Established operations have management programs; proposed operations have only desktop analysis. Limited research outputs exist (bathymetric mapping, benthic surveys etc.).\n• Outcomes of management framework in place: Established operations mitigate for local impacts, though not cumulative impacts.\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nMarine mining is limited in Australian waters with little change since 2011."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Pressures - Marine mining","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Pressures on the marine environment associated with marine mining\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE\nA wide variety of mineral resources exist within Australia’s maritime jurisdiction (see Table 1 in attached Expert Assessment). Mining of those resources however, remains an 'emerging industry'. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nPublished papers and reports. Assessment has been completed by literature review.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Low impact\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Evidence and consensus too low to make an assessment\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nClimate and system variability as a pressure on the marine environment was not assessed in 2011."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Pressures - Marine debris","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Pressures on the marine environment associated with marine debris\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE\nMarine debris is recognized as a globally important stressor in the marine environment, with increasing reports of impacts on marine biodiversity reported during the last four decades (Gall and Thompson 2015) and upwards of 6-12 million metric tons of plastic waste entering the oceans each year (Jambeck et al. 2015). Marine litter includes consumer items such as glass or plastic bottles, cans, bags, balloons, rubber, metal, fiberglass, cigarettes and other manufactured materials that end up in the ocean and along the coast, and other materials intentionally or unintentionally discarded at sea. In Australia, marine debris has been identified as a key threatening process for threatened and endangered vertebrate fauna. Marine litter also has socioeconomic impacts, it acts as a transporter of invasive species, can be a navigation hazard and there are increasing concerns over the human health risks due to food security issues from seafood (Rochman et al. 2015). With estimates of ¾ or more of marine debris coming from land-based sources and continued growth in plastics production and usage, marine debris is a ubiquitous problem, with high but variable concentrations of marine debris found both in coastal and marine environments (Hardesty et al. 2014). \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nConcentrations derived from a single survey around Australian coastline and at sea, carried out between 2011-2013 as well as data and analyses presented in peer review publications, a recent review of the TAP for marine debris.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nMarine debris was not included in 2011 assessment."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Seabed, slope (250 m - 700 m)","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of habitats and communities – seabed, slope (250 m - 700 m)\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF HABITAT/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThis specified depth range (250 m to 700 m) defines the upper continental slope. This habitat is mostly an extremely narrow and typically steep ribbon of seabed beyond the shelf-break, but wider in places (GBR/Coral Sea and North-west Regions). Where it is narrowest and steepest in the Temperate East and South-east Regions, it is typified by sediment draped slopes interspersed with deep reefs, canyons and pinnacles (small seamounts); the latter two habitats are assessed separately. Considering its planar area, this habitat supports disproportionately highly productive fisheries and is therefore subject to high levels of pressure, particularly in the South-east and parts of the Temperate East, but less so in other regions.\nNearly 20% of the 200-700 m depth zone has been mapped with multibeam sonar (MBS) resulting in detailed bathymetry and acoustic backscatter maps of the seabed that enable the identification of deep reefs (Kloser & Keith 2013). The largest proportional coverage is in the southern regions, 75% in the South-east Region, and 36% in the South-west; coverage of the northern regions is <10%. Deep reefs are particularly abundant and most expansive in area off Australia’s eastern continental margin and in the north-west region (Kloser et al. in press). \nThe upper slope harbours a highly diverse benthic fauna (Schlacher et al. 2007, Williams et al. 2010, McEnnulty et al. 2011, Dunstan et al. 2012, McCallum et al. 2013). Off Australia’s west-coast (South-west Region), the upper slope is predominantly sediment-draped with soft coral and sponge dominated communities on the relatively few, small deep reefs (Althaus et al. 2012). In the South-east Region bryozoan communities (assessed separately) dominate the shallower, softer part of the slope (Williams et al. 2009) whereas deep reefs harbour sponge gardens, corals and crinoids. The narrow ribbon of upper slope is the core habitat to many demersal fish species including many commercially targeted species, as well as threatened or management dependent species such as many deepwater sharks including gulper sharks (Centrophorus spp.) (Williams et al. 2012). There is little specific knowledge of upper slope habitats and biota in other regions. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThis assessment is based on data derived from Marine National Facility Surveys described in MarLIN (http://www.marine.csiro.au/marlin/search.html) and accessible through the CSIRO Data trawler (http://www.cmar.csiro.au/data/trawler/) and the Atlas of Living Australia (ALA - http://www.ala.org.au/). Many of these data have contributed to data sets compiled under the CERF and NERP Marine Biodiveristy Hubs. Links to specific CSIRO data sets are provided in the \"On-line resources\" section of this record, ALA datasets not specified.\n• Voyage of Discovery north-west (SS05/2007)\n• Voyage of Discovery south-west (SS07/2005 & SS10/2005)\n• Habitat Mapping (SS01/2000, SS04/2004)\n• Habitat and population assessment of giant crabs (2003 - 2005)\n• Tasmanian seamounts surveys (SS02/2006 & SS02/2007)\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good-Poor\nAssessment trend: Improving\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nNew information on national trawl footprints and a recent assessment of South-east region habitats, which suggests that the South-east region may not have been as widely or as substantially impacted as previously considered and is now expected to be improving albeit slowly."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Case Study - Commonwealth commercial fisheries","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Case Study \"Commonwealth commercial fisheries\". The full Case Study, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Case Study are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE FOCUS OF THE CASE STUDY\nManagement of commercial fisheries is shared between the Commonwealth, states and the Northern Territory. In general, the Australian Government, through the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA), is responsible for commercial fishing beyond three nautical miles from the coast. Some Commonwealth fisheries target fish stocks that extend into the high seas and the Exclusive Economic Zones of other countries. These are jointly managed with other countries through conventions and agreements. \nKey commercial stocks in Commonwealth fisheries are managed under the Commonwealth Fisheries Harvest Strategy Policy (HSP). The HSP requires an evidence–based approach to setting sustainable catch levels to ensure stocks are maintained at ecologically sustainable levels and within this context, maximise economic returns to the Australian community. The Australian Government aims to implement an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management, which considers fisheries’ interactions with, and impacts on, bycatch species, habitats, communities and ecosystems. Bycatch species are managed under the Commonwealth Policy on Fisheries Bycatch (BCP) and in line with Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) requirements. The BCP aims to reduce bycatch and improve protection for vulnerable species; this is implemented through a risk management framework.\n\nPRESSURES/ISSUES OF IMPORTANCE\nThe 2013 HSP review found the policy and guidelines improved the management of Commonwealth fisheries. The HSP is one of only a few comprehensive policies implemented to direct the development of harvest strategies across fisheries.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN CASE STUDY\nFishery status reports data, 1992 to 2014 covering all Commonwealth fisheries (as described in Patterson et al 2015). The status assessments are underpinned by AFMA’s fishery catch and effort data and the data used in individual fish stock assessments."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Primary productivity","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of ecological processes – primary productivity\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL PROCESS FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nSatellite data for ocean colour provides the most comprehensive assessment of phytoplankton biomass (PB) and primary production (PP). The method works very well in oceanic waters but PB and PP can be overestimated in regions where runoff or resuspension affects water colour (near land, especially near large tropical rivers). In general phytoplankton biomass and primary production (PP) are low around Australia. Typically both BP and PP are greatest near the coast tending to decline with distance from shore. Offshore oceanic waters north of ~30°S generally have low rates of PP, < 0.2g C m-3 d-1. From 1997 to 2015 the greatest rates of PP have been found near shore, in the marginal Arafura Sea and southern Tasman Sea. \n\nThe biomass and productivity of the oceans is dependent upon the magnitude and timing of nutrient supply. The more tropical oceans of northern Australia tend to be strongly stratified restricting nutrient resupply from depth (Chavez et al. 2011). Australia is one of the driest continents with very low and highly erratic runoff (McMahon, 1982) so nutrient supply from the land is also low.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nData used in this assessment are computed from the level 3 (L3) daily global products using one merging method. PP was computed from merged monthly L3 products using the algorithms developed by Antoine and Morel (1996). Details can be found at http://www.globcolour.info/products_description.html\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Improving\nConfidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nThis assessment uses observations from a range of spatial and temporal scales that allows a much better assessment of current state and trends to be made."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Seabed, abyss (>700 m)","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of habitats and communities – seabed, abyss (>700 m)\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF HABITAT/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThis specified depth range (> 700 m) aggregates several habitats and communities that are clearly distinct in geological, environmental and biological characteristics: the mid-continental slope, lower slope, continental rise, and abyss. Bottom fishing, the single biggest pressure on seabed habitats, is restricted to mid-slope depths (700-1500 m) (e.g. Pitcher et al. in review); oil and gas activity (or planned activity) extends across the continental slope and rise in restricted locations, e.g. the Great Australian Bight (GAB). \nOver 70% of Australia’s marine estate lies beyond 700 m depth; by region the percentage of planar area is >70% for all regions except the GBR (19%), north-west (51%) and the north (0%). The mid-slope 700-1500 m is a steep, narrow band comprising only comprising only 10% of the planar area. Habitats of the mid-slope have been studied through imagery and sampling as part of extensive biodiversity surveys off Western Australia, southern Tasmania and off shore in the Lord Howe Rise (Williams et al. 2010, McEnnulty et al. 2011, Williams et al. 2011, Zintzen et al. 2011, Althaus et al. 2012; Harris et al 2012); habitats beyond 1500 m have been little studied so far, with the exception of the western Australian margin (Daniell et al 2010). Considering the zonation of impacts and knowledge, our assessment is structured into mid-slope and remaining depths.\nThe temperate mid-slope is used by fisheries targeting deep sea sharks, orange roughy and oreos. Although substrates are predominantly muddy and extensive, hard substrates in these depths support biogenic habitats formed by attached fauna such as cold-water corals and glass sponges (separate SER). Fauna was believed to be sparse in abyssal depths, however, recent sampling in depths to 4000 m in the Tasman Fracture zone in the south-east region discovered corals and a high biomass community of large barnacles and anemones on steep rockwalls (Thresher et al. 2014). In contrast seafloor images and limited sampling from Daniels et al 2009 found very little fauna along the western margin, even on expanses of basalt rock walls. Benthic communities of soft sediments below 700 m depth are dominated by small-bodied infauna (worms and crustaceans) sampled in sediment grabs or cores and evident through traces (Lebensspuren) in low-disturbance abyssal environment (Przeslawski et al 2012), and patchy distributions, including dense aggregations, of echinoderms (urchins, sea cucumbers or ophiuroids) (MNF 2015a & b, unpublished data). \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThis assessment is based on data derived from Marine National Facility Surveys described in MarLIN (http://www.marine.csiro.au/marlin/search.html) and accessible through the CSIRO Data trawler (http://www.cmar.csiro.au/data/trawler/). Links to specific data sets are provided in the \"On-line resources\" section of this record.\n• Voyage of Discovery north-west (SS05/2007)\n• Voyage of Discovery south-west (SS07/2005 & SS10/2005)\n• Great Australian Bight Deepwater Marine Program (GABDMP 2016) (IN2015_C01)\n• Great Australian Bight Research Program (GABRP 2016) (SS2013_C02 & IN2015_C02)\n• Habitat Mapping (SS01/2000, SS04/2004)\n• Habitat and population assessment of giant crabs (2003 - 2005) \n• Tasmanian seamounts surveys, including samples on the slope (SS02/2006 & SS02/2007)\n• NORFANZ survey of Lord Howe Rise and Norfolk Ridge (TAN0308 - NORFANZ)\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nN/A"}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Canyons","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of habitats and communities – canyons\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL HABITAT/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nSubmarine canyons are a class of geomorphic seabed feature used as a physical surrogate for biodiversity distribution during Australia’s marine planning process and in designing the network of Commonwealth Marine Reserves. They are one of two ‘special’ feature types (together with seamounts) (Harris et al., 2008) believed to have potentially high influence on and value for marine biodiversity distribution and protection. It is these characteristics that have been used to define some canyons as Marine Key Ecological Features (Department of the Environment, 2012). \n\nSubmarine canyons are located on all sides of the Australian continental margin. They form deeply incised networks of valleys and channels that extend from the continental shelf edge (<200 m water depth) to the foot of the continental slope (>4000 m water depth). Based on a recent compilation of all available bathymetric data for the Australian EEZ, a total of 713 submarine canyons are now mapped on the continental margin, with an additional 40 canyons that fringe islands within the external territories (Table 1; Huang et al., 2014). The majority (618) of the mapped canyons are classified as ‘blind canyons’, meaning that they are located only on the continental slope and terminate at their head in water depths of ~500 to 1000 m. The other 95 canyons are classified as ‘shelf-incising’ canyons that extend from the slope onto the continental shelf, with canyon heads that define an abrupt depth transition between the slope and shelf of up to 400 m. Between Marine Planning Regions canyons vary in number and spatial distribution. Thus, canyons are most abundant in the South-East (206 canyons) and South-West (204) Marine Regions, with the latter having the higher proportion (51) of shelf-incising canyons. The Temperate East has 124 canyons. In contrast, the North-West and North Marine Regions incorporate 90 and 6 canyons, respectively.\n\nWithin canyons, the seabed is characteristically irregular with underlying substrate exposed along steep canyon walls, in places forming undersea cliffs hundreds of metres high. These localised areas of hard rock outcrop provide a stable surface for benthic biological communities, including sponges, corals and associated sessile flora and feeding grounds for demersal fishes (Schlacher et al., 2007; Fromont and Pisera, 2011; Currie and Sorokin, 2014; Kloser et al., 2014). Canyons also provide a pathway for the transport of sediments and nutrients, not only laterally from the shelf to the deep sea, but also vertically via upwelling of cold, nutrient-rich waters from the deep ocean toward the shelf (Kampf, 2010; Currie et al. 2012). This effect is now better understood through the modelling of larval dispersal, as driven by ocean currents. The modelling shows that more topographically complex canyons are potential settlement sites for marine larvae. For example, the canyons in the Albany Canyon Group which intersects the Leeuwin Current along the southwest margin are modelled as larval sinks, including the large Bremer Canyon and Wilson Canyon. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nNational Submarine Canyons of Australia [Geoscience Australia data product]\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good but poor in the South-East\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence and limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence and limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nNot clear how the 2011 assessment was undertaken."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Pressures - Toxins, pesticides and herbicides","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Pressures on the marine environment associated with toxins, pesticides and herbicides\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE\nThe group typically regarded as pollutants encompasses a large array of compounds and is generally divided into chemical compounds and metals. Estimates of the number of chemicals produced anthropogenically range as high as 100,000, however assessments of the toxicity and bioaccumulative nature of these are limited. Most research has only included a few classes of compounds, notably the halogenated hydrocarbons, a limited number of metals and polyaromatic and non-aromatic hydrocarbons.\n\nMost pollutants identified in marine animals are incorporated into tissues via dietary intake with many accumulating through the food web. Consequently, animals feeding at high trophic levels tend to have higher tissue concentrations than those feeding at lower trophic levels. Various pollutants have been reported to be associated with deleterious effects on the immune, endocrine and nervous systems of marine animals, resulting in disruption to growth, development, sexual differentiation and resistance to disease. However, direct associations between contaminants and these effects are few, and most studies lack substantive evidence of sublethal effects due to numerous confounding factors, both physiological and environmental in nature. This therefore limits quantification of the direct and indirect pressures pollutants may be exerting on the marine environment.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nPublished papers and reports. Assessment has been conducted by literature review.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Low impact\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Evidence and consensus too low to make an assessment\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nToxins, pesticides, herbicides was assessed under state and trends of physical and chemical processes rather than pressures."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Pressures - Shipping","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Pressures on the marine environment associated with shipping\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE\nAustralia as an island relies heavily on shipping for transportation of its imports and exports. In 2013–14, approximately 1274 million tonnes of cargo were loaded and 151 million tonnes discharged at Australian wharves by 5499 vessels that made 28 714 port calls.\nAs this shipping traverses Australian waters there is potential for adverse interactions with the marine environment across all regions (see Figure 1). Specifically, there is a risk of environmental damage from collision or grounding of vessels, and ship strike, which is a significant cause of anthropogenic mortality to whales worldwide. Also although not addressed specifically here it should be noted small recreational vessels regularly injure dugongs, turtles, and dolphins.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\n• AIS: AIS data for 2014, coverage over all regions, based on CTS product from AMSA\n• Ship strike database: Coverage over all regions 1872-2015. For the assessment we mainly looked at post 2000 records.\n• Shipping statistics: Coverage over all regions from 1998-2013 (Predictions from infrastructure Australia used for 2014-2015 growth).\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Low\nAssessment trend: Deteriorating\nConfidence grade: High level of consensus\nConfidence trend: High level of consensus\nComparability: Comparable\n• 2011 •\n<not provided>\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nThe assessment is unchanged."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Case Study - Plankton and climate change","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Case Study \"Plankton and climate change\". The full Case Study, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Case Study are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE FOCUS OF THE CASE STUDY\nPlankton is the foundation of the marine food web and supports nearly all life in our oceans. Plankton species are sensitive indicators of ecosystem health and climate change because they are abundant, short-lived, not harvested, and sensitive to changes in temperature, acidity and nutrients.\n\nISSUES OF IMPORTANCE\nOn local scales plankton are sensitive to eutrophication, over regional scales to invasive species and fisheries, and over large continental scales to climate change. There is growing evidence from Australia that plankton communities are being altered by climate change and this is likely resonate up food webs to higher trophic levels.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN CASE STUDY\nIMOS plankton data – both from the National Reference Stations and the Australian Continuous Plankton Recorder survey."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Pressures - Climate Change - Sea Surface Temperature (SST)","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Pressures on the marine environment associated with climate change - sea surface temperature\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE\nSea-surface temperature (SST) is a vital component of the marine ecosystem system as it exerts a major influence on the structure and function of the marine and atmospheric environment.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe majority of the assessment is based on data and analyses published in peer review papers. Some analyses of SST observations and model output have been included in the assessment. Details of specific data sets used to generate the assessment have not been provided.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n• Assessment grade: High impact. Sea surface temperature has continued to increase and extreme events have occurred in some regions.\n• Assessment trend: Deteriorating. Increasing sea surface temperature has significant impact on marine biodiversity and ocean health\n• Confidence grade: <not provided in assessment>\n• Confidence trend: Adequate high-quality evidence or high level of consensus. Observations and models agree that sea surface temperature will continue to increase and extreme events may increase in frequency\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nGrade and trends are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Seabed, inner shelf (0 - 25 m)","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of habitats and communities – seabed, inner shelf (0 - 25 m)\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF HABITAT/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe inner shelf seabed consist of a mix of habitats that range from rocky reef through coral reef, seagrass, algae and soft sediment, although this assessment focusses on open coast unvegetated soft sediment habitats on the inner shelf (0-25 m depth) as the other inshore habitats are assessed in other SoE metrics. Note that this assessment differs slightly from that in 2011 that focussed on the 0-50 m depth range, and it is assumed was also confined to soft sediment habitat. It concluded that the overall condition was good at a national scale, but poor in the SE and East, was likely to be stable, but it was based on limited evidence and trends from the previous assessment.\nInner shelf soft sediment habitats are usually dominated by coarse to fine sand in exposed coast locations but can grade to finer silts in sheltered habitats with nearby estuarine inputs and with depth. In specific locations, significant habitat mapping and/or biodiversity sampling programs have substantially improved knowledge of the spatial distribution of these habitats, and have provided an initial description of their current condition (e.g. Barrett et al. 2001; Pitcher et al. 2007ab, 2016; Jordan et al. 2010, Kangas et al. 2007, Currie et al. , 2003, 2009). However, at a national scale there is currently no integration and synthesis of this information on which to base condition assessments. In addition, there is little information to assess the extent of temporal trends or habitat degradation from baseline conditions. Despite this, there are a number of threats that can be identified and assessed to determine the potential current trends. These include trawling (through physical disturbance of the seabed), sedimentation/nitrification, and the spread of introduced pest species. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nAssessment is based on data and analyses published in peer reviewed literature and agency reports. Details of specific data sets used to generate the assessment have not been provided.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nNot clear on what basis and how the 2011 was conducted. Note that this assessment differs slightly from the 2011 assessment which was focused on the 0-50 m depth range, and it is assumed was also confined to soft sediment habitat."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Case Study - Blueprint for monitoring and reporting on biodiversity in Australia’s oceans","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Case Study \"Towards a blueprint for monitoring and reporting on biodiversity in Australia’s oceans\". The full Case Study, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Case Study are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE FOCUS OF THE CASE STUDY\nMonitoring Australia’s Commonwealth Marine Area (CMA) is fundamental to understanding and reporting on how the ocean is changing in response to human pressures. The National Environmental Research Program Marine Biodiversity Hub, collaborated with the Australian Government Department of the Environment, to develop \"Towards a blueprint...\" to monitor and report on key ecological features in the CMA.\n\"Towards a blueprint...\" shows how Australia can expand its institutional capacity to meet the reporting needs of the Department of the Environment. It identifies existing data for areas where monitoring can begin, and assesses Australia’s capability to collect new monitoring data as a basis for decision making. Key Ecological Features (KEFs) are parts of the ocean identified in the Australian Government’s marine bioregional plans as highly valued for their importance to biodiversity or ecological function and integrity. They provide an important starting point for developing monitoring in the Commonwealth Marine Area.\n\nPRESSURES/ISSUES OF IMPORTANCE\nFifty-four KEFs were identified in Commonwealth waters during marine planning processes. As the map of Australia illustrates (Figure 1), KEFs come in many shapes and sizes and Towards a blueprint divides them into six groups for reporting purposes. These are areas of enhanced pelagic productivity, canyons, deep seabeds, seamounts, shelf reefs and seabeds.\nWhile the oceanography of most KEF groups has been studied, the level of biological sampling varies. Areas of enhanced pelagic productivity are the best understood, and shelf seabeds and deep seabeds the least. The Bonney Coast Upwelling is one of nine enhanced pelagic productivity Key Ecological Features identified in Australia’s Commonwealth waters and provides a good example of how KEFs focus biodiversity monitoring. \nFrom November to May, the surface waters of the Bonney Coast are blown offshore by south-easterly winds and replaced by cold, nutrient-rich water. The sunlit nutrients fuel an explosion of phytoplankton that sustains hordes of marine life, from krill to blue whales. Understanding long-term changes to this biophysical system and distinguishing what is most likely to have caused any changes is the focus for monitoring. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN CASE STUDY\nSatellite observations of chlorophyll and derived net primary productivity estimates."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Case Study - Shipping","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Case Study \"Pressures on the marine environment associated with shipping\". The full Case Study, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Case Study are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE FOCUS OF THE CASE STUDY\nAustralia as an island relies heavily on shipping for transportation of its imports and exports. In 2013–14, approximately 1274 million tonnes of cargo were loaded and 151 million tonnes discharged at Australian wharves by 5499 vessels that made 28 714 port calls (BITRE 2015).\nAs this shipping traverses Australian waters there is potential for adverse interactions with the marine environment across all regions (see Figure 1 in full case study attached).\n\nPRESSURES/ISSUES OF IMPORTANCE\nThere is a risk of environmental damage from collision or grounding of vessels, and ship strike, which is a significant cause of anthropogenic mortality to whales worldwide. In addition, small recreational vessels regularly injure dugongs, turtles, and dolphins.\nKnown Australian ship strike incidents in recent times have predominately involved humpback whales and based on behaviour and distribution there is potential for mother-calf pairs to be particularly susceptible. There have also been reported incidents with southern right whales, sperm whales and pygmy blue whales. Given the speed and size of modern shipping, collisions with whales have a high probability of being fatal.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN CASE STUDY\nShip strike reports derived from the Australian Marine Mammal Centre National Marine Mammal Database, Vessel tracking data (AIS records)."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Marine microbial community composition","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of marine microbial community composition\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL PROCESS FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe microbial community composition is a sensitive indicator of ecosystem status and health. \n\nMarine waters typically contain 104-106 microbial (bacteria, archaea and unicellular algae) cells per milliliter, belonging to hundreds to thousands of different species. This highly diverse and abundant community has an intimate connection with its environment, the marine water. Marine microbial assemblages are the first responders to changes in the chemistry and physical properties of the surrounding water. At the same time, microbes also shape the marine environment by driving most of the biogeochemical cycles, supporting phytoplankton and primary productivity, contributing to the ocean carbon pump and the sequestration of carbon in recalcitrant forms, and removing a wide range of organics and pollutants. Photoautrophic microorganisms both form the base of the marine food-web and are responsible for ocean CO2 draw-down, while nitrogen fixing bacteria are often essential for fueling the food-web with bioavailable nitrogen.\n\nTo this end, marine microbial assemblages display systematic and predictable change over seasons, across temperature climates, with distance to shore, with depth in association with different water masses and in response to nutrient enrichment, eutrophication and pollution, and the traits of marine microorganisms accurately reflect their niche adaptation.\n\nMany of the most abundant clades of marine bacteria, including the Prochlorococcus, Synechococcus, Pelagibacter, Roseobacter and the SAR86 cluster of the gammaproteobacteria have a very broad, if not a cosmopolitan distribution. However this is not reflected in an underlying genetic identity. Rather, widespread distribution in these organisms is achieved by the existence of closely related but discrete ecotypes that display niche adaptations. Closely related ecotypes display specific nutritional or energy generating mechanisms and are adapted to different physical parameters including temperature, salinity, and hydrostatic pressure.\n\nThere is a global trend for rising incidence of disease in marine habitats. Within Australia there have recently been a number of significant disease outbreaks in organisms including corals, starfish, oysters and fin-fish. While pathogenic microbes constitute a very small minority of the marine microbial communities, their presence is of particular importance and interest.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThis assessment is based on peer-review papers and reports. Data on state and trends and associated spatial and temporal coverage are detailed in the publications provided in the reference list.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Unclear\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Evidence and consensus too low to make an assessment\nConfidence trend: Evidence and consensus too low to make an assessment\nComparability: Grade and trend are not comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nThe 2016 assessment is similar to the 2011 assessment. With very little information on marine microbial communities with which clear trends could be determined it was considered appropriate to alter the state assignment to ‘unclear’ rather than ‘very good’ and trend assignment to ‘unclear’ rather than ‘stable’ to avoid assumptions on the current state and recent trends."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Mesopelagic fish species","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of species and groups – mesopelagic fish species\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL SPECIES/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nMesopeolagic fish species (200 to 1000 m depths) of the Australian region are thought to be in very good condition as there is limited direct impact by human activities (e.g. no targeted commercial fishing, and limited seismic surveys). Therefore factors affecting the mesopelagic fishes and their habitats will most likely be due to overall changes in environmental conditions associated with climate change and variability influencing factors such as primary production, ocean acidification and changing oxygen levels (Hobday and Pecl, 2014). This estimate of mesopelagic fish status and trend is uncertain due to the low amount of monitoring that is done, but monitoring has increased since the last assessment in 2011.\nMonitoring of mesopelagic fishes has recently been included in Australia’s Integrated Marine Observing System (IMOS) through a bio-acoustics sub-facility in 2010 with one focus being the Tasman Sea (www.imos.org.au). Mesopelagic fishes are very diverse in Australian waters where in a recent field guide of the southern Tasman Sea 143 species in 43 families were identified (Flynn and Pogonoski, 2012). Using the IMOS bioacoustics Tasman Sea transect along 40oS there has been no detectable change in the annual acoustic index of mesopelagic fish biomass off the east coast of Tasmania between 2004 and 2013 (Kloser et al pers comms, www.imos.org.au). This region has a diverse range of fishes that have complex depth distributions and trophic interactions (Flynn and Kloser, 2012).\nEcosystem models and observational studies of mesopelagic fishes highlight their importance to ecosystem structure and function where they transfer energy to higher order predators such as commercial fish species in Australian waters (Fulton et al., 2005; Lehodey et al., 2010; Young et al., 2011). This is particularly important for Australia’s continental slope commercial species and other top predators for ecosystem based management (Smith et al., 2011). The importance of mesopelagic fishes to ecosystem services has been shown yet their biomass and production is uncertain with several recent net and acoustic estimates differing by 2 orders of magnitude in Tasman Sea Australian waters (Kloser et al., 2009; Irigoien et al., 2014). This difference is based on using different sampling gear and methods to interpret the data.\nThe outlook for mesopelagic fish in the Australian region is very good given the low direct impact of human activities (e.g. fishing) and increased monitoring through the IMOS bioacoustics program. Spatial and temporal shifts in mesopelagic fishes are expected to occur due to climate change and variability which will influence the distribution of their predators (Ridgway et al., 2008; Hobday and Pecl, 2014). To understand shifts in higher order predators and their ecological and human impact monitoring and ecosystem modelling of mesopelagic fish status and future trends is necessary.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nData from the IMOS bio-acoustics sub-facility, data from surveys along a transect line in the Tasman Sea repeated across 2004-2013.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nN/A"}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Effectiveness of Management - Recreational fishing","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Effectiveness of marine management of recreational fishing\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE BEING MANAGED, AND ITS IMPACT\nRecreational fishing continues to have considerable value as a popular Australian lifestyle activity contributing both economic benefits to the economy and playing an important social role in the Australian way of life. The most recent Australia wide survey of recreational and indigenous fishing was conducted in 2000-01. The results of this survey indicated that 3.4 million people participated in recreational fishing during this 12 month period generating an estimated $1.8 billion in expenditure on services and items related to recreational fishing. \nFor example, in Western Australia a recent survey of recreational fishing found that approximately 711,000 people (29.6% of the population) fished recreationally in the 2014/15 period compared to 691,000 in 2011/12 (32% of the population). Over 160,000 recreational fishing licences were issued during 2014/15 for specific recreational fishing activities. All revenue raised from licence fees goes back into recreational fisheries management. During the 2014/15 period, the Department of Fisheries Western Australia spent a total of $19 million on managing recreational fishing around the State, which includes the development of harvest strategies that include sectoral allocation and target catch ranges for both the recreational and commercial fish resources. Through this process, 19 fish resources have been identified as having a significant recreational fishing component and of these, 85% currently have catch ranges within acceptable limits.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe assessment is based on expert knowledge of recreational fisheries management, peer-reviewed publications, state/territory and national assessments of fish stocks and recreational fishing activities and expert input from the Australian Fisheries Management Forum. Details of the specific data sets used to generate this assessment have not been provided.\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n• Understanding of pressure: National and state/territory surveys have been conducted although understanding of overall impacts on stock status is not always known. In some jurisdictions ecosystem based approaches also include understanding of risks to species habitats and ecosystem structure.\n• Planning associated with management of pressure: Most jurisdictions have formal recreational fisheries management capacity and most incorporate ecosystems based approach to assessing risk, with increasing focus on habitat and fishery enhancement.\n• Input for informing management of pressure: Survey data include catch and effort data, and some social/behavioural and economic information.\n• Processes associated with developing, monitoring, and updating management: All jurisdictions use a range of controls including access restrictions, closed areas, closed seasons, restrictions on gear types, daily bag limits, minimum and or maximum size limits, possession limits, and licencing.\n• Outputs from management framework in place: National and jurisdictional survey data and reports can be used to provide information across species and stock ranges.\n• Outcomes of management framework in place: Recovery of some previously overfished species is occurring.\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nCommercial and recreational fisheries and traditional use of resources were all included in the one assessment in the 2011 report."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Pressures - Traditional use of marine resources","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Pressures on the marine environment associated with traditional use of marine resources\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE\nQuantifying the traditional use of marine resources by Indigenous communities is difficult due to the dispersed and sporadic nature of much traditional harvesting and the often complex and sensitive process of building community endorsement for long term monitoring programs to quantify harvest levels. Across Australia, there is a high diversity of community initiatives for monitoring and managing traditional harvest due to the specific local context for planning, managing and conservation. Since the 2011 assessment, the workforce of Indigenous rangers has grown around Australia and this has increased the on-ground capacity for monitoring the traditional take (e.g., GBRMPA, 2011; DIPF, 2013). In the Great Barrier Reef, as part of a Traditional use of marine resource agreement (TUMRA), Traditional owners are required to monitor, record and report traditional harvest activities (GBRMPA, 2008). In the Northern Territory, Indigenous rangers record information on the loss or return of aquatic species (e.g. fish, dugong, turtles) in their patrol areas (DIPF, 2013). Kimberley coastal communities are advancing with developing and implementing monitoring and evaluation frameworks (Jackson et al., 2015). Wide scale involvement of Indigenous rangers in monitoring programs also occurs in the Torres Strait (Johnson et al., 2015). Even with increased effort dedicated to Indigenous natural and cultural resource management, results have been mixed, with many projects falling well short of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous expectations (Barbour & Schlesinger, 2012). Natural and cultural resource management is considered a worthy and necessary goal (Ens et al., 2012), yet designing and implementing programs to achieve sustainability goals are not straightforward (Dressler et al., 2010). Determining whether traditional harvest is sustainable needs to be assessed on a case-by-case community basis given the wider ecological and pressure conditions within an area and as such, it is important to consider the state of the harvested population, state of supporting habitats, range of threats, and controls to limit human impacts.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe information used in the assessment was based on extracting insightful statements from reports and articles across Australia on Traditional use of marine resources. No data sets were used to generate this assessment.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Low impact\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nSince 2011, focus had been placed on monitoring and recording harvest levels to help quantify trends in Traditional use of marine resources."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Sea snakes","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of species and groups – sea snakes\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL PROCESS FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nAssessing the status of sea snakes is a priority based on evidence of significant declines in some populations (e.g., Guinea 2007, 2013, Lukoschek et al. 2007, 2013). Australia has approximately 32 sea snake species, more than half of global diversity, including 13 endemic species. Sea snakes occur in a variety of shallow-water marine habitats in northern Australia, including estuaries, reefs, soft-sediment habitats, and seagrass meadows. Two endemic species are listed as Critically Endangered under the EPBC Act and IUCN Red List, a further two endemics listed as Endangered and Near Threatened by IUCN have not been assess under the EPBC Act.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\n• Data primarily collected from an expert panel of sea snake researchers and marine resource managers during an IUCN Sea Snake Specialist Group Red List workshop in February 2009.\n• Updated status of sea snake populations from coastal WA and off-shore Timor Sea Reefs obtained from reports and publications by Michael Guinea, Vimoksalehi Lukoschek, Blanche D’Anastasi and Kate Sanders\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\nStatus and trends within the Australian EEZ are largely unknown but likely to vary between species and bioregions. Species have almost disappeared from Ashmore Reef, Timor Sea, the reasons for which are unknown.\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nLargely agrees with 2011 SOE assessment with the addition of the declines reported from the NW Shelf."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Case Study - Southern bluefin tuna","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Case Study \"Southern bluefin tuna\". The full Case Study, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Case Study are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE FOCUS OF THE CASE STUDY\nSouthern bluefin tuna (SBT) are an important apex predator within Australia’s marine environment with juveniles seasonally aggregating in the Great Australian Bight during the summer, subadults and adults utilising southern and south-eastern waters primarily during the winter months and adults aggregating in an areas off the north western region of Australia primarily during the spring and summer months on the only spawning ground for the species.\nSouthern bluefin tuna are a highly prized target species of international commercial and national recreational fisheries. Within Australian waters, a purse-seine fishery catches juvenile (2-4 yr old) SBT in the waters of the Great Australian Bight during the summer months, and is of significant value to the regional economy (~$150M annually). A longline fishery targeting large SBT off the eastern Australian seaboard during the winter months catches a smaller amount of Australia’s commercial allocation.\n\nISSUES OF IMPORTANCE\nThe SBT spawning biomass (a measure of the adult population) is estimated to have been depleted by fishing to a low fraction of its original size. The depleted nature of the stock has led to the listing of SBT as Conservation Dependent under the EPBC Act and Critically Endangered by the IUCN. Unaccounted mortalities associated with discards, unreported catches and recreational catches of SBT can impact on achieving current stock rebuilding targets set by the CCSBT.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN CASE STUDY\nThe case study is based on stock assessment information produced in annual reports of the Extended Scientific Committee and the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna. Assessments are based on data relating to fishery catches, aerial surveys and close-kin mark recapture methods covering the spatial area of the Commission and a temporal period of 1951-2014."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Water column, slope (250 m - 700 m)","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of habitats and communities - water column, slope (250 m -700 m)\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF HABITAT/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe major determinants of pelagic habitat can be considered to be temperature (T), salinity (S), light, nutrients, dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, and food availability. The slope waters around Australia are generally warm, saline, well illuminated, low in nutrients, phytoplankton, zooplankton and fish. The primary pressures affecting the pelagic biota in slope waters are related to climatic cycles (e.g. ENSO) and long term climate change impacting on T, S, DO, pH and fishing. The slope waters are particularly sensitive to changes in our boundary currents, the EAC and the Leeuwin which generally flow south, seaward of the shelf break. The pelagic productivity of the slope waters provides most of the food to animals in these waters and on the bottom. The shelf edge canyons can enhance upwelling or ‘capture’ eddies that act to focus phytoplankton into these features. Data collection is sparse but IMOS continuous plankton recorder (CPR) routes around Australia sample largely from this region. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nData are computed from the level 3 (L3) daily global products using one merging method following Maritorena and Siegel, (2005). Details can be found at http://www.globcolour.info/products_description.html\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nThis assessment uses observations from a greater range of spatial and temporal scales allowing a much better assessment of current state and trends to be made. There is also a statistical analysis of temporal change in zooplankton biomass."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Case Study - Traditional management of marine resources in Torres Strait","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Case Study \"traditional management of marine resources in Torres Strait\". The full Case Study, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Case Study are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE FOCUS OF THE CASE STUDY\nThe Torres Strait region is renowned for its ecological complexity and biodiversity, providing a multitude of habitats and niches for the highly diverse Indo-Pacific marine flora and fauna, including dugongs and marine turtles. The Torres Strait is of enormous significance from an Indigenous cultural resource management perspective. Marine and island resources traditionally have been, and continue to be, vital to Torres Strait Islanders from a subsistence and cultural viewpoint. Torres Strait Islanders have a strong and abiding connection with their islands and sea country, governed by the unique Ailan Kastom (Island Custom). \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN CASE STUDY\nRelevant peer review publications and reports. Case study based on literature review."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Whales","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of species and groups – whales\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF TAXONOMIC GROUP FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nA total of 24 species of whales (two of which comprise two subspecies) have been documented from Australian waters with a further one (Omura’s whale) likely to occur, but yet to be definitively confirmed. A number of these species (e.g. sperm whale) are distributed nationally, others are restricted to particular latitudes (e.g. Bryde’s whale) and others consist of populations that only seasonally utilise Australian waters (e.g. some of the baleen whale species).\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThis assessment is based on peer-review papers and reports provided by a series of researchers working on whales in Australia. Details on the specific data products used in this assessment have not been provided.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 • Baleen whales\nAssessment grade: Poor\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade & trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n• 2011 • Humpback whales\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Increasing\nConfidence grade & trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n• 2011 • Toothed whales\nAssessment grade: Poor\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade & trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nThe 2011 assessment was split across three categories. Given the lack of data on status and trends for most species it was considered more appropriate to provide one assessment, highlighting the increasing trends for humpback and southern right whales. Anecdotal information suggests that populations of most whales are stable and so it was considered more appropriate to assign status as good. With very little information on most species abundances, limited evidence of any change in populations and no long-term monitoring of populations with which clear trends could be determined, trend was identified as ‘unclear’ rather than ‘stable’."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Effectiveness of Management - Anthropogenic noise","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Effectiveness of marine management of anthropogenic noise\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE BEING MANAGED, AND ITS IMPACT\nThere is a good understanding of the potential sources of anthropogenic marine noise arising from construction related activities, oil and gas activities, shipping and military operations in Commonwealth waters. These include geophysical and geotechnical surveys, seismic exploration, seabed piling, explosives, construction, dredging, ongoing operations, sonar and noise from vessels (particularly dynamically positioned vessels). It is clearly understood that the level of impact from these noise sources will vary depending on the size of the noise source, spatial distribution of simultaneous sources, duration and level of the noise and proximity to sensitive receptors as well as the sensitivity of the particular species to noise. Less is known of the impacts of ongoing low level noise associated with shipping and that generated by other emerging sectors such as marine mining and renewable energy operations, although work on understanding noise impacts associated with these sectors is being actively researched overseas where these activities are more widespread (e.g. Europe). The level of understanding of the cause-effect pathways for marine noise impacts is also underdeveloped. In some cases predictions of impacts are made using limited scientific evidence, with available studies focused on short-term exposures of individuals rather than long-term population consequences and limited in-field verification of sound modelling and environmental impact. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nEnvironment data from petroleum activities in commonwealth waters that generate underwater noise spanning 2012 – 2015, data from collaborative research activities carried out by DSTG and the Australian Navy, data and analyses published in peer reviewed publications and agency reports. Details of the specific data sets used to generate this assessment have not been provided.\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n• Understanding of pressure: Sources of underwater noise across most sectors are well known, however knowledge of impacts requires a greater level of understanding.\n• Planning associated with management of pressure: Acute impacts across sectors are largely managed through EPBC Act approval processes, regulatory frameworks and environmental planning, reducing risks to sensitive receptors.\n• Input for informing management of pressure: Substantial information is available to inform management with varying degrees of uptake across sectors.\n• Processes associated with developing, monitoring, and updating management: Environmental authorisation processes associated with or endorsed by the EPBC Act are in place across sectors for acute impacts; there is little management of chronic impacts.\n• Outputs from management framework in place: Assessment and inspection of noise producing activities associated with the oil and gas industry and environmental assessments and collaborative research programs conducted by the Navy are used to inform required areas of improvement in these sectors. Outputs and improvement processes across other sectors are less clear.\n• Outcomes of management framework in place: An increased level of regulatory oversight for oil and gas activities and ongoing research and inputs into military environmental plans aim to ensure effective management of underwater noise in these sectors. Management outcomes for other sectors are less clear. \n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nThe management effectiveness of anthropogenic noise was not included in the 2011 assessment."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Epipelagic fish species","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of species and groups – Epipelagic fish species\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL SPECIES/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nAustralia’s coastal small pelagic fishes (<50 cm) include species such as Australian Sardines, Maray, Blue and Sandy Sprats, Australian anchovy, scads, Jack Mackerel, hardyheads, silversides, Blue mackerel, Australian Herring and Redbait. Tropical and temperate assemblages are comprised of different species and there are also regional differences in species composition (Hobday et al. 2009). This assessment refers only to temperate species in the East, South-east and South-west regions. Blue Mackerel, Common Jack Mackerel, Redbait and Australian Sardine (off eastern Australia only) are targeted by the Commonwealth Small Pelagic Fishery. The SPF is managed in two Zones: East spanning half of the East and eastern South-east regions and the West spanning the South west and western half of South-east). State fisheries primarily target Australian Sardine but may also take Australian Anchovy, Blue Mackerel, sprats and Maray.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe assessment is based on data and analyses published in the peer review literature, stock assessment reports and minutes of the meetings of the Small Pelagic Fishery Scientific Panel. Details of specific data sets used to generate the assessment have not been provided.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nAdditional fishery catch data, more recent stock assessments."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Pressures - Climate and system variability","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Pressures on the marine environment associated with climate and system variability\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE\nClimate and the marine environment varies on multiple temporal and spatial scales. This variability results in seasonal, inter-annual, decadal and longer changes to water temperature, rainfall patterns affecting ocean salinity, and surface winds, oceanic currents and tidal regimes which can influence the degree of vertical mixing through the water column.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nPublished papers and reports on climate variability. Details of the specific data sets used to generate this assessment have not been provided.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Low impact\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence or high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence or high level of consensus\nComparability: Not previously asssessed\n• 2011 •\n(Not previously assessed)\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nClimate and system variability as a pressure on the marine environment was not assessed in 2011."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Invertebrate species, outer shelf (25 m - 250 m)","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of species and groups – invertebrate species, outer shelf (25 m - 250 m)\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL HABITAT/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nA wide range of both sessile and mobile invertebrate species inhabit the continental shelf. Large areas of soft sediments are dominated by infauna and mobile epifauna, but there are also extensive regions with abundant sessile epifauna, including sponges, soft corals and bryozoans. Hard corals are covered in another section.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nPeer reviewed publications, fishery stock assessment reports and data from the IMOS autonomous underwater vehicle facility. Details of the specific data sets used to generate the assessment have not been provided.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence\nComparability: Grade and trend are comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nN/A"}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Introduced species","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of non-indigenous/non-endemic species – number and abundance of introduced species\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL PROCESS FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThere are over 250 introduced marine plants and animals established in Australian waters (see marine pests.gov.au). Some have hitch-hiked to Australian waters on the hulls of vessels of all types from yachts to commercial ships, or in their ballast water. Others have been introduced to support local aquaculture, with the aquarium industry another vector. Some species are listed on the National Introduced Marine Pest Information System and are assessed under the ‘Number and abundance of NIMPIS-listed species’ assessment. This assessment covers those species not currently on the list.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThis assessment is based on peer-review papers and reports as well as information on the marine pests website: see http://www.marinepests.gov.au.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Evidence or consensus too low to make an assessment\nComparability: Grade and trend are comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Evidence or consensus too low to make an assessment\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nThe 2016 assessment is similar to the 2011 assessment. With very little information on most species abundances and no long-term monitoring of populations with which clear trends could be determined it was considered appropriate to assign a trend of ‘unclear’."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Inner shelf reef fish species","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of species and groups - inner shelf reef fish species\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL SPECIES/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nBony and cartilaginous fish assemblages found on coastal rocky and coral reefs <25 m depth, around the Australian continent. This includes all species (most not exploited).\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nReef Life Survey visual census data were used for the current status assessment, with extensive spatial coverage of sites around the continent. Temporal trend information came from a combination of RLS, LTTRMP and AIMS long-term GBR monitoring datasets at 16 particular locations (MPA locations include the broader region and sites inside and outside sanctuary zones): \nNSW: Batemans Marine Park, Jervis Bay Marine Park, Sydney, Lord Howe Island, Port Stephens\nVIC: Beware Reef, Port Phillip Heads\nSA: Encounter Bay (Fleurieu Peninsula)\nWA: Rottnest Island, Jurien Marine Park, Ningaloo Marine Park\nQLD: Capricorn-Bunker, Southern GBR, Central GBR, Northern GBR\nTAS: Maria Island\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Poor\nAssessment trend: Deteriorating\nConfidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Poor\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nUnclear what the 2011 assessment was based on."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Pinnipeds","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of species and groups – pinnipeds\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF TAXONOMIC GROUP FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThis expert assessment covers 3 species of pinnipeds:\n• Australian sea lion (Neophoca cinerea)\n• Australian Fur Seal (Arctocephalus pusillus doriferus)\n• Long-nosed fur seal (LNFS), Arctocephalus forsteri – formerly New Zealand fur seal\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe assessments are based on data and analyses published in peer-review publications and agency reports (see publications in \"Supplementary Information\") and data held by SARDI, WA DPAW, Phillip Island Nature Parks Details on the specific data products used in this assessment have not been provided.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Improving\nConfidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Improving\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nN/A"}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Algal beds","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of ecological communities – algal beds\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nAlgal beds are generally thought of as algae associated with hard substratum such as rocky reefs that provides a strong point of attachment for algae to grow and maintain position. The majority of Australia’s algal beds are found in temperate waters and are in many cases replaced as the major habitat forming benthic organisms by corals in more tropical environments where intense grazing by herbivorous fishes contains algal biomass, particularly in clear offshore waters. The changeover from temperate algal covered reefs to coral dominated reefs is a gradual transition, but, as a broad generalisation, is considered to be in the vicinity of the Abrohlos Islands in Western Australia and Brisbane in Queensland, and is driven by the northern limit of the canopy forming kelp, Ecklonia radiata. Throughout this range, algal beds are found from the intertidal zone down to approximately 30 m depth where light availability limits growth. Despite this, lower limits may be much reduced in turbid or coloured water, or substantially exceed this in clear offshore water. Algal beds are composed of many constituent species with more than 1500 species of red, brown and green algae known from temperate and tropical Australia. Despite this, the overall canopy forming species are dominated by a far smaller subset of species, including Ecklonia radiata (the common kelp) which tends to be the dominant habitat former and most conspicuous species on temperate reefs, particularly on moderate to high energy coasts where it can form an extensive monospecific canopy above other algae. Given this ecological dominance which is consistent at continental scales, the overall health and extent of Ecklonia is considered to be a suitable indicator of the state of algal beds in general. Despite this, Ecklonia is typically replaced as a dominant species by Sargassum and Cystophora species in sheltered waters such as the Tasmanian north coast and upper reaches of South Australian gulfs, and may replace other species that are under stress (such as Macrocystis pyrifera in Tasmania, the giant kelp or Scytothalia dorycarpa in Western Australia). Hence understanding the condition of algal beds can often require a region-specific knowledge of trends in key species in addition to Ecklonia.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe assessment is predominantly based on data and analyses published in peer review papers. Data has been used from IMOS, The Reef Life Survey, and various state based ecological monitoring programs associated with the establishment of coastal MPAs. Details of specific data sets used to generate the assessment have not been provided.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable to deteriorating\nConfidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nUncertain."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Effectiveness of Management - Traditional use of marine resources","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Effectiveness of marine management of traditional use of marine resources\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE BEING MANAGED, AND ITS IMPACT\nQuantifying the traditional use of marine resources by Indigenous communities is difficult due to the dispersed and sporadic nature of much traditional harvesting and the often complex and sensitive process of building community endorsement for long term monitoring programs to quantify harvest levels. Across Australia, there is a high diversity of community initiatives for monitoring and managing traditional harvest due to the specific local context for planning, managing and conservation. Since the 2011 assessment, the workforce of Indigenous rangers has grown around Australia and this has increased the on-ground capacity for monitoring the traditional take (e.g., GBRMPA, 2011; DIPF, 2013). In the Great Barrier Reef, as part of a Traditional use of marine resource agreement (TUMRA), Traditional owners are required to monitor, record and report traditional harvest activities (GBRMPA, 2008). In the Northern Territory, Indigenous rangers record information on the loss or return of aquatic species (e.g. fish, dugong, turtles) in their patrol areas (DIPF, 2013). Kimberley coastal communities are advancing with developing and implementing monitoring and evaluation frameworks (Jackson et al., 2015). Wide scale involvement of Indigenous rangers in monitoring programs also occurs in the Torres Strait (Johnson et al., 2015). Even with increased effort dedicated to Indigenous natural and cultural resource management, results have been mixed, with many projects falling well short of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous expectations (Barbour & Schlesinger, 2012). Natural and cultural resource management is considered a worthy and necessary goal (Ens et al., 2012), yet designing and implementing programs to achieve sustainability goals are not straightforward (Dressler et al., 2010). Determining whether traditional harvest is sustainable needs to be assessed on a case-by-case community basis given the wider ecological and pressure conditions within an area and as such, it is important to consider the state of the harvested population, state of supporting habitats, range of threats, and controls to limit human impacts.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe information used in the assessment was based on extracting insightful statements from reports and articles across Australia on Traditional use of marine resources. No data sets were used to generate this assessment.\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n• Understanding of pressure: Gradual shift from the well-recognised need to understand sustainable traditional harvest levels towards building on-ground capacity and solutions for quantifying this level.\n• Planning associated with management of pressure: Indigenous-driven planning is growing yet it is not consistently linked to a framework that assesses the performance of stated objectives.\n• Input for informing management of pressure: Further progress on consistent recording and storing of data on traditional harvesting is needed before it informs management frameworks about the impact of this use.\n• Processes associated with developing, monitoring, and updating management: An extensive range of Indigenous-based initiatives are advancing to support the management of Traditional use of marine resources; assessing their performance is the next increment for effective management.\n• Outputs from management framework in place: Improved community involvement for developing protocols for cultural resource management is empowering Indigenous people to make more informed decisions about regulatory solutions.\n• Outcomes of management framework in place: Indigenous-driven planning and management achieves higher environmental outcomes; greater effectiveness with rolling forward programs to meet future priorities and challenges.\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nEffectiveness of management associated with the traditional use of resources was not included in the 2011 assessment."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Deepwater corals and sponges (30 m – 250 m)","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of habitats and communities – Deepwater corals and sponges (30 m – 250 m)\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL HABITAT/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nCorals and sponges are habitat-forming biota that often enhance benthic biodiversity in deep shelf waters by providing complex structural living spaces for a large number of other species from a variety of taxa (Pitcher et al. 2007a, Buhl-Mortensen et al. 2010, Fromont et al. 2012). Most species of corals and sponges need stable substrata for larva to settle and attachment of adult colonies, thus they are usually not associated with mobile or soft-sediment habitats. While corals are often thought of as being associated with tropical waters, coral species are found throughout Australia’s shelf waters and can make up a significant component of the cold-water assemblage. Coldwater corals include stony corals (Scleractinia), black corals (Antipatharia), and octocorals (Alcyonacea)\n. \nOur knowledge of these taxa in Australian waters below typical diving depths stems mainly from a few broad-scale biodiversity surveys covering the Gulf of Carpentaria (Long et al. 1995; Harris et al. 2007; Bustamante et al. 2011), Great Barrier Reef shelf (Pitcher et al. 2007a), Torres Strait (Pitcher et al. 2007b), Pilbara (Pitcher et al. 2016b), southern south-east, north-west, and western south –west regions, and the Lord Howe/ Norfolk ridge area (McEnnulty et al. 2011, Williams et al. 2011, Dunstan et al. 2012). Both corals and sponges were found to be highly diverse with many undescribed species, as well as many ‘unknown’ (sensuHooper et al. 2013) species (McEnnulty et al. 2011, Fromont et al. 2012, Alderslade et al. 2014). For example, sponges in the GBR were the most diverse group with the highest levels of rarity (Pitcher et al. 2007a) and some of the most abundant sponges discovered were new species (Sutcliffe et al. 2010). In addition, species turn-over between samples was extremely high for both taxa (Schlacher et al. 2007, Fromont et al. 2012, Alderslade et al. 2014). The sponge fauna of NSW shelf waters was reviewed in order to improve our understanding in east coast subtropical and temperate waters (Davis et al. 2010).\n\nRecently (2008 onwards), IMOS has funded an AUV program that allows repeat photographic surveys to document the cross-shelf distribution of reef associated benthic invertebrate assemblages at a broad set of latitudinally spaced nodes along Australia’s eastern and western coastlines. This program, if continued, will allow long-term monitoring of the state and trend of deep shelf reef sponges and corals at a fixed set of sites and feed into future SoE assessments. While species identifications are not always possible from such imagery, a national identification framework has been established for consistently annotating this imagery to the finest scale possible (CATAMI refs), and initial analysis (e.g. Perkins et al. 2015) demonstrates patterns similar to the biodiversity surveys above, with high diversity and high species turnover between locations samples (e.g. Monk et al., in press). \n\nBoth sponges and corals are frequently used as indicators of benthic ‘vulnerable marine ecosystems’ (VME) in conservation planning (FAO 2008, Tracey et al. 2008, Williams et al. 2015). \n\nThe ability of sponges to filter large volumes of water makes them a critical link between the benthos and the overlaying water column (WAMSI 2016), and recent studies of productivity on shallow coral reefs suggest that filter feeding by sponges may account for up to 90% of the trophic coupling between pelagic and benthic ecosystems (ref). Such coupling is equally likely on deeper reefs and temperate latitudes as well. The species-level identification of deepwater sponges has not been standardised across Australian collections at this stage; however, this may be possible in the future through SpongeMaps, an online collaboration tool for sponge taxonomists (Hooper et al. 2013; Hall & Hooper 2014). \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThis assessment is based on data from several Marine National Facility Surveys (available via CSIRO Data Trawler http://www.cmar.csiro.au/data/trawler/). Links to specific data sets are provided in the \"On-line resources\" section of this record.\n• Voyage of Discovery north-west (SS05/2007)\n• Voyage of Discovery south-west (SS07/2005 & SS10/2005)\n• Tasmanian seamounts surveys (SS01/1999, SS02/2006 & SS02/2007, SS01/2008 & TT01/2008)\n• Habitat and population assessment of giant crabs (2003 - 2005) \n• Gulf of Carpentaria survey : beam trawl megabenthos (SS03/1990)\n• Mapping & Characterisation of Biotic & Physical Attributes of the Torres Strait (Epibenthic Sled)\n• Great Barrier Reef Seabed Biodiversity Project (Epibenthic Sled)\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Improving\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nEvidence for the good 2011 grade for the Temperate East Region is unclear and it is suggested that this previous grade for the East Region was incorrect based on new information on trawl footprints in the 5 marine regions."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Case Study - White shark status in Australasian waters","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Case Study \"White shark (Carcharodon carcharias) status in Australasian waters\". The full Case Study, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Case Study are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE FOCUS OF THE CASE STUDY\nThe white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) is a large, globally distributed, apex predator and one of the few shark species responsible for fatalities to humans. They are a target species for ecotourism, with the South Australian industry valued at over $6M annually. In Australian waters, it occurs from northwest Western Australia around the south coast to central Queensland as two populations separated east and west by Bass Strait. Biologically important areas for white sharks occur in all Marine Regions with the exception of the North Marine Region A geographically discrete nursery area spanning 65 km of coast is centred around Port Stephens in central New South Wales and a second more geographically extensive nursery area is present off 90 Mile Beach in southeast Victoria. Movements are extensive across the range of each population, primarily focussed over continental shelf and slope waters with occasional open ocean excursions.\n\nISSUES OF IMPORTANCE\nThe key factor for monitoring status is a lack of information on current population size and trend. Although impact has no doubt been reduced, white sharks are still taken as bycatch in commercial shark fisheries, shark control programs and targeted in response to shark attack/potential hazards. Impacts of shark cage diving operations on white shark physiology is unknown and subject to current research.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN CASE STUDY\nRelevant peer review publications and reports, aerial survey and tagging data."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Pressures - Commercial fishing","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Pressures on the marine environment associated with commercial fishing\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE\nAustralia’s wild-caught marine fisheries are highly diverse and contribute significantly to the economy. These fisheries catch scallops, prawns, crabs, squid, coastal fish such as whiting and flathead, reef fish such as coral trout, shelf and deepwater fish such as ling and blue-eye trevally, and oceanic tuna and billfish Although fisheries operate across all states and the Northern Territory and out to the limit of the Australian EEZ, fishing effort is not evenly distributed across Australian marine waters with the majority of fishing effort occurring in the North, Temperate East, South-East, and South-West Marine Regions. The impact of fisheries on the marine environment also varies with differing gears having differing impacts on species that might be caught as bycatch, and the habitats where fishing takes place. Methods used to capture those species are highly varied ranging from small-scale netting to large-scale pelagic long-line fishing and trawling (Flood et al. 2014). There is currently extensive effort occurring the Coral Sea bioregion using pelagic long – line gear. There have been extensive reductions in the footprint of the trawl fishery in the South West, South East and Temperate Eastern Bioregions. There is also an extensive trawl fishery in the North Bioregion, associated with the Northern Prawn Fishery, which remains relatively constant through time. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe metadata record for the fisheries data can be found at http://www.marlin.csiro.au/geonetwork/srv/eng/search?uuid=aa53a4df-7fe6-46d1-93b7-2d3732f4883e.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Low-High\nAssessment trend: Improving\nConfidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are not comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Not directly comparable\nAssessment trend: Not directly comparable\nConfidence grade: Not directly comparable\nConfidence trend: Not directly comparable\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nCommercial fishing was separated from recreational fishing and traditional use of resources."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Secondary production (zooplankton)","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of ecological processes – secondary production (zooplankton)\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL PROCESS FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nSecondary production in the ocean is the generation of biomass by zooplankton – the primary consumers of phytoplankton. The most common zooplankton, the copepods, are the most abundant animals on Earth, even outnumbering insects. Zooplankton are important components of the biological pump, shunting carbon from the surface to the deep ocean through sinking of faeces or dead carcasses. The recruitment of fish stocks and the carrying capacity of marine ecosystems – the mass of fish, squid and shellfish, marine mammals, seabirds and sea turtles) – is related to secondary production. Productivity hotspots (e.g. Eden and Bonney upwelling zones) have high densities of zooplankton, sustaining fish and whales alike.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nIMOS plankton data – both from the National Reference Stations and the Australian Continuous Plankton Recorder survey.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Not previously assessed\n• 2011 •\n(not previously assessed)\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nNot previously assessed."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Demersal and benthopelagic fish species, slope (>250 m)","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of species and groups – demersal and benthopelagic fish species, slope (>250 m)\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL SPECIES/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nMost information available on the state and trends of demersal and benthopelagic fish species is derived from fisheries catches (note that sharks are also included in a separate assessment on sharks). The demersal and benthopelagic fish species and populations over the slope of Australian waters greater than 250 m depth are considered to be in good condition except in the South East Region (SER) where stocks are considered in poorer but improving condition. This assessment will focus particularly on commercial stocks in the SER, the most impacted by fishing and the region with the most comprehensive studies of stock status of key commercial populations. Attempts have also been made to be consistent in scope with the 2011 State of the Environment report. \nWithin the slope waters of the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery (SESSF) commercial fish stocks have been managed under agreed harvest strategies to set catch limits, Commonwealth marine reserves have been established, and a closure to deepwater fishing greater than 700 m was declared since 2006. These measures as well as a structural adjustment scheme which resulted in a reduction in active licenses operating in the fishery have assisted in the improvement of the status of some over exploited stocks and by reducing over-fishing. Of the 13 slope species (groups) representing 22 distinct managed populations, there has been an improvement in the overall fish biomass of populations; 10 populations were considered as not overfished in 2010, while 13 populations were considered as not overfished in 2015. The clearest example of this improving trend is the recovery of the deep-water eastern zone stock of orange roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus). Since closure due to concerns regarding stock status in 2006, the eastern zone stock is now believed to have recovered sufficiently to have allowed a commercial fishery to recommence in 2015. Several indicators for the eastern zone orange roughy fishery support this assessment with improvements in the biomass, age distribution and fish fecundity. \nFive populations, representing three species, are considered to be overfished. The southern and western zone populations of orange roughy, eastern gemfish (Rexea solandri) and gulper sharks (Centrophorus spp.) are currently classified as overfished. Despite efforts to rebuild the stock of eastern gemfish, there have been no signs of recovery to date. Changing environmental conditions due to the strengthening and southern movement of the East Australian Current may be a component of this non-recovery. Gulper Sharks have been subject to increasing research, a recovery plan, and spatial closures. Recovery of these populations however has been estimated to take more than 60 years. \nBased on current management and monitoring practices, the outlook for commercial deep-water demersal and benthopelagic fish species in Australian waters is improving. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThis assessment is based on fisheries assessments of commercial species in the south-east region. Data on state and trends and associated spatial and temporal coverage are detailed in the publications provided in the reference list.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Improving\nConfidence grade: Adequate high-quality evidence or high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high-quality evidence or high level of consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Poor\nAssessment trend: Improving\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high-quality evidence or high level of consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nIt is not clear how the assessment in 2011 was derived. The 2016 is based on the most recent commercial fisheries assessments."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Crown-of-Thorns Starfish (COTS) outbreaks","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment The state and trends of ecological processes – Crown-of-Thorns Starfish (COTS) outbreaks.The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL PROCESS FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nCOTS (Acanthaster planci) are natural predators of coral and occur on all coral reefs in Australia’s marine domain. High fecundity means that when spawning coincides with favourable conditions, resulting recruitment can lead to outbreak densities of large starfish that can deplete local coral cover within 3-5 years. Populations then collapse through starvation and disease but not before they spawn abundant planktonic offspring, which may form secondary outbreaks on downstream reefs. There have been four synchronised eruptions of secondary outbreak in the highly connected, archipelagic Great Barrier Reef (GBR) since 1960. In the subsequent 15-20 years, multi-generational waves of secondary outbreaks have progressed southward through the central GBR. Average coral cover on GBR reefs fell by half over 27 years of monitoring to 2012; about 40% of the total decline was attributed to COTS. Outbreaks have also been recorded in all other parts of the starfish’s Australian range (Far northern GBR, Torres Strait, northwest WA), but their significance is uncertain since systematic monitoring was only recently implemented or is non-existent. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe assessment is based on data and analysis published in peer reviewed literature and unpublished reports. Details of specific data sets used to generate the assessment have not been provided.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Poor\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nComparability: Grade and trends are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nSince the 2011 assessment there has been widespread outbreaks of COTS detected across its range. There is a general lack of information with which to determine long term trends and so trends are regarded as unclear rather than stable."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Offshore banks, shoals, islands","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of ecological communities/habitats – offshore banks, shoals, islands\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL HABITAT/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nAssemblages of plants and animals found on offshore banks, and shoals around islands, in the 0-25 m depth range. This largely relates to reefs in the Coral Sea, Elizabeth and Middleton Reefs, Lord Howe Island, Norfolk Island, and the offshore reefs in the north and north-west.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nReef Life Survey data were used for the current status assessment, with extensive spatial coverage of sites on most offshore banks, shoals and Island around the continent where the seabed rises to within 20 m of the surface.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Adequate high-quality evidence or high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nThe 2016 assessment is based on an updated and expanded dataset."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Tuna and billfish","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of species and groups – tuna and billfish\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF TAXONOMIC GROUP FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThis assessment focuses on those tuna and billfish species that are targeted by commercial fisheries and for which stock assessments are available. These include albacore, bigeye, skipjack, southern bluefin and yellowfin tuna, broadbill swordfish and striped and blue marlin. \n\nIn Australian waters, southern bluefin tuna are caught predominantly by commercial fisheries in the south-west and temperate east bioregions with recreational catches also occurring in the north-west and south-east bioregions. Yellowfin, bigeye and albacore tuna, swordfish and striped marlin are predominantly caught by commercial and recreational fisheries in the north-west, south-west, temperate east and north east bioregions with recreational catches also occurring in the north and in the south-east seasonally. Blue marlin is caught recreationally in the north-east, temperate east, south-west and north-west bioregions with commercial catches of the species not permitted \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe assessment is based on stock assessment information produced in working papers provided to the scientific committees of relevant RFMOs and annual reports of the scientific committees and working groups of relevant RFMOs. Assessments are based on a variety of data relating to species population dynamics, spatial dynamics, fishery catches, survey and mark-recapture experiments covering the spatial area of each of the RFMOs and spanning varying temporal periods. Details on the specific data products used in this assessment have not been provided.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are notcomparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nSince the 2011 chapter, some management frameworks have been modified so both reporting and assessment frameworks have been altered providing clearer views of current stock status. The 2011 assessment doesn’t appear to have referenced available stock assessments which provide the best and most robust indications of status for each of the species. The 2011 assessment stated that there was limited evidence and limited consensus and that the condition of stocks in the south-west was poor and declining, which doesn’t reflect stock assessments conducted at the time. Since the 2011 assessment, stock assessments available for the species have been updated and new data streams are contributing to stock assessments."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Water column, outer shelf (25 m - 250 m)","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of habitats and communities - water column, outer shelf (25 m - 250 m)\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF HABITAT/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe water column is the primary habitat for pelagic communities that are mainly phytoplankton, bacteria, zooplankton and higher predators (in the ratios of ~300:75:10:1, respectively: Marchant 2002) and their biomass declines exponentially with depth (Rex et al., 2006). The major determinants of habitat quality for most pelagic organisms can be considered to be temperature (T), salinity (S), light, nutrients, dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, and food availability. The continental shelf waters around Australia are generally warm, saline, well illuminated, low in nutrients, and abundances of phytoplankton (Fig. 1), zooplankton (Fig. 2) and fish. Relative to the seasonal variability for the majority of the water column on the outer shelf there have been modest long term changes to these components of the habitat and its communities. Overall its current status should be considered good. The major potential threats that could reduce the existing flora and fauna can be considered to be: inputs from the terrestrial environment (sediments, nutrients, carbon), development, warming, declining [DO], decreasing pH and fishing. While there are areas of local habitat degradation (e.g. near ports and harbours) the overall impacts of local pressures tend to be low as Australia is a large area with a relatively sparse human population. There is increasing evidence our shelf waters are experiencing change due to the global pressures; some of which are deleterious. Shelf waters from Port Hedland to Cape Howe have risen ~ 1°C from 1993 to 2013 (Foster et al., 2014), and portions of the SW region were 3°C warmer during February 2011 than normal (Pearce and Feng 2013). There is evidence that dissolved oxygen has declined (Thompson et al. 2009) and continues to decline due to warming (Talley et al., 2016) plus concerns over acidification continue to grow (Mongin et al., 2016). Already there is clear evidence of community responses by phytoplankton, zooplankton and fish to these climatic pressures (e.g. Johnson et al. 2011).\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nData are computed from the level 3 (L3) daily global products using one merging method following Maritorena and Siegel, (2005). Details can be found at http://www.globcolour.info/products_description.html \nZooplankton data are from Australia’s National Reference Stations operated by the Integrated Marine Observing System.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nThis assessment uses observations from a greater range of spatial and temporal scales allowing a much better assessment of current state and trends to be made. There is also a statistical analysis of temporal change in zooplankton biomass."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Dolphins and porpoises","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of species and groups – dolphins and porpoises\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF TAXONOMIC GROUP FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nFollowing taxonomic standards, 20 dolphin species in the Family Delphinidae and one species in the Family Phocoenidae occur in Australian waters. A number of these species (e.g. common bottlenose dolphins) are distributed nationally, others are restricted to particular latitudes (e.g. dusky dolphin) and others consist of populations that are highly restricted to embayments and tributaries within particular regions (e.g. the endemic snub-fin dolphin). \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThis assessment is based on peer-review papers and reports provided by a series of researchers working on dolphin and porpoises in Australia. Data on state and trends and associated spatial and temporal coverage are detailed in the publications provided in the reference list. Specific data products used to generate the assessment are not listed.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nThe 2016 assessment is similar to the 2011 assessment. With very little information on most species abundances and no long-term monitoring of populations with which clear trends could be determined it was considered appropriate to alter the trend assignment to ‘unclear’ rather than ‘stable’."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Viral diseases, parasitic infestations, mass die-offs","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of physical, biogeochemical and biological processes - viral diseases, parasitic infestations, mass die-offs\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL PROCESS FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe health management of finfish, crustaceans and molluscs is an essential element of maintaining aquaculture productivity, fisheries resources and biodiversity in Australia.\nThis assessment provides information on the status and trends of national aquatic animal health, with respect to viral diseases, parasitic infestations and mass die-offs in the marine environment. \nAustralia has a reporting system for aquatic animal diseases of national significance. All the diseases currently reportable to the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) and other aquatic animal diseases of national significance are included on Australia’s National List of Reportable Diseases of Aquatic Animals (www.agriculture.gov.au/animal-plant-health/aquatic/reporting).\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nNACA reporting – quarterly reports provided at the national level. Details of specific data sets used to generate this assessment have not been provided.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nThe 2016 assessment has not changed significantly from the 2011 assessment."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Deepwater corals and sponges (>250 m)","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of quality of habitats and communities – Deepwater corals and sponges (>250 m)\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF SPECIES/HABITAT/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nCorals and sponges are habitat-forming biota that often enhance benthic biodiversity in the deepsea by providing complex structural living spaces for a large number of species from a variety of taxa (Buhl-Mortensen et al. 2010, Fromont et al. 2012). Most species of deepwater (often termed ‘coldwater’) corals and sponges need stable substrata for larva to settle and attachment of adult colonies, thus they are usually associated with hard-bottom habitats. \nOur knowledge of these taxa in Australian waters stems mainly from extensive deepsea biodiversity surveys covering the southern south-east, north-west, and western south –west regions, and the Lord Howe/ Norfolk ridge area (McEnnulty et al. 2011, Williams et al. 2011, Dunstan et al. 2012) (Table 1). In addition, a variety of corals were photographed in situ and collected during a survey of the Perth Canyon lead by researcheers from the University of Western Australia on board the RV Falkor (http://archiveschmidtocean.org/story/show/3888). Both taxa were found to be highly diverse with many undescribed species, as well as many ‘unknown’ (sensuHooper et al. 2013) species (McEnnulty et al. 2011, Fromont et al. 2012, Alderslade et al. 2014). In addition, species turn-over between samples was extremely high for both taxa (Schlacher et al. 2007, Fromont et al. 2012, Alderslade et al. 2014). \nColdwater corals include stony corals (Scleractinia), black corals (Antipatharia), and octocorals (Alcyonacea). Some stony corals form extensive reefs in the deep sea, particularly on seamounts (e.g. see Seamount SER); a single species, Solenosmilia variabilis, is the dominant reef-builder in temperate Australian waters. Studies of the reef on the southern Tasmanian seamounts showed that Solenosmilia has been in the area for at least 47,000 years (Fallon et al. 2014). Deepwater corals are frequently used as indicators of benthic ‘vulnerable marine ecosystems’ (VME) in deep-sea conservation planning (FAO 2008, Tracey et al. 2008, Williams et al. 2015). Althaus et al. (submitted) show that representation of deepwater octocoral species (>80 m) in Australia’s reserves is equitable to spatial coverage by reserves, but there is low species overlap in- and outside reserves. \nThe ability of sponge to filter large volumes of water makes them a critical link between the benthos and the overlaying water column (WAMSI 2016). Deepwater sponges include demosponges, calcareous and glass sponges. The species-level identification of deepwater sponges has not been standardised across Australian collections at this stage; however, this may be possible in the future through SpongeMaps, an online collaboration tool for sponge taxonomists (Hooper et al. 2013; Hall & Hooper 2014). The broadest regional analysis of deep-water sponges is presented by Fromont et al. (2012) who found that, off WA, the richness and abundance of demosponges and Calcera were negatively associated with decreasing latitude and increasing depth, and hexactinellids positively Fromont et al. (2012). \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThis assessment is based on data derived from Marine National Facility Surveys described in MarLIN (http://www.marine.csiro.au/marlin/search.html) and accessible through the CSIRO Data trawler (http://www.cmar.csiro.au/data/trawler/). Links to specific data sets are provided in the \"On-line resources\" section of this record.\n• Voyage of Discovery north-west (SS05/2007)\n• Voyage of Discovery south-west (SS07/2005 & SS10/2005)\n• Tasmanian seamounts surveys (SS01/1999, SS02/2006 & SS02/2007, SS01/2008 & TT01/2008)\n• Habitat and population assessment of giant crabs (2003 - 2005) \n• NORFANZ survey of Lord Howe Rise and Norfolk Ridge (TAN0308 - NORFANZ)\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Poor-Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nNot clear how the assessment in 2011 was done."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Case Study - National assessment of shallow reefs","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Case Study \"The National assessment of shallow reefs\". The full Case Study, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Case Study are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE FOCUS OF THE CASE STUDY\nShallow rocky and coral reef biodiversity (<25 m depth) around Australia’s coasts and at offshore islands and reef systems. This assessment is based on the recent Australia-wide rollout of Reef Life Survey monitoring methodology (data available at http://reeflifesurvey.imas.utas.edu.au), which includes consideration of reef fishes, large mobile invertebrates such as sea urchins, crown of thorns, lobsters and abalone, and habitat-forming seaweeds and corals.\n\nPRESSURES/ISSUES OF IMPORTANCE\nPressures from recreational and commercial fisheries are of particular importance to larger fish species and lobsters, while ocean warming is having widespread impacts on the composition of communities in temperate zones. The marine heatwave in WA has had a particularly large impact on shallow water reef biodiversity in WA since SoE 2011, with widespread coral bleaching in the northwest and loss of kelp habitats and changing fish communities in the southwest. Cyclones and storms have also had substantial impacts on coral communities at Ningaloo Reef and parts of the GBR. Inner Great Barrier Reef coral structures have been adversely affected by siltation and nutrification.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN CASE STUDY\nReef Life Survey visual census data were used for the current status assessment, with extensive spatial coverage of sites around the continent. Temporal trend information came from a combination of RLS, LTTRMP and AIMS long-term GBR monitoring datasets at 16 particular locations (MPA locations include the broader region and sites inside and outside sanctuary zones): \nNSW: Batemans Marine Park, Jervis Bay Marine Park, Sydney, Lord Howe Island, Port Stephens\nVIC: Beware Reef, Port Phillip Heads\nSA: Encounter Bay (Fleurieu Peninsula)\nWA: Rottnest Island, Jurien Marine Park, Ningaloo Marine Park\nQLD: Capricorn-Bunker, Southern GBR, Central GBR, Northern GBR\nTAS: Maria Island"}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Fringing temperate rocky reefs","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of ecological communities/habitats – fringing temperate rocky reefs\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL HABITAT/COMMUNITY FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nAssemblages of plants and animals found on coastal rocky reefs <25 m depth in the temperate zone, not including reefs within large marine embayments (covered in the Coasts chapter). As fishes are covered in other assessments, the primary focus here is on habitat-forming biota and mobile invertebrates. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nReef Life Survey and Long-term Temperate Reef Monitoring program data were used for the current status assessment, with extensive spatial coverage of sites around the continent. Temporal trend information came from a combination of RLS and LTTRMP at six particular locations (MPA locations include the broader region and sites inside and outside sanctuary zones): \nNSW: Batemans Marine Park, Jervis Bay Marine Park, Sydney, Port Stephens\nVIC: Beware Reef, Port Phillip Heads\nSA: Encounter Bay (Fleurieu Peninsula)\nWA: Rottnest Island, Jurien Marine Park\nTAS: Maria Island\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Poor\nAssessment trend: Deteriorating\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are not comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nNot clear what the 2011 assessment was based on."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - Marine turtles","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of marine turtles\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF TAXONOMIC GROUP FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nSix species of marine turtles reside in the marine habitats of Australia, predominantly north of 29 °S. All six species migrate between foraging and nesting sites. Post hatchlings of five species undertake oceanic migrations which take them outside of Australia’s EEZ. The flatback turtle has a life history largely contained within the waters of the Australian EEZ. Each species can be separated into genetically distinct management units (MUs) and Australia shares these many of these MUs with neighbouring nations. This assessment focusses on the state and trend of marine turtles in their offshore foraging areas; nesting beaches are covered in the coasts chapter. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nData on state and trends and associated spatial and temporal coverage are detailed in the publications provided in the reference list and is based on state government agency and independent surveys.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Poor-good\nAssessment trend: Unclear\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus \nComparability: Grade and trend are comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Poor\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nThe 2016 is based on the most recent information on populations."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Effectiveness of Management - Climate variability and climate change","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Effectiveness of marine management of climate variability and climate change\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE BEING MANAGED, AND ITS IMPACT\nAnthropogenic ocean warming, superimposed on natural climate variations – in particular El Niño–Southern Oscillation and decadal variability – and ocean acidification pose risks to Australia’s coral reef ecosystems, giant kelp and other habitats. In response, there have been significant shifts in the ranges of various invertebrates and fish. Recent reviews of climate change impacts and adaptation on Australia’s commercial marine fisheries and marine ecosystems discuss the implications for marine management.\n\nOn the Great Barrier Reef, rising summer sea temperatures and steadily increasing ocean acidity increase the risk of mass coral bleaching. The cumulative impacts of economic activities – port dredging and runoff of sediment, nutrients and fertiliser from agriculture, for example – cause coral reefs to become stressed and more prone to the effects of climate change. More broadly around Australia, ocean warming and changes in currents are affecting fisheries and aquaculture. \n\nWorld-leading research on these risks is ongoing through Australian universities and research institutes and in consequence the understanding of physical processes is high. Understanding of the economic and cultural significance of the marine environment for Australia is lower, but considerable value is attributed to coastal regions in temperate and tropical Australia. Understanding of the management strategies required to combat the risks is lower still due at least in part to its complexity. Research is ongoing, but a greater investment in developing, implementing and monitoring strategies, monitoring and understanding change, and systematic acquisition and storage of data, is required.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThe assessment is based on published literature – a list is provided in the attached Expert Assessment.\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n• Understanding of pressure: Understanding of climate variability and its management is reasonably high and improving with government funding for well-established and internationally-respected institutions. \n• Planning associated with management of pressure: In-depth planning for icons such as the Great Barrier Reef continues, and commercial fisheries are aware of the need to plan around climate variability. Elsewhere efforts are more patchy.\n• Input for informing management of pressure: Short-term funding cycles are a continuing threat to effective management for long-term goals and sustainability. \n• Processes associated with developing, monitoring, and updating management: Management tools and approaches exist and in some cases are applied; stronger regulation is required for long-term environmental health. \n• Outputs from management framework in place: Conflicting interests between economic development and the environment are leading to a gradual long-term environmental declines, which current management is not addressing.\n• Outcomes of management framework in place: Further policy and management controls are required to address declining environmental health and emerging risks of climate change.\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nNot specified. Review of additional literature has been conducted since 2011 SoE Assessment."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Case Study - National Marine Science Plan","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Case Study \"National Marine Science Plan\". The full Case Study, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Case Study are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE FOCUS OF THE CASE STUDY\nThe National Marine Science Plan (the Plan) is a decadal plan designed to focus investment on the biggest development and sustainability challenges facing Australia's marine estate, and the highest priority science needed to tackle these challenges to fulfill our blue economy’s potential. The grand challenges are highly relevant to the State of Australia's Marine Environment, including energy security; food security; biodiversity conservation and ecosystem health; urban coastal environments; climate variability and change; and resource allocation.\nThe Plan was developed under the auspices of the National Marine Science Committee (NMSC), on which senior representatives of 23 research institutions, universities and government departments work together to plan, coordinate and communicate marine science and its application to national priorities. \nOver 500 marine scientists and stakeholders took part in the development of the Plan, beginning with the development of eight community white papers. The white paper process involved stakeholders from the different marine science sectors working to identify the science required to address grand challenges. The white papers were presented and discussed at a National Marine Science Symposium in November 2014, followed by two further rounds of consultation. The finalised Plan brings together the highest priority science and science capabilities (skills, infrastructure and relationships) to meet a cross-section of challenges areas in an integrated and strategic manner. \n\nISSUES OF IMPORTANCE\nTo focus the coordination efforts and investments, the Plan sets out eight high level recommendations. \n\n1.\tCreate an explicit focus on the blue economy throughout the marine science system.\n2.\tEstablish and support a National Marine Baselines and Long-term Monitoring Program to develop a comprehensive assessment of our estate, and to help manage Commonwealth and State Marine Reserve networks.\n3.\tFacilitate coordinated national studies on marine ecosystem processes and resilience to enable understanding of the impacts of development (urban, industrial and agricultural) and climate change on our marine estate.\n4.\tCreate a National Oceanographic Modelling System to supply defence, industry and government with accurate, detailed knowledge and predictions of ocean state to support decision-making by policymakers and marine industry.\n5.\tDevelop a dedicated and coordinated science program to support decision-making by policymakers and marine industry.\n6.\tSustain and expand the Integrated Marine Observing System to support critical climate change and coastal systems research, including coverage of key estuarine systems.\n7.\tDevelop marine science research training that is more quantitative, cross-disciplinary and congruent with industry and government needs.\n8.\tFund national research vessels for full use.\n\nAll of these recommendations will improve the national capacity to provide evidence-based assessments on the state of Australia’s vast and valuable marine environment.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN CASE STUDY\nSynopsis of the National Marine Science Plan."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - State and Trends - NIMPIS-listed pests","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"The state and trends of non-indigenous/non-endemic species – number and abundance of NIMPIS-listed pests\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ECOLOGICAL PROCESS FOR EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThere are over 250 introduced marine plants and animals established in Australian waters (see marine pests.gov.au). Some have hitch-hiked to Australian waters on the hulls of vessels of all types from yachts to commercial ships, or in their ballast water. Others have been introduced to support local aquaculture, with the aquarium industry another vector. Species that are listed on the National Introduced Marine Pest Information System are those known to have been introduced to Australia, or considered to be a risk of future introduction. NIMPIS currently contains detailed information on over 100 invasive marine species.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nThis assessment is based on peer-review papers and reports as well as information on the marine pests website: see http://www.marinepests.gov.au.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nComparability: Grade and trend are comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nThe 2016 assessment is similar to the 2011 assessment."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Pressures - Dumped wastes","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Expert Assessment \"Pressures on the marine environment associated with dumped wastes\". The full Expert Assessment, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Expert Assessment are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE PRESSURE\nDredging associated with the development or maintenance of port facilities around the coast of Australia is a necessary and unavoidable activity, vital to the continuity of the Australian economy. Disposal of dredged material is mostly commonly by placement on the sea floor in specially designated areas. By volume this is by far the largest pressure on the marine environment due to “dumped waste” and over the period from 2011 to 2016 totalled in the region of 90 million cubic meters of sediment (Ports Australia 2014, 2015). The areas selected as disposal sites and the nature of disposed dredged material at sea are highly regulated to minimise the risk of marine organisms being exposed to toxic materials and that the sites chosen are the most likely to be minimally affected by the application of additional sediment (Ports Australia 2014). Pressures arising from this practice include direct burial of biota as well as less direct impacts arising from resuspension of sediments placed on the sea floor. While the footprint of disposal sites is relatively small on the scale of Australia’s continental shelf, the area affected by remobilised material is potentially larger and less well known (McCook et al 2015). \n\nThe amount of dredged material disposed of at sea in the 5 year period up to 2016 has increased markedly over that reported up to 2011 (Fig. 1). This is mainly due to two large port developments in north-western Australia’s Pilbara region (Gorgon and Wheatstone). Generally there appears to have been a strong upward trend in volumes in the Pilbara over the past decade and two new project approvals have been granted for a further 34 million cubic meters at Anketell Port and 42 million cubic meters at Port Hedland of dredging and disposal in the region. Given the decline in resource development experienced since 2014, this trend may abate in the short term. \n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN EXPERT ASSESSMENT\nData used in assessment cover the entire continental coastal zone of Australia, and include all major ports. See \"On-line resources\" section of this record for links to specific data products.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\n2016 SOE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY [see attached Expert Assessment for full details]\n\n• 2016 •\nAssessment grade: Good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nConfidence trend: Adequate high quality evidence and high level of consensus\nComparability: Grade and trends are somewhat comparable to the 2011 assessment\n• 2011 •\nAssessment grade: Very good\nAssessment trend: Stable\nConfidence grade: Limited evidence or limited consensus\nConfidence trend: Limited evidence or limited consensus\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nCHANGES SINCE 2011 SOE ASSESSMENT\nAt sea dumping was not included in the 2011 SOE assessment as a separate section, where it is barely mentioned."}
- {"title":"2016 SoE Marine Chapter - Case Study - Footprint of trawling","recordAbstract":"The Marine chapter of the 2016 State of the Environment (SoE) report incorporates multiple expert templates developed from streams of marine data. This metadata record describes the Case Study \"Footprint of trawling\". The full Case Study, including figures and tables (where provided), is attached to this record. Where available, the Data Stream(s) used to generate this Case Study are accessible through the \"On-line Resources\" section of this record.\n\n----------------------------------------\n\nDESCRIPTION OF THE FOCUS OF THE CASE STUDY\nSOE 2011 stated that virtually all of Australia’s marine areas shallower than 1,000 m depth are, or have been, fished [by some means]. The most extensive direct human pressure on the seabed in Australia is demersal trawling for fishes, prawns and scallops. It is also commonly perceived that trawl gear has substantial direct impacts on seabed habitats, with most concern surrounding impacts on delicate long-lived structure-forming biota that may be easily damaged and slow to recover if trawling or other bottom-contact fishing occurs on such habitats. This habitat loss is considered to be one of the primary threats to marine ecosystems (SOE 2011). \nDespite this, to date there has been no national-scale quantitative analysis of the cumulative spatial extent of demersal trawl fishing [or “footprint”: the area (km²) of seabed trawled at least once in a specified period of time] that may be used to assess the potential for impacts of trawling on seabed habitats. Formal habitat assessments have been completed for only a small (5 of 22) number of Australian fisheries although these assessments include the largest fisheries and account for >70% of the total footprint. Some other fisheries have implemented qualitative consideration of habitat risks under Ecological Sustainable Development (ESD) objectives, and the Regional Marine Planning process attempted a national qualitative assessment of cumulative risks. Critically, however, the majority of regions lack suitable data on seabed habitats types and their distributions — a major gap that is an impediment to formal assessment of their status.\n\nPRESSURES/ISSUES OF IMPORTANCE\nAustralia’s marine estate is very large and a national quantitative analysis is required to estimate the footprint of trawling and to identify regions that are most exposed and have most need to focus limited research resources towards understanding the presence, distribution and status of sensitive habitats.\nIn recent years-to-decades the total annual effort in most Australia trawl fisheries has been declining, in some cases substantially (Figure 1). As a consequence, the footprints of these fisheries are also contracting as has been documented in several cases (GBR: Pears et al. 2012; TS: Pitcher 2013; NPF: W. Rochester pers. comm.; SET: Pitcher et al. 2015), although footprint contraction is not directly proportional to effort reduction (e.g. GBR: 2005 vs 2009 effort reduction 44% cf footprint decrease 19%; TS: 2005 vs 2011 effort reduction 72% cf footprint decrease 54%; SET: 5 yrs before vs after 2007 effort reduction 36% cf footprint decrease 23%). \nAlthough trawl effort and footprints have contracted, it nevertheless remains critical to determine where potential risks are greatest and where new surveys are required to document presence and distributions of sensitive seabed habitats.\n\nDATA STREAM(S) USED IN CASE STUDY\nThe distribution and intensity of trawl effort in each fishery was mapped by interpolating and gridding position data of trawling events recorded in confidential fishing vessel logbooks, or electronic Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) data, for a 3–5 year period between 2007 and 2012 depending on the fishery. Each trawl event included the associated hours of trawling effort. Depending on the fishery, a ‘trawl event’ may comprise either VMS position polls at ~2 hourly intervals; start and end positions of each individual trawl; positions recorded manually during trawling operations (e.g. 3× per night); a cell location for the days trawling for each vessel (either 6 or 10 minute cells). The gridding was done at 0.01° resolution (~1.1 km² depending on latitude), because the distribution of effort is typically random at about this scale. Effort in hours was converted to trawl swept area per grid area ratios using information on gear width and tow speeds specific to each fishery, then mapped."}