8 rHncrrr~ College of Science amp Engineering

INSPIRING ACHIEVEMENT

flinderseduau 1

Better Prospects for the Future of South Australiarsquos Biodiversity Corey J A Bradshaw Matthew Flinders Fellow in Global Ecology

Prepared for the Environment Protection Authority of South Australia July 2018

ill Flinders ~ UNIVERSITY

College of S_cience amp Engineering flinderseduau

Cite as

Bradshaw CJA 2018 Better Prospects for the Future of South Australiarsquos Biodiversity Report prepared for the Environment Protection Authority of South Australia College of Science and Engineering Flinders University Adelaide South Australia 28 pp July 2018

Professor Corey J A Bradshaw Matthew Flinders Fellow in Global Ecology Global Ecology College of Science and Engineering Flinders University GPO Box 2100 Adelaide South Australia 5001 Australia

E-mail coreybradshawflinderseduau Tel +61 8 8201 2090 URL ConservationBytescom

Environment Protection Authority South Australia GPO Box 2607Adelaide South Australia 5001 Australia

E-mail epainfosagovau Tel +61 8 8204 2004

2

ill Flinders ~ UNIVERSITY

College of S_cience amp Engineering flinderseduau

Cite as

Bradshaw CJA 2018 Better Prospects for the Future of South Australiarsquos Biodiversity Report prepared for the Environment Protection Authority of South Australia College of Science and Engineering Flinders University Adelaide South Australia 28 pp July 2018

Professor Corey J A Bradshaw Matthew Flinders Fellow in Global Ecology Global Ecology College of Science and Engineering Flinders University GPO Box 2100 Adelaide South Australia 5001 Australia

E-mail coreybradshawflinderseduau Tel +61 8 8201 2090 URL ConservationBytescom

Environment Protection Authority South Australia GPO Box 2607Adelaide South Australia 5001 Australia

E-mail epainfosagovau Tel +61 8 8204 2004

2

flinderseduau

Table of Contents

i Summary 4

ii Background 5

Box 1 Biodiversity in context 6 South Australiarsquos biodiversity 6

iii Recent trends in South Australiarsquos biodiversity 7

Native vegetation7 Fauna 7 Wetlands amp aquatic ecosystems 7 Invasive species 7

iv Steps in the right direction 8

Focus on revegetation 8 Rewilding and Fauna Reintroduction 8 Invasive species control 8 Environmental flows 9 Wetland improvement 9 Sanctuaries 9 Climate-change strategies 10 Engaging people10 Heritage agreements 10

v Realistic goals for improvement 11

No lsquono-extinctionrsquo targets 11 Generic priorities for conservation11 Realistic baselines for recovery 12

vi Opportunities 13

Restoration 13 Box 2 Gondwana Link amp NatureLinks 13

Invasive species control14 Protected areas 14 Fix legislation 15 Biodiversity offsets 16 Conservation covenants16 Monitoring 17 Funding 18 Energy 18 Multi-agency cooperation 18 Other 18

vii What we still need to learn 20

viii Final thoughts 21

ix Acknowledgements 21

x References 22

CRICOS No 00114A ABN 65 542 596 200

3

flinderseduau

i Summary

It is unequivocal that the already-poor condition of South Australiarsquos biodiversity is continuing to decline overall mainly due to the legacy of vegetation clearing and habitat modification since European colonisation the destructive influence of invasive species (especially predators like foxes and cats) on our native fauna and flora and impotent or broken legislation to prevent further damage Our struggle to maintain our remaining biodiversity and our intentions to restore once-healthy ecosystems are rendered even more difficult by the added influence of rapid climate disruption Despite the pessimistic outlook South Australians have successfully employed several effective conservation mechanisms including increasing the coverage of our network of protected areas doing ecological restoration projects reducing the densities of feral animals across landscapes encouraging private landholders to protect their biodiversity assets releasing environmental water flows to rivers and wetlands and bringing more people in touch with nature While these strategies are certainly stepping in the right direction our policies and conservation targets have been hampered by arbitrary baselines a lack of cohesion among projects and associated legislation and inappropriate spatial and time scales of intervention While the challenges are many there are several tractable and affordable actions

that can be taken immediately to improve the prospect of the Statersquos biodiversity into the near future These include coordinating existing and promoting broader-scale ecological restoration projects establishing strategic and evidence-based control of invasive species planning more representative protected-area networks that are managed effectively for conservation outcomes fixing broken environmental legislation avoiding or severely limiting biodiversity-offset incentives expanding conservation covenants on private land coordinating a state-wide monitoring network and protocol that tells the South Australian community how effective we are with our policies and actions (and provides opportunities to adapt our policies and actions to improve the trajectory of biodiversity) expanding existing conservation investment and tapping into different funding schemes and coordinating better communication and interaction among government and non-governmental environment agencies Having a more transparent and defensible link between specific conservation actions and targeted outcomes will also likely improve confidence that investments are well-spent With just a little more effort coordination funding and foresight South Australia has the opportunity to become a pillar of biodiversity conservation in Australia

4

flinderseduau

ii Background Despite a relatively small human population by global standardsa and a corresponding low population densityb Australiarsquos terrestrial biodiversity mdash that is its forests grasslands and arid lands that are home to its native plants microbes fungi and animals (see Box 1) mdash are not doing well Of course Australia is not alone in this regard for the world as a whole is losing species approximately 1000 times faster than is expected from normal environmental variation (1 2) This elevated extinction rate is primarily caused by the economic activity of a 75 billion-strong (and risingc) global human society (3) including the direct exploitation of other species for food deforestation mainly from agricultural expansion the spread of non-native species into novel areas pollution and anthropogenic climate change (4 5)

However Australiarsquos track record in species loss is not necessarily in keeping with that expected from its low human population density and vast tracks of open spaces mdash indeed Australia has the worldrsquos highest mammal extinction rate (6) we have a legacy of deforestation from long-running policies encouraging landholders to clear native vegetation (7-9) and we have an abundance of destructive invasive plant and animal species (10) mdash from weeds to voracious introduced

predators like European foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and feral cats (Felis catus) These invasive plants and animals not only threaten native species that largely evolved in isolation from such pressures they also cost Australia billions of dollars each year to control them and in lost economic opportunity (11 12) Australians also have a massive ecological footprintd mdash as a population we are using over 4 times what would be considered ecologically sustainable in the long term due in part to our exorbitant per-capita greenhouse-gas emissionse

(13) and water usef As such a 2010 study calculated that Australiarsquos overall environmental performance was the 9th worst of all nations in the world (14) and we rank 37th

in the world on progress toward the United Nationsrsquo Sustainable Development Goalsg

But can we hinder further onslaught of human endeavour on our natural life-support system Through sound monitoring smart environment and energy policies and evidence-based interventions I argue that we certainly have the means and financial capability of doing so the question is more whether we have sufficient leadership to achieve them at spatial and time scales meaningful to the preservation of our remaining biodiversity In this report I outline several ways in which South Australia can and hopefully will improve

a As of July 2018 there are nearly 25 million people living in Australia of which 32 are in New South Wales 26 in Victoria 20 in Queensland 10 in Western Australia 7 in South Australia 2 each in Tasmania and the ACT and 1 in the Northern Territory (data from Australian Bureau of Statistics) This places Australia as the 54th most-populated country in the world b approximately 325 people per square kilometre (km2) which is one of the lowest national population densities in the world (dataworldbankorg) c Australiarsquos population is also increasing at about 1 per year largely due to immigration d Measures the ecological lsquoassetsrsquo that a particular human population requires to produce the natural resources it consumes and to absorb its

wastes The index tracks the relative ecological resource use (domestic and trade) per capita e Australians emit over 25 tonnes of carbon-dioxide equivalents per person per year making us the approximately the 15th worst emitting countries in the world per capita (see also dataworldbankorg) f Australians consume around 6300 litres of freshwater per person70 ka per day which is around the 9th highest among all countries in the world (watercalculatororg) g Australiarsquos 2nd poorest-performing Sustainable Development Goal is Goal 15 lsquoLife on Landrsquo Itrsquos poorest-performing Goal is lsquoClimate Actionrsquo (Goal 13)

5

flinderseduau

i Summary

It is unequivocal that the already-poor condition of South Australiarsquos biodiversity is continuing to decline overall mainly due to the legacy of vegetation clearing and habitat modification since European colonisation the destructive influence of invasive species (especially predators like foxes and cats) on our native fauna and flora and impotent or broken legislation to prevent further damage Our struggle to maintain our remaining biodiversity and our intentions to restore once-healthy ecosystems are rendered even more difficult by the added influence of rapid climate disruption Despite the pessimistic outlook South Australians have successfully employed several effective conservation mechanisms including increasing the coverage of our network of protected areas doing ecological restoration projects reducing the densities of feral animals across landscapes encouraging private landholders to protect their biodiversity assets releasing environmental water flows to rivers and wetlands and bringing more people in touch with nature While these strategies are certainly stepping in the right direction our policies and conservation targets have been hampered by arbitrary baselines a lack of cohesion among projects and associated legislation and inappropriate spatial and time scales of intervention While the challenges are many there are several tractable and affordable actions

that can be taken immediately to improve the prospect of the Statersquos biodiversity into the near future These include coordinating existing and promoting broader-scale ecological restoration projects establishing strategic and evidence-based control of invasive species planning more representative protected-area networks that are managed effectively for conservation outcomes fixing broken environmental legislation avoiding or severely limiting biodiversity-offset incentives expanding conservation covenants on private land coordinating a state-wide monitoring network and protocol that tells the South Australian community how effective we are with our policies and actions (and provides opportunities to adapt our policies and actions to improve the trajectory of biodiversity) expanding existing conservation investment and tapping into different funding schemes and coordinating better communication and interaction among government and non-governmental environment agencies Having a more transparent and defensible link between specific conservation actions and targeted outcomes will also likely improve confidence that investments are well-spent With just a little more effort coordination funding and foresight South Australia has the opportunity to become a pillar of biodiversity conservation in Australia

4

flinderseduau

ii Background Despite a relatively small human population by global standardsa and a corresponding low population densityb Australiarsquos terrestrial biodiversity mdash that is its forests grasslands and arid lands that are home to its native plants microbes fungi and animals (see Box 1) mdash are not doing well Of course Australia is not alone in this regard for the world as a whole is losing species approximately 1000 times faster than is expected from normal environmental variation (1 2) This elevated extinction rate is primarily caused by the economic activity of a 75 billion-strong (and risingc) global human society (3) including the direct exploitation of other species for food deforestation mainly from agricultural expansion the spread of non-native species into novel areas pollution and anthropogenic climate change (4 5)

However Australiarsquos track record in species loss is not necessarily in keeping with that expected from its low human population density and vast tracks of open spaces mdash indeed Australia has the worldrsquos highest mammal extinction rate (6) we have a legacy of deforestation from long-running policies encouraging landholders to clear native vegetation (7-9) and we have an abundance of destructive invasive plant and animal species (10) mdash from weeds to voracious introduced

predators like European foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and feral cats (Felis catus) These invasive plants and animals not only threaten native species that largely evolved in isolation from such pressures they also cost Australia billions of dollars each year to control them and in lost economic opportunity (11 12) Australians also have a massive ecological footprintd mdash as a population we are using over 4 times what would be considered ecologically sustainable in the long term due in part to our exorbitant per-capita greenhouse-gas emissionse

(13) and water usef As such a 2010 study calculated that Australiarsquos overall environmental performance was the 9th worst of all nations in the world (14) and we rank 37th

in the world on progress toward the United Nationsrsquo Sustainable Development Goalsg

But can we hinder further onslaught of human endeavour on our natural life-support system Through sound monitoring smart environment and energy policies and evidence-based interventions I argue that we certainly have the means and financial capability of doing so the question is more whether we have sufficient leadership to achieve them at spatial and time scales meaningful to the preservation of our remaining biodiversity In this report I outline several ways in which South Australia can and hopefully will improve

a As of July 2018 there are nearly 25 million people living in Australia of which 32 are in New South Wales 26 in Victoria 20 in Queensland 10 in Western Australia 7 in South Australia 2 each in Tasmania and the ACT and 1 in the Northern Territory (data from Australian Bureau of Statistics) This places Australia as the 54th most-populated country in the world b approximately 325 people per square kilometre (km2) which is one of the lowest national population densities in the world (dataworldbankorg) c Australiarsquos population is also increasing at about 1 per year largely due to immigration d Measures the ecological lsquoassetsrsquo that a particular human population requires to produce the natural resources it consumes and to absorb its

wastes The index tracks the relative ecological resource use (domestic and trade) per capita e Australians emit over 25 tonnes of carbon-dioxide equivalents per person per year making us the approximately the 15th worst emitting countries in the world per capita (see also dataworldbankorg) f Australians consume around 6300 litres of freshwater per person70 ka per day which is around the 9th highest among all countries in the world (watercalculatororg) g Australiarsquos 2nd poorest-performing Sustainable Development Goal is Goal 15 lsquoLife on Landrsquo Itrsquos poorest-performing Goal is lsquoClimate Actionrsquo (Goal 13)

5

flinderseduau

ii Background Despite a relatively small human population by global standardsa and a corresponding low population densityb Australiarsquos terrestrial biodiversity mdash that is its forests grasslands and arid lands that are home to its native plants microbes fungi and animals (see Box 1) mdash are not doing well Of course Australia is not alone in this regard for the world as a whole is losing species approximately 1000 times faster than is expected from normal environmental variation (1 2) This elevated extinction rate is primarily caused by the economic activity of a 75 billion-strong (and risingc) global human society (3) including the direct exploitation of other species for food deforestation mainly from agricultural expansion the spread of non-native species into novel areas pollution and anthropogenic climate change (4 5)

However Australiarsquos track record in species loss is not necessarily in keeping with that expected from its low human population density and vast tracks of open spaces mdash indeed Australia has the worldrsquos highest mammal extinction rate (6) we have a legacy of deforestation from long-running policies encouraging landholders to clear native vegetation (7-9) and we have an abundance of destructive invasive plant and animal species (10) mdash from weeds to voracious introduced

predators like European foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and feral cats (Felis catus) These invasive plants and animals not only threaten native species that largely evolved in isolation from such pressures they also cost Australia billions of dollars each year to control them and in lost economic opportunity (11 12) Australians also have a massive ecological footprintd mdash as a population we are using over 4 times what would be considered ecologically sustainable in the long term due in part to our exorbitant per-capita greenhouse-gas emissionse

(13) and water usef As such a 2010 study calculated that Australiarsquos overall environmental performance was the 9th worst of all nations in the world (14) and we rank 37th

in the world on progress toward the United Nationsrsquo Sustainable Development Goalsg

But can we hinder further onslaught of human endeavour on our natural life-support system Through sound monitoring smart environment and energy policies and evidence-based interventions I argue that we certainly have the means and financial capability of doing so the question is more whether we have sufficient leadership to achieve them at spatial and time scales meaningful to the preservation of our remaining biodiversity In this report I outline several ways in which South Australia can and hopefully will improve

a As of July 2018 there are nearly 25 million people living in Australia of which 32 are in New South Wales 26 in Victoria 20 in Queensland 10 in Western Australia 7 in South Australia 2 each in Tasmania and the ACT and 1 in the Northern Territory (data from Australian Bureau of Statistics) This places Australia as the 54th most-populated country in the world b approximately 325 people per square kilometre (km2) which is one of the lowest national population densities in the world (dataworldbankorg) c Australiarsquos population is also increasing at about 1 per year largely due to immigration d Measures the ecological lsquoassetsrsquo that a particular human population requires to produce the natural resources it consumes and to absorb its

wastes The index tracks the relative ecological resource use (domestic and trade) per capita e Australians emit over 25 tonnes of carbon-dioxide equivalents per person per year making us the approximately the 15th worst emitting countries in the world per capita (see also dataworldbankorg) f Australians consume around 6300 litres of freshwater per person70 ka per day which is around the 9th highest among all countries in the world (watercalculatororg) g Australiarsquos 2nd poorest-performing Sustainable Development Goal is Goal 15 lsquoLife on Landrsquo Itrsquos poorest-performing Goal is lsquoClimate Actionrsquo (Goal 13)

5

flinderseduau

Box 1 Biodiversity in context

The variety of life on Earth known collectively as biodiversity is made up of over an estimated 12 million speciesh of which only 62 thousand are animals with a backbone (vertebrates) While scientists have identified most of the larger species such as birds reptiles and mammals they are far less certain about the number of smaller species such as insects worms and micro-organisms This means that we still discover many new species each year and the true global species richness (the number of unique species) is probably far greater

Australia is home to and estimated 566000 species of which only about 150000 have been described formallyi (15) Many of Australiarsquos species are found nowhere else on Earth including most of the more well-known marsupial mammals (about 87 of the described species) but also many different endemic birds (45) reptiles (94) fish and plants (92) (15) In South Australia it is difficult to estimate the total number of native land species because a full biodiversity assessment for the State has never been done (especially for invertebrates and micro-organisms) However we do have estimates for some groups such as extantj terrestrial mammals 129 species birds 469 species reptiles 238 species amphibiansk 26 species (16) native vascular plants 9448 species bryophytes l 440 species fungim 1478 species lichensn 355 species and algae 2050 specieso (17)

South Australiarsquos biodiversity

South Australiarsquos direct human-population footprint might appear to be less than that in the more populated eastern states however this assumption belies the long history of deforestation and habitat change done principally in the name of agricultural expansion since European colonisation The infamy of clearing in Western Australiarsquos wheatbelt from the 1940s to the 1980s (7 18) and Queenslandrsquos sporadic title as a world deforestation hotspot this century (7 19-22) might overshadow the fact that most of South Australiarsquos native vegetation clearing was done in the 19th and early 20th centuries (7 23)

Today native forests therefore cover only about 9 of the South Australiarsquos land area with less than 10 of the original forest cover remaining in the Mount Lofty Ranges and less than 4 remaining in the Adelaide Plains relative to their extents immediately before Europeans first came to Australia (7) In fact a Parliamentary Inquiry into the state of South Australiarsquos biodiversity by the Environment Resources and Development Committee concluded in 2017 that ldquohellip the condition of biodiversity in the State continues to declinerdquo (24)

Given the overall loss of biodiversity nationally and the well-established relative loss of species habitats and ecosystems in South Australia since European colonisation the question of how to impede or slow future losses should not necessarily focus on the (probably impossible) task of bringing our environment back to a pre-European condition instead we should be asking whether our actions and political decisions are at least maintaining the status quo or perhaps even improving the state of biodiversity in South Australia Thus the following sections (iii) summarise the current data describing the recent trends and conditions of the Statersquos terrestrialp biodiversity (iv) discuss recent actions and policies that have slowed or have the potential to limit biodiversity loss (v) set realistic goals for improvement (vi) recommend actions to reduce the risk of even more biodiversity losses and (vii) identify gaps in our knowledge regarding what actions should be prioritised and best applied to maximise the resilience of South Australiarsquos remaining species

h although fewer than one tenth of those have been described formally i 8128 vertebrates 987703 invertebrates 24716 plants (including algae and bryophytes) 11846 fungi and 4186 from other groups j living not extinct k frogs salamanders caecilians l liverworts hornworts mosses m mushrooms yeasts moulds n algae or cyanobacteria-fungus hybrids o although many of these are marine macroalgae (ie seaweeds) p land

6

flinderseduau

iii Recent trends in South Australiarsquos biodiversity

Native vegetation

The cover in woody native vegetationq in South Australia over the last 25 years is approximately stable with slight increases in the southern and central regionsr however its overall conditions is unknown (25) Broadening our scope overall native vegetationt is in a State-wide decline in cover with the regions doing the worst also those with the most peopler like woody native vegetation the condition of our remaining native vegetation is unknown (25) At the species level the abundance and distribution of native florau is also declining across the state especially in the most-populated regionsr (25) Like their animal counterparts (see below) 12 of native plant species are threatened with extinctionv across the State of which the South East has the highest proportion (25)

Fauna

Following the greater trend across Australia South Australia fauna speciesw have been declining in abundance and distribution overall most notably in the most-populated regionsr of the State Of these 12 of South Australiarsquos native animal species are considered threatened with extinctionv (25) with the highest proportion of threatened species (23) reported in the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges As an example many South Australian bird species are declining at alarming rates and consequently have some of the highest risks of extinction relative to almost everywhere else in the country (26)

Wetlands amp aquatic ecosystems

Globally the world has lost some ⅔ of its wetlands over the last century (27) Combined with the higher proportional risk of extinction for freshwater biodiversity relative to almost any other group of animals or plants

q woodlands amp shrublands r Eyre Peninsula Northern and Yorke Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges South Australian Murray-Darling Basin s or lsquohealthrsquo in terms of ecological function t which includes habitats like native grasslands u based on assessments of abundance and distribution of 3171 different plant species v according to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species in which a species is defined as

(28 29) and the high human demand for freshwater in this the driest inhabited continent on Earth freshwater species are perhaps the most threatened group in South Australia Indeed over 70 of the Statersquos wetlands have been lost since European colonisation and 99 of those remaining cannot be considered lsquointactrsquo (30) Over the entire State wetlands are considered lsquostablersquo however most of its wetlands are found in only two regions (Adelaide and Mount Lofty Rangesx South Easty) and the wetlands there are declining in both area and condition (25) That said aquatic ecosystem condition in general is improving in many regions (except the wetland-rich South East) mainly as a result of more available environmental water since the Millennium drought (2001-2009) (25) As for the Statersquos rivers streams and drains they are classed overall as in lsquofairrsquo or lsquopoorrsquo ecological conditionz in terms of nutrient concentrations salt content sediment load vegetation type weeds and invertebrate communities

Invasive species

South Australia is now host to many weedy plants (eg African boxthorn Lycium ferocissimum arum lily Zantedeschia aethiopica flax-leaf broom Genista linifolia) (31) and alien animal species (eg foxes cats feral goats Capra hircus rats Rattus spp dromedary camels Camelus dromedarius) with the situation worsening in terms of their increasing abundance andor distribution mainly in the most populated regionsaa of the State (25)

Extinct in the Wild Critically Endangered Endangered or Vulnerable mdash see the IUCN category descriptions for details w based on assessments of abundance and distribution of 779 different species x since 1990 this region has lost an estimated 163 of its wetland cover y since 1990 this region has lost an estimated 275 of its wetland cover z based on assessments of 418 sites across 18 catchments aa Northern and Yorke Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges South East

7

flinderseduau

iv Steps in the right direction

The preceding sectionrsquos brief summary of the state of South Australiarsquos biodiversity might be viewed as pessimistic but the collective realisation that there are problems to fix from a long history of environment reporting from various state government bodies (eg 32 33 34) academic institutions (see References) and non-government agencies has stimulated a wide range of on-the-ground management interventions as well as positive changes to policy While we still have a long way to go to improve (see Opportunities) we can be proud of having already made some progress to protect the Statersquos biodiversity and ecosystems

Focus on revegetation

Overall land clearing is by far the greatest threatening process to South Australiarsquos terrestrial species (25) so it stands to reason that programs to revegetate previously cleared land with native plants have been emphasised throughout much of the State and especially in its agricultural zones

Over several decades up until the present many different revegetation programs have been initiated with the intent of bringing back some semblance of native forest andor grassland function Many of these have been small-scale ventures to assist in revegetating tracts of farmland or others that have a broader-scale regional focusbb Further non-for-profit groups like Greening Australia and Trees for Life continue to assist land owners and community groups across the State to revegetate areas with native species However broader coverage more regional coordination and connectivity linking plantings to specific conservation outcomes idealising the species combinations per habitat type and linking to other ecosystem services (eg carbon sequestration pollination efficiency) have so far not been examined or planned in much detail within most revegetation projects (see Opportunities)

Rewilding and Fauna Reintroduction

(Re)introducing native fauna serves two main purposes (i) to reduce the risk of species going extinct by increasing abundance the number of populations andor genetic diversity (35 36) and (ii) to reintroduce

bb eg Coorong Lower Lakes and Murray Mouth Community Revegetation Programme (2010-2016) under the $610 million Murray Futures project that has planted 14 million plants covering nearly 90 thousand hectares

an ecological function once provided by (often another) species that is no longer present (eg top predators) Such actions can dovetail with other goals such as reintroducing species following the control of invasives andor establishing a fenced protected area

There have been several successful attempts to reintroduce or restock native wildlife in areas where they are threatened with extinction Some of the most successful include the reintroduction of yellow-footed rock wallaby (Petrogale xanthopus) to restored habitats in the Flinders Ranges the reintroduction of warru (black-footed rock wallabies Petrogale lateralis) into the northern Anangu-Pitjantjatjara-Yankunytjatjara (APY) lands and recent attempts to reintroduce western quolls (Dasyurus geoffroii) and brush-tailed possums (Trichosurus vulpecula) to the arid interior of South Australia under the auspices of the Bounceback programcc There is also the potential for a major rewilding project in Yorke Peninsula coordinated by a consortium of groups provided invasive predator (ie foxes and cats) removal precedes any reintroduction (see Steps in the right direction mdash Invasive species control) This latter program is perhaps one of the most daring attempted to date and if it works it could represent one of the greatest conservation gains this State has ever witnessed

Invasive species control

Feral cats and foxes are two of the most destructive invasive species in Australia in terms of their negative impacts on native wildlife (10 37) so it makes sense that their removal or at least reducing their densities will have many positive flow-on effects for South Australiarsquos native wildlife (whether for remaining or reintroduced populations)

Some of the more publicised predator eradications include cat and fox reductions in fenced areas in the arid mid-North (eg the mostly industry-funded Arid Recovery) fox reductions to benefit yellow-footed rock wallabies in the Flinders Ranges and malleefowl (Leipoa ocellata) in southern Yorke Peninsula and council-level cat and fox trapping initiatives (with varied success) around the State

cc a landscape-scale conservation program to protect and restore semi-arid environments in the Flinders Olary and Gawler Ranges

8

flinderseduau

Perhaps one of the most promising projects is the Kangaroo Island Feral Cat Eradication Program that is just getting underway The fact that Kangaroo Island is an island (island species tend to be the most susceptible to cats) (38) that could be quarantined from further cat immigration from the mainland that it still has no foxes and that much of it remains forested it is the ideal place to attempt such a challenging yet potentially rewarding project

Other promising moves forward is the recognition by many regional councils that house cats pose immense threats to local wildlife even if they appear not to hunt native species (when in fact they do mdash 39 40) and the ensuing restrictions on cat ownership compulsory cat registration and microchipping desexing and confinement curfews The trend for more councils to adopt increasingly restrictive by-laws for cat ownership and management will likely reduce the pressure on native wildlife to some extent

There are many other animal species that have been the target of eradication programs including feral goats dromedary camels various deer species and European rabbits Oryctolagus cuniculus Success has varied (ie some success with goats less with camels and deer) but arguably the most conservation and agricultural benefit has been the case of large reductions in wild rabbits following the release and spread of two rabbit-specific viruses myxoma virus and rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus In fact South Australia is leading the country in terms of rabbit control using these diseases with substantial gains in native vegetation cover (41) and the recovery of small mammalsdd (42) following large disease-driven declines in rabbits since the 1950s (43)

Environmental flows

Many of South Australiarsquos rivers creeks and even lakes are highly regulated by artificial dams and locks that attenuate the flooding and drying cycles in natural systems Hence ephemeral wetlands and floodplains

dd because not only is their more vegetation for native mammals to eat when there are fewer rabbits competing for the same food resources there are generally fewer invasive predators following a reduction in their main prey (rabbits) ee eg the Torrens South Para and Onkaparinga Rivers environmental flows within the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resource Management region

tend not to experience the flooding necessary for long-term native plant (and animal) survival unless we specifically release water to them These lsquoenvironmental flowsrsquo are increasingly used to mimic natural cycles (eg those that are nationally legislated but not always done under the Murray-Darling Basin Plan) and are being used in some council regions successfullyee although the full impact on native biodiversity is still largely unmeasuredff (see also Opportunities mdash Monitoring)

Wetland improvement

Despite many threats to South Australiarsquos few remaining wetlands (44) there have been several examples of successful restoration and even entirely new creation of wetlands in South Australia A trip to the Botanic Gardens in Adelaide shows how this can be done even at small scales The recently completed First Creek Wetland there not only purifies run-off it provides habitat for birds insects and fish and saves the Botanic Gardens large volumes of water for other irrigation uses The Adelaide Hills Council also invested in returning the award-winning Laratinga Wetlands in Mount Barker to a fully functioning and biodiverse wetland in only a few years Likewise Nature Foundation South Australia has championed many wetland restoration and environmental-flow projects under its Water for Nature program and Nature Glenelg Trust is successfully restoring wetlands like the Mount Burr Swamp and Eaglehawk Waterhole

Sanctuaries

Approximately 30 of the Statersquos land area is protected in part for its biodiversity values albeit most of this is the semi-arid and arid regions of the State where there is relatively lower species richnessgg and endemismhh

compared to the wetter regions to the south (25) Fortunately the number of protected areas and their total area coverage is increasing throughout most of the state although there is probably inadequate coverage of unique ecosystems in some regionsii Some areas in the arid north under the designation of Indigenous Protected Areas are large (eg the 12 million hectare

ff however there have been noticeable reductions in the frequency and intensity of toxic algal blooms in the Torrens River since environmental flows were initiated gg lsquospecies richnessrsquo is simply the total number of different species found in a particular area hh an lsquoendemicrsquo species is found nowhere else ii Northern and Yorke (8 coverage) South Australian Murray-Darling Basin (18 coverage) South East (24 coverage)

9

flinderseduau

Watarru Indigenous Protected Area in the north east of the State) but most in the southern more biodiverse areas are small (eg the 2680 ha Wirrabara Range Conservation Park and the 177 ha Little Mount Crawford Native Forest Reserve) Other types of reserves are becoming increasingly popular such as the previously mentioned Arid Recovery fenced reserve funded mainly by the mining industry for-profit and educational wildlife parks (eg Cleland Wildlife Park Warrawong Wildlife Sanctuary) and urban parks (eg Adelaide Botanic Gardens Oaklands Wetlands Urrbrae Wetland Greenfields Wetlands)

Climate-change strategies

The recent warming of the Earths climate due to human societyrsquos production of greenhouse gasesjj and the inevitable continuation of this trend are unequivocal (45-48) South Australia has wisely recognised that our changing climate threatens not only our biodiversity (49-54) but also the high quality of life most South Australians enjoy via increasing risk of drought flood bushfire heatwave death and reduced agricultural production (50 52 55) To that end the State Government all regional councils and Natural Resource Management boards and municipalities have relevant climate-change strategies and legislation While it is arguable that these do not go far enough given the magnitude of ongoing change the attempts to mitigate and adapt are essential

Engaging people

It is without doubt that we do not stand much hope of limiting the erosion of our biodiversity if people do not value are not engaged with or are otherwise indifferent to nature and its plight (24) To improve the engagement with people mdash from farmers to developers to average citizens mdash many programs have been rolled out to promote awareness and appreciation of natural values in South Australia One of the shining stars is the not-for-profit Nature Play SA which aims to get more children playing outside in their own backyards parks and wild places Similarly places like the Morialta Conservation Park has developed programs for children to engage with native flora and fauna Establishing

reserves and parks near or in South Australiarsquos principal urban area (Adelaide) such as Tennyson Dunes Conservation Park Adelaide International Bird Sanctuary National Park and Cromer Conservation Park provide extensive opportunities as multiple-use areas to engage mainly urban visitors Other endeavours to encourage people to get back to nature include opening some conservation reserves to camping (eg Onkaparinga River National Park) although such policies remains controversialkk

Heritage agreements

Land owners in South Australia can apply for a Heritage Agreement which essentially establishes a conservation area on private land in perpetuityll These are great in principle to encourage people to protect important conservation resources on private land although there can be perverse outcomes if not managed correctly (see Opportunities)

jj gases (mainly water vapour carbon dioxide methane nitrous oxide kk environmental purists sometimes argue that protected areas should and ozone) in the atmosphere that absorb and emit radiant energy be off-limits to recreationists to reduce their potential negative within the thermal infrared range impacts on protected flora and fauna

ll even if the property is sold or ownership is transferred

10

flinderseduau

v Realistic goals for improvement

No lsquono-extinctionrsquo targets

Before discussing specific opportunities that will likely improve the outcomes for biodiversity conservation in South Australia over the coming years it pays to reflect on our long-terms goals and the possibility of realising them The State currently has a policy of lsquono species lossrsquo which is laudable but an entirely unrealistic proposition because extinctions are impossible to avoid Extinctions are a normal part of life at least over geological time scales (56 57)

But it is incorrect to believe that because most of the environmental damage in South Australia has already been done that we can more easily avoid extinctions in the future Unfortunately degradation of the past has not yet wreaked its full havoc on species due to a phenomenon known as extinction debt (58) This well-demonstrated phenomenon means that extinctions continue years decades and sometimes even centuries (59) past the causal environmental perturbation Thus even if a comprehensive state-wide and massive ecological effort were to begin tomorrow in South Australia (an unlikely scenario) we would still be committed to decades of extinctions from past degradation These are not wild uncertain concepts mdash these are well-established facts in conservation ecology Combining this notion with the observation that few of the indicators used to track biodiversity change in South Australia are suggesting improvement (see Recent trends in South Australiarsquos biodiversity) a no-loss policy becomes unachievable

Thankfully South Australia is beginning to rethink this approach through the multi-stakeholder partnership known as Nature of SA mdash a sector-wide endeavour to support positive change in the Statersquos holistic approach to nature conservation While still in its early stages this multi-institutional (see also Opportunities mdash Multi-agency cooperation) conversation is potentially bringing the greater communityrsquos conservation values more formally into government policies and future management endeavours While this will most likely

mm a more comprehensive set of systematic conservation planning standards is provided by the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation

help align government policy with public values by itself it will be insufficient to set realistic goals for the conservation of South Australiarsquos biodiversity

South Australia therefore requires conservation goals that will enhance the resilience of the most species for the lowest costs (see also Opportunities mdash Funding) While I will describe specific opportunities for achieving this in the next sections the essence of our policies should be testing improvement via effective monitoring and the estimation of counterfactuals First because too few species habitats and ecosystems are adequately monitored (measured) it is difficult or impossible to determine whether specific interventions actually improve the species they were intended to help Second there are typically insufficient efforts to estimate counterfactuals (ie what would happen otherwise) when proposing an intervention Here mathematical models that incorporate measured environmental variation and projected trends in land-use and climate change can be useful for testing business-as-usual scenarios against realistic intervention scenarios (see an example here)

Generic priorities for conservation

In an overarching sense our priorities for biodiversity conservation should therefore adhere to the following general approachesmm

a Determine which biodiversity values are most important to protect in the long-run to maintain ecosystem function and evolutionary resilience

b Measure whether these biodiversity values (eg using indices of abundance distribution condition of a population species or ecosystem) are changing over time

c If these measured values are declining design an intervention that at least stops or slows the declinenn

d Test interventions (experimentally or by mathematical simulation) for their capacity to restore a population species or ecosystem towards an acceptable baseline (eg a minimum viable population sizeoo a minimum

nn a new resource that can assist in assessing whether a particular intervention will function as intended is Conservation Evidence oo The minimum number of individuals in a population to make the probability of extinction negligible

11

flinderseduau

proportion of formally occupied range an accepted minimum number of populations minimum number of species for ecosystems to continue functioning etc)

The key word in point d is minimum mdash from the perspective of minimising the risk of a species going extinct there is a vast scientific foundation for how many individuals (36) populations (60) genetic diversity (35) and ecological functions are required Adding a little bit more of this scientific understanding into the planning mix will therefore help us to reach these minima And if we manage to build populations up even beyond these targets the risk of extinction will decline even more

It is also essential to appreciate that context matters mdash in other words determining what species are at risk and what interventions are required will differ across landscapes This can be true even for the same species or ecological communities in different areas Thus what works in one place will not necessarily work somewhere else if the pressures and landscape contexts are different meaning that generic one-action-fits-all approaches are unlikely to be successful everywhere

Realistic baselines for recovery

Also in reference to point d above restoration goals are premised on establishing some sort of minimum baseline mdash in other words a state to which we aspire to return the system Purists are often of the opinion that this baseline should be the state of the environment at the time of European colonisation but this naiumlve perspective ignores the notions that all ecosystems change through time climate change will make no-analogue futures for many species (61 62) extensive landscape modification already precludes a return to pre-European states no one alive today knows what the pre-European state was like (nor are there any data to estimate it) and there was substantial ecosystem modification by Indigenous Australians well before Europeans arrived (63 64) Returning to the priorities for conservation we therefore need to establish conservation goals based on the ecological fundamentals of species persistence (35) rather than adhering to arbitrary and unrealistic historical baselines (65)

12

flinderseduau

vi Opportunities

In this section I outline what I argue are some of the most tractable and affordable changes to existing management actions and policies that could result in the greatest conservation gains in South Australia over the next few decades

Restoration

As outlined earlier the greatest threatening process in South Australia today for native flora and fauna is past and ongoing clearing (25) Thus (i) arresting further vegetation clearing and (ii) restoring previously cleared land to functional native vegetation communities are easily the highest priority across the entire State I discuss the first aspect (preventing clearing) in more detail below so I will focus here instead on the restoration component

Despite the valiant attempts across the State to revegetate the haphazard approach to reforestation in South Australia means that we are unlikely to be maximising ecological function and providing the best habitats for native flora and fauna Several improvements in this regard can be made

a Establish a State Register of past ongoing and planned revegetation projects including data on the proponents area revegetated species plant number of individuals planted from each species monitoring in place (eg plant survival other species using the restored habitat etc) and costs

b Establish a State Revegetation Council that uses data from the Register to prioritise projects (either for funding or other forms of assistance) to promote connectivity (ie linking restored areas to each other and existing tracts of native habitats mdash see Box 2) enhance collaboration among ongoing projects suggest improvements in design and placement and monitor progress at the landscape scale

c In a similar manner as outlined in points a and b above establish a State Register of Wetland-Restoration projects and a State Wetlands Council Here smaller wetlands with more unique endemic plant species should be prioritised for conservation and restoration (66)

d Both councils should ideally also assist in coordinating non-profit and private organisations in terms of their revegetation priorities as well as coordinate with conservation covenant programs for private landholders

e Most revegetation projects are not specifically linked to particular conservation outcomes Thus establishing what specific goals the revegetation intends to have (eg expanding the available habitat for specific species) will help design projects of sufficient magnitude and composition for the intended outcomes As far as is practical approaches should follow the National Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration in Australia

f All restoration projects should ideally incorporate carbon accounting to estimate the carbon sequestration component (realised and potential) of restoration projects for carbon assessments legislated under Australiarsquos commitment to the Kyoto Protocolpp

g There is currently a lack of empirical evidence regarding the most effective ways to maximise biodiversity potential in revegetation projects (ie which species to plant how many different species to plant what spacing to plant etc) while there are some ongoing experiments to determine these ideal approaches for certain habitats in South Australia there is as yet insufficient information across all vegetation communities to provide ideal guidelines (see also What we still need to learn)

Box 2 Gondwana Link amp NatureLinks

Perhaps the best example of a large-scale project to enhance habitat connectivity in Australia is the ambitious (yet so far incomplete) Gondwana Link which is attempting to link fragments of bushland together into a contiguous habitat feature Operating in southern Western Australia the program is aiming to achieve complete forest connectivity over about 1000 km

pp Australia committed to reduce its greenhouse-gas emissions by of the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007 Australia ratifying the Kyoto Protocol in 2007 and then signed up to the second is obliged to account for all emissions and sequestration commitment period (2013-2020) under the Paris Agreement As part

13

flinderseduau

from the dry woodlands of the interior to the tall wet forests of the far south-west corner of the State By restoring the native vegetation in the gaps between forest fragments the overall aim is to build a contiguous forest over this entire range Given that connectivity is an important feature of habitats that improve the conservation prospects of the many species living within them (by allowing species to move freely among populations and by increasing the overall size of the available habitat) Gondwana Link represents if fully realised one of the greatest potential conservation achievements in Australiarsquos history

South Australia used to have an analogous program known as NatureLinks from which successful projects like Bounceback emerged However Commonwealth and State funding for the program dried up several years ago and it is unfortunately no longer planned A return to a NatureLinks-like program would achieve many conservation gains for the State of South Australia

Invasive species control

If vegetation clearing is the greatest threat to South Australiarsquos remaining biodiversity then invasive species (predators in particular) are certainly in second place While local attempts to reduce the density of species like foxes and cats in particular are admirable insufficient effort and longevity of the projects in many cases do little to reduce actual predator densities Ideal culling regimes to maximise the reduction in densities that have real positive implications for native prey typically require some mathematical modelling beforehand to guide the effort needed to achieve success (eg 67) While such models are in development for the places like Kangaroo Island most density-reduction programs do not employ these powerful planning tools Thus culling regimes have to demonstrate empirical evidence that efforts will succeed in reducing densities they need to be sufficiently funded they need to occur over long-enough time frames they need to be integrated across the landscape to dovetail with other conservation goals and they also need to monitor their progress Without these essential ingredients most projects end up doing nothing more than wasting money and time without helping any native species In terms of overall priorities for animal species to cull this will be site-specific but in general we should be aiming to reduce (a) cats then (b) foxes (c) rabbits (d) goats (e) camels and (f) deer For weeds the eradication priorities are likely to be highly site-specific and should follow the Weeds of National Significance priorities based on known and projected ecological and economic impacts

Protected areas

While South Australia might boast a large proportional coverage of its land area under some form of protection the fact remains that there is likely high under-representation of certain areas and habitats with the most unique native species (ie especially in the wetter southern parts of the State) Thus our goal should be to avoid arbitrary overall targets of coverage and instead

plan on increasing the coverage of our most endangered and under-representative habitats (eg wetlands moist temperate forests native grasslands etc) Finding crown or Indigenous land outside of private holdings to protect can be politically challenging andor expensive but we should at least model ideal spatial patterns for maximising representativeness using established approaches (68-70) Of course this includes planning for the climates of the future (71) as well as for fire and urbanisation trends (72)

Planning for effective and representative networks of protected areas should follow the principles of Comprehensive Adequate and Representative Reserve Systems (CARRS) Thus merely adding new reserves to the network opportunistically will not lead to adequate representation of the ecological communities most in need of protection Perhaps more importantly each protected area requires sufficient management to be able to function as intended and this requires adequate funding and planning Merely gazetting a reserve and then doing nothing more will nearly always ensure continued biodiversity loss (73)

But if we only relied on standard protected areas like reserves conservation areas and national parks to protect biodiversity we would likely fail to avoid extinctions mainly because most land area is under private ownership This point was recently echoed strongly by the South Australia Parliamentary Inquiry into Biodiversity (24) Thus coordination with landholders to improve agricultural practices that harm wildlife establish conservation covenants or Heritage Agreements and exclude livestock and other species from conservation assets must occur in tandem Further increasing biodiversity conservation in urban environments (74) with specific biodiversity-focussed planning of green spaces in cities using landscape-ecology frameworks will assist in promoting biodiversity persistence in urban and peri-urban regions of the State

14

flinderseduau

Fix legislation

Surprisingly there is no dedicated legislation to protect biodiversity in South Australia today While the Native Vegetation Act restricts clearing the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972 deals with protected areas and species endangerment the Wilderness Protection Act 1992 addresses wilderness protection and land restoration the Natural Resource Management Act 2004 promotes sustainable and integrated management of the States natural resources and the Environment Protection Authority operates under various actsqq to limit environmental damage there is no act specifically focussed on biodiversity conservation in South Australia and those that do exist do not even consider invertebrates (like insects) as animalsrr

Indeed the 2017 Parliamentary Inquiry into Biodiversity concluded that existing environmental legislation in South Australia ldquohellip lacks cohesion and consistency particularly regarding enforcement and compliance provisionsrdquo (24) An entirely new biodiversity-focussed act would therefore add legislative teeth to biodiversity conservation in this state mdash in fact the Parliamentary Inquiry into Biodiversity recently recommendedss the creation of a Biodiversity Expert Panel to reform the legislative framework of environmental protection (24) and the newtt Government of South Australia has the perfect opportunity to do so under their proposed changes to natural resource management legislation Following these calls for reform and the new direction of Nature of SA there is a real opportunity here for statutory reform that includes integrated biodiversity legislation analogous to the New South Wales Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016

While broad-scale clearing of vegetation in South Australia was limited in 1991 with the implementation of the Native Vegetation Act each year in South Australia there are between 1000 and 2000 hectares legally cleared (as administered by the Native Vegetation Council) and over 200 hectares cleared illegally (7 34) Better enforcement (and a suggested increase in financial penalties for non-compliance) of the Native Vegetation Act notwithstanding there are some

qq including the Aquaculture Act 2001 Environmental Protection Act 1993 Radiation Protection and Control Act 1982 and the Wingfield Waste Depot Closure Act 1999 rr because most animals are in fact invertebrates this means that the majority of South Australiarsquos species is ineligible for official threat listing even if they have a high risk of extinction ss However the Minister for Sustainability Environment and Conservation at the time (Ian Hunter) responded that ldquohellip it would be premature to embark on significant changes to conservation legislation and policy frameworks helliprdquo given the existence of Nature of

problems with the current operation and rules governing the restrictions on clearing native vegetation Potential improvements therefore include

a The Council needs better connection to the planning process for projects proposing to clear native vegetation In many circumstances the planning is done before consulting the Council so that it becomes of case of approvenot approve instead of being able to influence the planning from the outset It should be a legal requirement of development proponents to seek advice from the Council before project planning commences

b The biggest weakness of the Native Vegetation Act is the ability for separate legislation to be created at the discretion of the sitting government to circumvent this Actuu Under the Development Act 1993vv if a development is successfully assessed as lsquomajorrsquo it can under certain circumstances be permitted to bypass and completely ignore all restrictions of the Native Vegetation Actww via the passing of new dominant legislation This sort of special compensation undermines the entire Act and renders the Native Vegetation Councilrsquos oversight toothless This requires immediate rectification because the practice of allowing commercial interests to circumvent the Act essentially permits the largest and most biodiversity-destructive developments to go ahead unhindered (24)

c Analogously most allowed vegetation clearances by the Council within the last few years have been for the development of renewable-energy projects like wind and solar-photovoltaic farms yet the Act does not specifically address renewable-energy developments While the addition of low-carbon energy facilities is certainly a positive to the Statersquos energy-generation profile if development comes at the cost of native vegetation in all circumstances the outcomes for biodiversity could in fact be negative The

SA Unfortunately Nature of SA cannot create propose or otherwise implement new State-level legislation tt elected 17 March 2018 uu as well as other relevant acts vv Section 46 ww This occurred recently with the approval of the Bend Motorsport Park when it lobbied for and was granted special compensation to clear unique native vegetation without the approval of the Native Vegetation Council

15

flinderseduau

Act therefore needs to be updated to include renewable-energy developments

d As is often the case the Councilrsquos administrative burden is high such that applications for small-scale clearances (eg lt 5 ha) might work better under some regimented framework of self-assessment This could be supported by regional Natural Resource Management staff

e Heritage Agreements unfortunately have some perverse outcomes for retaining native vegetation Existing Heritage Agreements preclude any form of development such that new owners who wish to reside within their lsquobush blocksrsquo are precluded from constructing eco-friendly homes under existing legislation To encourage environmentally conscious lsquotree-changersrsquo this impediment should be relaxed on a case-by-case basis Also Heritage Agreements appear overly restrictive with respect to applying conservation interventions like controlled burns and the removal of weedy plant species

Biodiversity offsets

While biodiversity offsets are becoming more popular with state and Commonwealth agencies as a means to raise money for conservation and restoration while simultaneously promoting economic development (75) there are many perverse consequences for biodiversity if they are not set up carefully (75-77) Biodiversity lsquooffsetsrsquo are intended to work in a similar way to carbon offsetsxx in that the destruction of a part of an ecosystem (eg a native forest or grassland or a wetland) can be offset by paying to fund the restoration of another similar ecosystem elsewhere As such approval to clear native vegetation usually comes with financial and other conditions (eg see South Australiarsquos offsetting rules as they pertain to Significant Environmental Benefits)

But there are several problems with biodiversity offsetting including the inconvenient fact that creating an equivalent ecosystem somewhere takes substantially longer than it does to destroy one somewhere else (eg 78) While carbon emitted in one place is essentially the same as that sequestered elsewhere a forest can take

xx Reducing greenhouse-gas emissions to compensate for (lsquooffsetrsquo) an emission made elsewhere Typically an industry will lsquooffsetrsquo its emissions by agreeing to pay for the generation of a forest

hundreds of years to develop the same biodiversity values and ecological functions it had prior to destruction As such it is generally acknowledged that existing state-level biodiversity offsetting schemes have failed (eg 76) and might be doing more long-term harm than good in fact many scientists conclude that biodiversity offsetting has little hope of ever working as originally intended (75 79 80) Thus while biodiversity offsetting might look good on paper and it can provide funding for restoration projects it has to be done following a strict set of rules (81) for it to have any hope of maintaining biodiversity in the long run Thus biodiversity offsetting should only be used sparingly in South Australia and under the strictest set of rules and supervision

Conservation covenants

In addition to voluntary Heritage Agreements landholders in South Australia can choose to participate in establishing a type of easement on their land that acts specifically as a conservation covenant Such covenants on a title restrict the landholderrsquos lsquorightsrsquo (eg to graze clear develop etc) While there is nearly no ongoing official government support (financial or otherwise) for such endeavours they have had some success in encouraging voluntary conservation on private land via reverse auctions funded sometimes ironically from biodiversity-offset schemes

Reverse auctions operate generally as a voluntary process where a private landholder (i) is asked if shehe desires to manage a conservation asset (eg a forest fragment) differently than the status quo or restore a habitatspecies (ii) estimates the magnitude of change that this different form of managementintervention will have for the conservation value (iii) invokes a specific management plan with assistance from a conservation professional (iv) estimates the amount that this change will cost and (v) is provided that money through government or other sources of funding if the cost is competitive when ranked against other landholder offers A South Australian example mdash Bushbids mdash has had some success using this approach (other examples can be viewed here)

The problems of insufficient funding notwithstanding reverse auctions of conservation covenants might have a

somewhere because the growing trees take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere

16

flinderseduau

more positive role in promoting the communication of conservation values among stakeholders than immediate conservation gains per se (see also Bringing people back to nature) Still there are several impediments to its wide application in South Australia For example the good work that not-for-profit organisations like Greening Australia do in terms of planting services can in fact outcompete third-party companies from bidding to restore or manage a conservation asset on private land Thus the delivery of quality services to landholders unwilling to spend their time and money to protect or enhance biodiversity on their land are largely unavailable

Further much of the pricing associated with biodiversity management on private land is only loosely estimated but there are few studies quantifying what landholders will actually gain from the process Also entry-level covenant schemes with few commitments could assist in convincing many dubious landholders that the process is beneficial such that they are ultimately more willing to participate eventually in broader-scale and more sophisticated schemes (ie a lsquotry before you buyrsquo approach) Finally many untargeted initiatives are divorced from landscape-scale planning of restoration

so linking with a State Revegetation Council could assist in this regard

Monitoring

A persistent weakness with our assessments of the state of South Australiarsquos environment is a lack of rigorous long-term monitoring that clearly measures how our Statersquos biodiversity values are changing over time This is clear with the lack of incontrovertible condition assessments for our native vegetation and aquatic ecosystems in particular In conjunction with State authorities planning and monitoring the progress of revegetation projects (for example) a state-wide system of monitoring points should be established for the most important and underrepresented biodiversity values Indicator species and ecosystems should be identified by a dedicated committee based on representativeness degree of threat and distribution and protocols for basic monitoring (eg surveys of abundance water quality counts of species present condition etc) protocols established A coordinated state-wide monitoring system could revolutionise not only how we understand the trending fate of our ecosystems it would assuredly assist in planning better restoration and conservation plans over the coming decades

17

35 300 -

~ 0 30 I ~ I 250

~ -~

O C Cl) C gtlt Cl)

I 25

200

20 $ _ 150

15 - 10--------------100

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

year

Cl) )( Cl) 0 C ciJ -2 er UI ~ -

flinderseduau

Funding

State Government funding for the environmentyy is currently hovering between 10-15 of State Budget expenditures or between $100 and $150 million annually (Fig 1) The main feature of government spending on the environment is the steady decline overall since the early 2000s (Fig 1) It might appear to be a lot of money but managing the Statersquos biodiversity and other environmental resources is not cheap such that the amount spent is vastly inferior to what would be required to restore preserve and enhance the Statersquos threatened biodiversity values

However a major government funding boost is unlikely in the near term (if ever) even though arresting further budget declines would be advisable Other funding streams are possible including Commonwealth-level initiatives (eg Caring for Country) private acquisitions and investments (eg Arid Recovery) and offset programs The latter category includes both biodiversity offsets (most likely not a large source of funding itself nor a particularly good idea) and carbon offsets with the latter representing perhaps the greatest source of new funding should restoration programs be directly tied to carbon accounting

Energy

The production of energy mdash electricity transport fuels and industrial heat for manufacturing mdash is intimately tied to biodiversity conservation in this state From mining uranium to fracking natural gas to vegetation clearing for renewable-energy installations to climate-change mitigation via emissions reductions a society that ignores the role of energy production in environmental protection risks losing even more biodiversity (82) Further societies that promote 100 renewable-energy instead of 0 carbon pathways are likely doomed to rely on a substantial component of their energy production from fossil fuels (especially in most of Australia that lacks large hydro or geothermal resources) and the burning of environmentally destructive biofuels (83) As such different government

yy Given changes to departmental responsibilities these should be considered only indicative includes environment water heritage and

Figure 1 South Australia budget expenditures (total $ and of total (from 2002-03 to 2017-18 (source South Australia Department of Treasury)

agencies tasked with managing the environment and energy are required to collaborate to avoid perverse outcomes for biodiversity

Multi-agency cooperation

As discussed the creation of Nature of SA is an excellent step toward cohesion of the often fragmented environmental and political agendas of different government and non-government organisations However Nature of SA currently lacks legislative teeth and has only really begun the conversation between groups An independent non-government body should be established to coordinate the various environmental-interest groups government agencies councils and boards such that consensus statements are agreed and co-signed This could help develop strong societal value statements and subsequent funding and policy outcomes that favour biodiversity conservation in South Australia

Other

There are many other steps South Australia could take to improve its biodiversity outcomes but there is far too little space here to go into much detail Different government and private agencies could promote all or

Environment Protection Authority portfolios (source South Australia Department of Treasury)

18

35 300 -

~ 0 30 I ~ I 250

~ -~

O C Cl) C gtlt Cl)

I 25

200

20 $ _ 150

15 - 10--------------100

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

year

Cl) )( Cl) 0 C ciJ -2 er UI ~ -

flinderseduau

Funding

State Government funding for the environmentyy is currently hovering between 10-15 of State Budget expenditures or between $100 and $150 million annually (Fig 1) The main feature of government spending on the environment is the steady decline overall since the early 2000s (Fig 1) It might appear to be a lot of money but managing the Statersquos biodiversity and other environmental resources is not cheap such that the amount spent is vastly inferior to what would be required to restore preserve and enhance the Statersquos threatened biodiversity values

However a major government funding boost is unlikely in the near term (if ever) even though arresting further budget declines would be advisable Other funding streams are possible including Commonwealth-level initiatives (eg Caring for Country) private acquisitions and investments (eg Arid Recovery) and offset programs The latter category includes both biodiversity offsets (most likely not a large source of funding itself nor a particularly good idea) and carbon offsets with the latter representing perhaps the greatest source of new funding should restoration programs be directly tied to carbon accounting

Energy

The production of energy mdash electricity transport fuels and industrial heat for manufacturing mdash is intimately tied to biodiversity conservation in this state From mining uranium to fracking natural gas to vegetation clearing for renewable-energy installations to climate-change mitigation via emissions reductions a society that ignores the role of energy production in environmental protection risks losing even more biodiversity (82) Further societies that promote 100 renewable-energy instead of 0 carbon pathways are likely doomed to rely on a substantial component of their energy production from fossil fuels (especially in most of Australia that lacks large hydro or geothermal resources) and the burning of environmentally destructive biofuels (83) As such different government

yy Given changes to departmental responsibilities these should be considered only indicative includes environment water heritage and

Figure 1 South Australia budget expenditures (total $ and of total (from 2002-03 to 2017-18 (source South Australia Department of Treasury)

agencies tasked with managing the environment and energy are required to collaborate to avoid perverse outcomes for biodiversity

Multi-agency cooperation

As discussed the creation of Nature of SA is an excellent step toward cohesion of the often fragmented environmental and political agendas of different government and non-government organisations However Nature of SA currently lacks legislative teeth and has only really begun the conversation between groups An independent non-government body should be established to coordinate the various environmental-interest groups government agencies councils and boards such that consensus statements are agreed and co-signed This could help develop strong societal value statements and subsequent funding and policy outcomes that favour biodiversity conservation in South Australia

Other

There are many other steps South Australia could take to improve its biodiversity outcomes but there is far too little space here to go into much detail Different government and private agencies could promote all or

Environment Protection Authority portfolios (source South Australia Department of Treasury)

18

flinderseduau

at least some of the following in the course of their normal operations to provide real biodiversity benefits

bull The development of more biodiversity-friendly agriculture that spareszz native habitats (84) is an obvious course of action mdash this includes land-sparing approaches (85-89) restoration of adjacent native vegetation to promote the persistence of wild pollinators (90) rotational grazing (91 92) reducing stocking density (93-96) payments for ecosystem services (97) intensification instead of expansion (98 99) in areas already highly compromised (to reduce the incentives to clear even more land for agriculture) among many other approaches (100)

bull Many ecologists today promote the use of dingoes (Canis dingo) to alleviate predation on native fauna from introduced predators like cats and foxes While controversial and currently at odds with South Australiarsquos official position on lsquowild dogsrsquo as an agricultural pestaaa (despite dingoes being recognised as a distinct species from other dogs) (101) there is mounting evidence that allowing dingoes into the southern rangelands would benefit biodiversity (102-105) and in some cases possibly increase profit margins for cattlebbb farmers (106) A more engaged discussion between Biosecurity South Australia the pastoral sector and environmental agencies regarding the pros and cons of dingoes for biodiversity enhancement as well as the tractability of different management options for pastoralists should therefore be encouraged

bull The success of Indigenous Protected Areas in conserving land for multiple cultural and biodiversity values has been a step in the right direction for biodiversity conservation across Australia however these are mainly restricted to more remote areas with relatively lower biodiversity than the more populated regions to the south Broader engagement with Aboriginal peoples in all aspects of biodiversity conservation on private and public lands will undoubtedly increase the likelihood of positive outcomes Increasing cultural

zz land sparing (leaving native habitats completely free of human disturbance) as opposed to land sharing (mixing agriculture with some natural habitat features) overwhelmingly supports more native species aaa In fact dingoes and dog-dingo hybrids are classified as lsquowild dogsrsquo inside the Dog Fence under the Natural Resources Management Act 2004 but outside the Fence they are considered lsquonativersquo (but

awareness among non-Indigenous Australians is also a potential drawcard for bringing people into more frequent and lasting contact with natural values

unprotected) under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972 (and therefore have some acknowledged ecological value there) Non-dingo dogs are considered declared pests under the Natural Resources Management Act 2004 and the Dog and Cat Management Act 1995 bbb and perhaps to some extent for sheep pastoralists too in combination with guardian dogs although this has not yet been modelled or tested

19

flinderseduau

vii What we still need to learn its effects on ecological communities are less

Throughout this report I have identified several topics that require more research and understanding to be able to increase the effectiveness of our interventions to protect South Australiarsquos biodiversity Here I briefly

predictable Community-level models of how important habitats will change over time are necessary to be able to plan the most effective restoration and conservation objectives

outline what I argue would provide the most useful iv The eradication mdash or at least the reduction of

information we are currently lacking densities mdash of invasive species requires planning and sound predictions of culling effectiveness Any

i Revegetation and ecological restoration in general project attempting to control an invasive species stand to have the greatest positive impacts on should construct predictive models to maximise biodiversity maintenance and recovery provided efficiency they can be done at spatial scales large enough to v How much and what types of native vegetation reduce the extinction risks of many species adjacent to croplands can influence wild pollinator simultaneously Thus we require much better abundance and performance and hence information regarding which combinations of potentially crop yields yet the details are currently species are needed for planting to maximise the limited for South Australian agrosystems More biodiversity values of the habitats they will detailed assessments of the relationship between eventually create the configurations of different agricultural-native

ii Without enough funding restoration projects are vegetation configurations and pollinator unlikely to be of sufficient size to make much efficiencycrop yields would potentially highlight to difference to most species Thus the role of carbon farmers how conserving native habitats can benefit offsetting to fund both the planning and their businesses as well biodiversity in general implementation cannot be underestimated vi We still have a poor understanding of what However detailed habitat-specific soil wetland economic and psychological conditions promote grassland and forest carbon-storage capacities the likelihood that private landholders will partake and potential are still poorly measured in biodiversity conservation on their land More

iii While we have a reasonable understanding of how testing of various incentive approaches is required the climate will change over the coming decades to predict which ones will lead to the greatest rates

of participation

20

flinderseduau

viii Final thoughts While better and broader scientific information will most certainly help in our quest to maintain and enhance South Australiarsquos biodiversity the most challenging issues that remain are more social economic and psychological in nature than they are scientific In other words our challenges are related more to managing people and their choices and behaviours rather than biodiversity per se The human element in biodiversity conservation therefore cannot be understated so the

ix Acknowledgements

important task of managing ourselves is essential for long-term success in our conservation approaches From encouraging people to value nature to amending legislation that limits destructive economic behaviour to providing a viable business framework for maintaining financing and restoring biodiversity on public and private lands mdash these all play the most important roles in todayrsquos biodiversity-conservation challenge If we forget the people in our quest to save other species we are doomed to fail but if we include everyone in the challenge we will prevail

I sincerely thank Emily Jenke (democracyCo) Patrick OrsquoConnor (OrsquoConnor NRM) Chris Daniels (Cleland Wildlife Park) Daniel Rogers (Department for Environment and Water) and Tobias Hills (Environment Protection Authority) for advice insight and direction in the development of this report

21

flinderseduau

x References 1 De Vos JM Joppa LN Gittleman JL Stephens PR Pimm SL (2014) Estimating the normal background rate of species extinction Conservation Biology 29452-462 2 Pimm SL et al (2014) The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction distribution and protection Science 3441246752 3 Bradshaw CJA Brook BW (2014) Human population reduction is not a quick fix for environmental problems Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of

the USA 11116610-16615 4 Sodhi NS Brook BW Bradshaw CJA (2009) Causes and consequences of species extinctions The Princeton Guide to Ecology ed Levin SA (Princeton University

Press Princeton USA) pp 514-520 5 Griggs D et al (2013) Sustainable development goals for people and planet Nature 495305 6 Woinarski JCZ Burbidge AA Harrison PL (2015) Ongoing unraveling of a continental fauna decline and extinction of Australian mammals since European

settlement Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 1124531-4540 7 Bradshaw CJA (2012) Little left to lose deforestation and forest degradation in Australia since European colonization Journal of Plant Ecology 5109-120 8 Evans MC (2016) Deforestation in Australia drivers trends and policy responses Pacific Conservation Biology 22130-150 9 Bradshaw CJA Ehrlich PR (2015) Killing the Koala and Poisoning the Prairie Australia America and the Environment (University of Chicago Press Chicago) 10 Doherty TS Glen AS Nimmo DG Ritchie EG Dickman CR (2016) Invasive predators and global biodiversity loss Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

of the United States of America 11311261-11265 11 Hoffmann BD Broadhurst LM (2016) The economic cost of managing invasive species in Australia NeoBiota 311-18 12 Bradshaw CJA et al (2016) Massive yet grossly underestimated global costs of invasive insects Nature Communications 712986 13 Bradshaw CJA Brook BW (2016) Implications of Australias population policy for future greenhouse-gas emissions targets Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies

3249-265 14 Bradshaw CJA Giam X Sodhi NS (2010) Evaluating the relative environmental impact of countries PLoS One 5e10440 15 Chapman AD (2009) Numbers of Living Species in Australia and the World Second Edition (Canberra Australia

wwwenvironmentgovaubiodiversityabrspublicationsotherspecies-numbers2009indexhtml 16 Owens H Graham A (2009) Census of South Australian Vertebrates (Department of Environment and Natural Resources South Australia and South Australian

Museum Adelaide South Australia) httpwwwenvironmentsagovauScienceInformation_dataCensus_of_SA_vertebrates 17 Barker WR Barker RM Jessop JP Vonow HP (2005) Census of South Australian Vascular Plants 5th Edition Journal of the Adelaide Botanic Gardens Supplement

1 (Botanic Gardens of Adelaide and State Herbarium Adelaide South Australia) 18 Saunders DA (1989) Changes in the avifauna of a region district and remnant as a result of fragmentation of native vegetation the wheatbelt of Western

Australia A case study Biological Conservation 5099-135 19 Lepers E et al (2005) A synthesis of information on rapid land-cover change for the period 1981ndash2000 BioScience 55115-124 20 Henry BK Mitchell C Cowie A Woldring O Carter J (2005) A regional interpretation of rules and good practice for greenhouse accounting northern Australian

savanna systems Australian Journal of Botany 53589-605 21 McAlpine CA Etter A Fearnside PM Seabrook L Laurance WF (2009) Increasing world consumption of beef as a driver of regional and global change A call for

policy action based on evidence from Queensland (Australia) Colombia and Brazil Global Environmental Change-Human and Policy Dimensions 1921-33 22 Accad A Neldner VJ Wilson BA Niehus RE (2006) Remnant Vegetation in Queensland Analysis of remnant vegetation 1997-1999-2000-2001-2003 including

regional ecosystem information (Queensland Herbarium Environmental Protection Agency Brisbane) 23 Szabo JK Vesk PA Baxter PWJ Possingham HP (2011) Paying the extinction debt woodland birds in the Mount Lofty Ranges South Australia Emu 11159-70 24 Environmment RaDC (2017) Biodiversity Seventy-eighth Report Environmment Resources and Development Committee Report Tabled in the House of

Assembly in the Second Session Fifty-third Parliament (Parliament of South Australia Adelaide South Australia) 25 Government of South Australia (2018) Tracking Changes in South Australiarsquos Environment (Department of Environment and Water Adelaide South Australia) 26 Geyle HM et al (2018) Quantifying extinction risk and forecasting the number of impending Australian bird and mammal extinctions Pacific Conservation

Biology 24157-167 27 Davidson NC (2014) How much wetland has the world lost Long-term and recent trends in global wetland area Marine and Freshwater Research 65934-941 28 Dudgeon D et al (2006) Freshwater biodiversity importance threats status and conservation challenges Biological Reviews 81163-182 29 Balian EV Segers H Martens K Leacuteveacuteque C (2008) The Freshwater Animal Diversity Assessment an overview of the results Freshwater Animal Diversity

Assessment eds Balian EV Leacutevecircque C Segers H amp Martens K (Springer Netherlands Dordrecht) pp 627-637 30 Government of South Australia (2003) Wetlands Strategy for South Australia (Department for Environment and Heritage Adelaide South Australia) 31 Government of South Australia (2018) Weed Control Handbook for Declared Plants in South Australia (Department of Environment and Water Adelaide South

Australia) 32 Nicolson C Payne J Wallace J (2003) The State of Our Environment State of the Environment Report for South Australia 2003 (Environment Protection

Authority Adelaide South Australia) 33 Mudge S Moss M (2008) The State of Our Environment State of the Environment Report for South Australia 2008 (Environment Protection Authority Adelaide

South Australia) 34 Environment Protection Authority (2013) State of the Environment South Australia (Environment Protection Authority Adelaide South Australia) 35 Frankham R Bradshaw CJA Brook BW (2014) Genetics in conservation management revised recommendations for the 50500 rules Red List criteria and

population viability analyses Biological Conservation 17056-63 36 Traill LW Brook BW Frankham R Bradshaw CJA (2010) Pragmatic population viability targets in a rapidly changing world Biological Conservation 14328-34 37 Doherty TS et al (2017) Impacts and management of feral cats Felis catus in Australia Mammal Review 4783-97 38 Medina FM et al (2011) A global review of the impacts of invasive cats on island endangered vertebrates Global Change Biology 173503-3510 39 Loyd KAT Hernandez SM Carroll JP Abernathy KJ Marshall GJ (2013) Quantifying free-roaming domestic cat predation using animal-borne video cameras

Biological Conservation 160183-189 40 Lepczyk CA Mertig AG Liu J (2004) Landowners and cat predation across rural-to-urban landscapes Biological Conservation 115191-201 41 Burrell AL Evans JP Liu Y (2017) Detecting dryland degradation using time series segmentation and residual trend analysis (TSS-RESTREND) Remote Sensing of

Environment 19743-57 42 Pedler RD et al (2016) Rabbit biocontrol and landscape-scale recovery of threatened desert mammals Conservation Biology 30774-782 43 Barnett LK et al (2018) Previous exposure to myxoma virus reduces survival of European rabbits during outbreaks of rabbit haemorrhagic disease Journal of

Applied Ecologydoi1011111365-266413187 44 Brookes J (2018) Managing in a dry climate with limited water availability 2018 South Australia State of the Environment Report (Environment Protection

Authority Adelaide South Australia) 45 Cook J et al (2013) Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature Environmental Research Letters 8024024 46 IPCC (2013) Summary for Policymakers Climate Change 2013 The Physical Science Basis Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge University Press Cambridge United Kingdom) 47 IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014 Impacts Adaptation and Vulnerability IPCC WGII AR5 Technical Summary (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Geneva Switzerland) 48 Suppiah R et al (2006) Climate change under enhanced greenhouse conditions in South Australia (Copyright Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research

Organisation Adelaide South Australia) 49 Urban MC (2015) Accelerating extinction risk from climate change Science 348571 50 Hughes L (2003) Climate change and Australia trends projections and impacts Austral Ecology 28423-443 51 Brereton R Bennett S Mansergh I (1995) Enhanced greenhouse climate change and its potential effect on selected fauna of south-eastern Australia a trend

analysis Biological Conservation 72339-354

22

flinderseduau

viii Final thoughts While better and broader scientific information will most certainly help in our quest to maintain and enhance South Australiarsquos biodiversity the most challenging issues that remain are more social economic and psychological in nature than they are scientific In other words our challenges are related more to managing people and their choices and behaviours rather than biodiversity per se The human element in biodiversity conservation therefore cannot be understated so the

ix Acknowledgements

important task of managing ourselves is essential for long-term success in our conservation approaches From encouraging people to value nature to amending legislation that limits destructive economic behaviour to providing a viable business framework for maintaining financing and restoring biodiversity on public and private lands mdash these all play the most important roles in todayrsquos biodiversity-conservation challenge If we forget the people in our quest to save other species we are doomed to fail but if we include everyone in the challenge we will prevail

I sincerely thank Emily Jenke (democracyCo) Patrick OrsquoConnor (OrsquoConnor NRM) Chris Daniels (Cleland Wildlife Park) Daniel Rogers (Department for Environment and Water) and Tobias Hills (Environment Protection Authority) for advice insight and direction in the development of this report

21

flinderseduau

x References 1 De Vos JM Joppa LN Gittleman JL Stephens PR Pimm SL (2014) Estimating the normal background rate of species extinction Conservation Biology 29452-462 2 Pimm SL et al (2014) The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction distribution and protection Science 3441246752 3 Bradshaw CJA Brook BW (2014) Human population reduction is not a quick fix for environmental problems Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of

the USA 11116610-16615 4 Sodhi NS Brook BW Bradshaw CJA (2009) Causes and consequences of species extinctions The Princeton Guide to Ecology ed Levin SA (Princeton University

Press Princeton USA) pp 514-520 5 Griggs D et al (2013) Sustainable development goals for people and planet Nature 495305 6 Woinarski JCZ Burbidge AA Harrison PL (2015) Ongoing unraveling of a continental fauna decline and extinction of Australian mammals since European

settlement Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 1124531-4540 7 Bradshaw CJA (2012) Little left to lose deforestation and forest degradation in Australia since European colonization Journal of Plant Ecology 5109-120 8 Evans MC (2016) Deforestation in Australia drivers trends and policy responses Pacific Conservation Biology 22130-150 9 Bradshaw CJA Ehrlich PR (2015) Killing the Koala and Poisoning the Prairie Australia America and the Environment (University of Chicago Press Chicago) 10 Doherty TS Glen AS Nimmo DG Ritchie EG Dickman CR (2016) Invasive predators and global biodiversity loss Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

of the United States of America 11311261-11265 11 Hoffmann BD Broadhurst LM (2016) The economic cost of managing invasive species in Australia NeoBiota 311-18 12 Bradshaw CJA et al (2016) Massive yet grossly underestimated global costs of invasive insects Nature Communications 712986 13 Bradshaw CJA Brook BW (2016) Implications of Australias population policy for future greenhouse-gas emissions targets Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies

3249-265 14 Bradshaw CJA Giam X Sodhi NS (2010) Evaluating the relative environmental impact of countries PLoS One 5e10440 15 Chapman AD (2009) Numbers of Living Species in Australia and the World Second Edition (Canberra Australia

wwwenvironmentgovaubiodiversityabrspublicationsotherspecies-numbers2009indexhtml 16 Owens H Graham A (2009) Census of South Australian Vertebrates (Department of Environment and Natural Resources South Australia and South Australian

Museum Adelaide South Australia) httpwwwenvironmentsagovauScienceInformation_dataCensus_of_SA_vertebrates 17 Barker WR Barker RM Jessop JP Vonow HP (2005) Census of South Australian Vascular Plants 5th Edition Journal of the Adelaide Botanic Gardens Supplement

1 (Botanic Gardens of Adelaide and State Herbarium Adelaide South Australia) 18 Saunders DA (1989) Changes in the avifauna of a region district and remnant as a result of fragmentation of native vegetation the wheatbelt of Western

Australia A case study Biological Conservation 5099-135 19 Lepers E et al (2005) A synthesis of information on rapid land-cover change for the period 1981ndash2000 BioScience 55115-124 20 Henry BK Mitchell C Cowie A Woldring O Carter J (2005) A regional interpretation of rules and good practice for greenhouse accounting northern Australian

savanna systems Australian Journal of Botany 53589-605 21 McAlpine CA Etter A Fearnside PM Seabrook L Laurance WF (2009) Increasing world consumption of beef as a driver of regional and global change A call for

policy action based on evidence from Queensland (Australia) Colombia and Brazil Global Environmental Change-Human and Policy Dimensions 1921-33 22 Accad A Neldner VJ Wilson BA Niehus RE (2006) Remnant Vegetation in Queensland Analysis of remnant vegetation 1997-1999-2000-2001-2003 including

regional ecosystem information (Queensland Herbarium Environmental Protection Agency Brisbane) 23 Szabo JK Vesk PA Baxter PWJ Possingham HP (2011) Paying the extinction debt woodland birds in the Mount Lofty Ranges South Australia Emu 11159-70 24 Environmment RaDC (2017) Biodiversity Seventy-eighth Report Environmment Resources and Development Committee Report Tabled in the House of

Assembly in the Second Session Fifty-third Parliament (Parliament of South Australia Adelaide South Australia) 25 Government of South Australia (2018) Tracking Changes in South Australiarsquos Environment (Department of Environment and Water Adelaide South Australia) 26 Geyle HM et al (2018) Quantifying extinction risk and forecasting the number of impending Australian bird and mammal extinctions Pacific Conservation

Biology 24157-167 27 Davidson NC (2014) How much wetland has the world lost Long-term and recent trends in global wetland area Marine and Freshwater Research 65934-941 28 Dudgeon D et al (2006) Freshwater biodiversity importance threats status and conservation challenges Biological Reviews 81163-182 29 Balian EV Segers H Martens K Leacuteveacuteque C (2008) The Freshwater Animal Diversity Assessment an overview of the results Freshwater Animal Diversity

Assessment eds Balian EV Leacutevecircque C Segers H amp Martens K (Springer Netherlands Dordrecht) pp 627-637 30 Government of South Australia (2003) Wetlands Strategy for South Australia (Department for Environment and Heritage Adelaide South Australia) 31 Government of South Australia (2018) Weed Control Handbook for Declared Plants in South Australia (Department of Environment and Water Adelaide South

Australia) 32 Nicolson C Payne J Wallace J (2003) The State of Our Environment State of the Environment Report for South Australia 2003 (Environment Protection

Authority Adelaide South Australia) 33 Mudge S Moss M (2008) The State of Our Environment State of the Environment Report for South Australia 2008 (Environment Protection Authority Adelaide

South Australia) 34 Environment Protection Authority (2013) State of the Environment South Australia (Environment Protection Authority Adelaide South Australia) 35 Frankham R Bradshaw CJA Brook BW (2014) Genetics in conservation management revised recommendations for the 50500 rules Red List criteria and

population viability analyses Biological Conservation 17056-63 36 Traill LW Brook BW Frankham R Bradshaw CJA (2010) Pragmatic population viability targets in a rapidly changing world Biological Conservation 14328-34 37 Doherty TS et al (2017) Impacts and management of feral cats Felis catus in Australia Mammal Review 4783-97 38 Medina FM et al (2011) A global review of the impacts of invasive cats on island endangered vertebrates Global Change Biology 173503-3510 39 Loyd KAT Hernandez SM Carroll JP Abernathy KJ Marshall GJ (2013) Quantifying free-roaming domestic cat predation using animal-borne video cameras

Biological Conservation 160183-189 40 Lepczyk CA Mertig AG Liu J (2004) Landowners and cat predation across rural-to-urban landscapes Biological Conservation 115191-201 41 Burrell AL Evans JP Liu Y (2017) Detecting dryland degradation using time series segmentation and residual trend analysis (TSS-RESTREND) Remote Sensing of

Environment 19743-57 42 Pedler RD et al (2016) Rabbit biocontrol and landscape-scale recovery of threatened desert mammals Conservation Biology 30774-782 43 Barnett LK et al (2018) Previous exposure to myxoma virus reduces survival of European rabbits during outbreaks of rabbit haemorrhagic disease Journal of

Applied Ecologydoi1011111365-266413187 44 Brookes J (2018) Managing in a dry climate with limited water availability 2018 South Australia State of the Environment Report (Environment Protection

Authority Adelaide South Australia) 45 Cook J et al (2013) Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature Environmental Research Letters 8024024 46 IPCC (2013) Summary for Policymakers Climate Change 2013 The Physical Science Basis Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge University Press Cambridge United Kingdom) 47 IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014 Impacts Adaptation and Vulnerability IPCC WGII AR5 Technical Summary (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Geneva Switzerland) 48 Suppiah R et al (2006) Climate change under enhanced greenhouse conditions in South Australia (Copyright Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research

Organisation Adelaide South Australia) 49 Urban MC (2015) Accelerating extinction risk from climate change Science 348571 50 Hughes L (2003) Climate change and Australia trends projections and impacts Austral Ecology 28423-443 51 Brereton R Bennett S Mansergh I (1995) Enhanced greenhouse climate change and its potential effect on selected fauna of south-eastern Australia a trend

analysis Biological Conservation 72339-354

22

flinderseduau

x References 1 De Vos JM Joppa LN Gittleman JL Stephens PR Pimm SL (2014) Estimating the normal background rate of species extinction Conservation Biology 29452-462 2 Pimm SL et al (2014) The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction distribution and protection Science 3441246752 3 Bradshaw CJA Brook BW (2014) Human population reduction is not a quick fix for environmental problems Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of

the USA 11116610-16615 4 Sodhi NS Brook BW Bradshaw CJA (2009) Causes and consequences of species extinctions The Princeton Guide to Ecology ed Levin SA (Princeton University

Press Princeton USA) pp 514-520 5 Griggs D et al (2013) Sustainable development goals for people and planet Nature 495305 6 Woinarski JCZ Burbidge AA Harrison PL (2015) Ongoing unraveling of a continental fauna decline and extinction of Australian mammals since European

settlement Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 1124531-4540 7 Bradshaw CJA (2012) Little left to lose deforestation and forest degradation in Australia since European colonization Journal of Plant Ecology 5109-120 8 Evans MC (2016) Deforestation in Australia drivers trends and policy responses Pacific Conservation Biology 22130-150 9 Bradshaw CJA Ehrlich PR (2015) Killing the Koala and Poisoning the Prairie Australia America and the Environment (University of Chicago Press Chicago) 10 Doherty TS Glen AS Nimmo DG Ritchie EG Dickman CR (2016) Invasive predators and global biodiversity loss Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

of the United States of America 11311261-11265 11 Hoffmann BD Broadhurst LM (2016) The economic cost of managing invasive species in Australia NeoBiota 311-18 12 Bradshaw CJA et al (2016) Massive yet grossly underestimated global costs of invasive insects Nature Communications 712986 13 Bradshaw CJA Brook BW (2016) Implications of Australias population policy for future greenhouse-gas emissions targets Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies

3249-265 14 Bradshaw CJA Giam X Sodhi NS (2010) Evaluating the relative environmental impact of countries PLoS One 5e10440 15 Chapman AD (2009) Numbers of Living Species in Australia and the World Second Edition (Canberra Australia

wwwenvironmentgovaubiodiversityabrspublicationsotherspecies-numbers2009indexhtml 16 Owens H Graham A (2009) Census of South Australian Vertebrates (Department of Environment and Natural Resources South Australia and South Australian

Museum Adelaide South Australia) httpwwwenvironmentsagovauScienceInformation_dataCensus_of_SA_vertebrates 17 Barker WR Barker RM Jessop JP Vonow HP (2005) Census of South Australian Vascular Plants 5th Edition Journal of the Adelaide Botanic Gardens Supplement

1 (Botanic Gardens of Adelaide and State Herbarium Adelaide South Australia) 18 Saunders DA (1989) Changes in the avifauna of a region district and remnant as a result of fragmentation of native vegetation the wheatbelt of Western

Australia A case study Biological Conservation 5099-135 19 Lepers E et al (2005) A synthesis of information on rapid land-cover change for the period 1981ndash2000 BioScience 55115-124 20 Henry BK Mitchell C Cowie A Woldring O Carter J (2005) A regional interpretation of rules and good practice for greenhouse accounting northern Australian

savanna systems Australian Journal of Botany 53589-605 21 McAlpine CA Etter A Fearnside PM Seabrook L Laurance WF (2009) Increasing world consumption of beef as a driver of regional and global change A call for

policy action based on evidence from Queensland (Australia) Colombia and Brazil Global Environmental Change-Human and Policy Dimensions 1921-33 22 Accad A Neldner VJ Wilson BA Niehus RE (2006) Remnant Vegetation in Queensland Analysis of remnant vegetation 1997-1999-2000-2001-2003 including

regional ecosystem information (Queensland Herbarium Environmental Protection Agency Brisbane) 23 Szabo JK Vesk PA Baxter PWJ Possingham HP (2011) Paying the extinction debt woodland birds in the Mount Lofty Ranges South Australia Emu 11159-70 24 Environmment RaDC (2017) Biodiversity Seventy-eighth Report Environmment Resources and Development Committee Report Tabled in the House of

Assembly in the Second Session Fifty-third Parliament (Parliament of South Australia Adelaide South Australia) 25 Government of South Australia (2018) Tracking Changes in South Australiarsquos Environment (Department of Environment and Water Adelaide South Australia) 26 Geyle HM et al (2018) Quantifying extinction risk and forecasting the number of impending Australian bird and mammal extinctions Pacific Conservation

Biology 24157-167 27 Davidson NC (2014) How much wetland has the world lost Long-term and recent trends in global wetland area Marine and Freshwater Research 65934-941 28 Dudgeon D et al (2006) Freshwater biodiversity importance threats status and conservation challenges Biological Reviews 81163-182 29 Balian EV Segers H Martens K Leacuteveacuteque C (2008) The Freshwater Animal Diversity Assessment an overview of the results Freshwater Animal Diversity

Assessment eds Balian EV Leacutevecircque C Segers H amp Martens K (Springer Netherlands Dordrecht) pp 627-637 30 Government of South Australia (2003) Wetlands Strategy for South Australia (Department for Environment and Heritage Adelaide South Australia) 31 Government of South Australia (2018) Weed Control Handbook for Declared Plants in South Australia (Department of Environment and Water Adelaide South

Australia) 32 Nicolson C Payne J Wallace J (2003) The State of Our Environment State of the Environment Report for South Australia 2003 (Environment Protection

Authority Adelaide South Australia) 33 Mudge S Moss M (2008) The State of Our Environment State of the Environment Report for South Australia 2008 (Environment Protection Authority Adelaide

South Australia) 34 Environment Protection Authority (2013) State of the Environment South Australia (Environment Protection Authority Adelaide South Australia) 35 Frankham R Bradshaw CJA Brook BW (2014) Genetics in conservation management revised recommendations for the 50500 rules Red List criteria and

population viability analyses Biological Conservation 17056-63 36 Traill LW Brook BW Frankham R Bradshaw CJA (2010) Pragmatic population viability targets in a rapidly changing world Biological Conservation 14328-34 37 Doherty TS et al (2017) Impacts and management of feral cats Felis catus in Australia Mammal Review 4783-97 38 Medina FM et al (2011) A global review of the impacts of invasive cats on island endangered vertebrates Global Change Biology 173503-3510 39 Loyd KAT Hernandez SM Carroll JP Abernathy KJ Marshall GJ (2013) Quantifying free-roaming domestic cat predation using animal-borne video cameras

Biological Conservation 160183-189 40 Lepczyk CA Mertig AG Liu J (2004) Landowners and cat predation across rural-to-urban landscapes Biological Conservation 115191-201 41 Burrell AL Evans JP Liu Y (2017) Detecting dryland degradation using time series segmentation and residual trend analysis (TSS-RESTREND) Remote Sensing of

Environment 19743-57 42 Pedler RD et al (2016) Rabbit biocontrol and landscape-scale recovery of threatened desert mammals Conservation Biology 30774-782 43 Barnett LK et al (2018) Previous exposure to myxoma virus reduces survival of European rabbits during outbreaks of rabbit haemorrhagic disease Journal of

Applied Ecologydoi1011111365-266413187 44 Brookes J (2018) Managing in a dry climate with limited water availability 2018 South Australia State of the Environment Report (Environment Protection

Authority Adelaide South Australia) 45 Cook J et al (2013) Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature Environmental Research Letters 8024024 46 IPCC (2013) Summary for Policymakers Climate Change 2013 The Physical Science Basis Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge University Press Cambridge United Kingdom) 47 IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014 Impacts Adaptation and Vulnerability IPCC WGII AR5 Technical Summary (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Geneva Switzerland) 48 Suppiah R et al (2006) Climate change under enhanced greenhouse conditions in South Australia (Copyright Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research

Organisation Adelaide South Australia) 49 Urban MC (2015) Accelerating extinction risk from climate change Science 348571 50 Hughes L (2003) Climate change and Australia trends projections and impacts Austral Ecology 28423-443 51 Brereton R Bennett S Mansergh I (1995) Enhanced greenhouse climate change and its potential effect on selected fauna of south-eastern Australia a trend

analysis Biological Conservation 72339-354

22

flinderseduau

52 Williams RJ et al (2009) Interactions between climate change fire regimes and biodiversity in Australia mdash a preliminary assessment (Australian Government Department of Climate Change and Department of the Environment Water Heritage and the Arts Canberra Australia)

53 Guerin GR Christmas MJ Sparrow B Lowe AJ (2018) Projected climate change implications for the South Australian flora Swainsona 3025-31 54 Warren R Price J Graham E Forstenhaeusler N VanDerWal J (2018) The projected effect on insects vertebrates and plants of limiting global warming to 15degC

rather than 2degC Science 360791 55 Hennessy K et al (2005) Climate change impacts on fire-weather in south-east Australia (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

Aspendale Victoria Australia) 56 Raup DM (1986) Biological extinction in Earth history Science 2311528-1533 57 Raup DM (1994) The role of extinction in evolution Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 916758-6763 58 Tilman D May RM Lehman CL Nowak MA (1994) Habitat destruction and the extinction debt Nature 37165-66 59 Dullinger S et al (2013) Europersquos other debt crisis caused by the long legacy of future extinctions Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA

1107342-7347 60 Ceballos G Ehrlich PR Dirzo R (2017) Biological annihilation via the ongoing sixth mass extinction signaled by vertebrate population losses and declines

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 114E6089-E6096 61 Urban MC Tewksbury JJ Sheldon KS (2012) On a collision course competition and dispersal differences create no-analogue communities and cause extinctions

during climate change Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences 2792072 62 Garciacutea-Loacutepez JM Allueacute C (2013) Modelling future no-analogue climate distributions a world-wide phytoclimatic niche-based survey Global and Planetary Change

1011-11 63 Johnson CN et al (2016) What caused extinction of the Pleistocene megafauna of Sahul Proceedings of the Royal Society B 28352399 64 Saltreacute F et al (2016) Climate change not to blame for late Quaternary megafauna extinctions in Australia Nature Communications 710511 65 Higgs E et al (2014) The changing role of history in restoration ecology Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 12499-506 66 Deane DC Fordham DA He F Bradshaw CJA (2017) Future extinction risk of wetland plants is higher from individual patch loss than total area reduction

Biological Conservation 20927-33 67 McMahon CR Brook BW Collier N Bradshaw CJA (2010) Spatially explicit spreadsheet modelling for optimizing the efficiency of reducing invasive animal density

Methods in Ecology and Evolution 153-68 68 Watts ME et al (2017) Systematic conservation planning with Marxan Learning Landscape Ecology eds Gergel S amp Turner M (Springer New York) 69 Moilanen A Wilson KA Possingham H (2009) Spatial Conservation Prioritization Quantitative Methods and Computational Tools (Oxford University Press

Oxford United Kingdom) 70 Lechner AM Brown G Raymond CM (2015) Modeling the impact of future development and public conservation orientation on landscape connectivity for

conservation planning Landscape Ecology 30699-713 71 Keppel G et al (2015) The capacity of refugia for conservation planning under climate change Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 13106-112 72 Bardsley DK Weber D Robinson GM Moskwa E Bardsley AM (2015) Wildfire risk biodiversity and peri-urban planning in the Mt Lofty Ranges South Australia

Applied Geography 63155-165 73 Geldmann J et al (2015) Changes in protected area management effectiveness over time A global analysis Biological Conservation 191692-699 74 Goddard MA Dougill AJ Benton TG (2010) Scaling up from gardens biodiversity conservation in urban environments Trends in Ecology and Evolution 2590-98 75 Maron M Gordon A Mackey BG Possingham HP Watson JEM (2015) Stop misuse of biodiversity offsets Nature 523401-403 76 Nature Conservation Council of NSW (2016) Paradise Lost - The weakening and widening of NSW biodiversity offsetting schemes 2005-2016 (Nature

Conservation Council of New South Wales Sydney Australia) 77 Bekessy SA et al (2010) The biodiversity bank cannot be a lending bank Conservation Letters 3151-158 78 Martin PA Newton AC Bullock JM (2013) Carbon pools recover more quickly than plant biodiversity in tropical secondary forests Proceedings of the Royal

Society B Biological Sciences 28020132236 79 Apostolopoulou E Adams WM (2017) Biodiversity offsetting and conservation reframing nature to save it Oryx 5123-31 80 Walker S Brower Ann L Stephens RTT Lee William G (2009) Why bartering biodiversity fails Conservation Letters 2149-157 81 Maron M et al (2012) Faustian bargains Restoration realities in the context of biodiversity offset policies Biological Conservation 155141-148 82 Brook BW Bradshaw CJA (2015) Key role for nuclear energy in global biodiversity conservation Conservation Biology doi101111cobi12433 83 Heard B Bradshaw CJA Brook BW (2015) Beyond wind furthering developing of clean energy in South Australia Transactions of the Royal Society of South

Australia 13957-82 84 Phalan B Onial M Balmford A Green RE (2011) Reconciling food production and biodiversity conservation land sharing and land sparing compared Science

3331289 85 Kremen C (2015) Reframing the land-sparingland-sharing debate for biodiversity conservation Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 135552-76 86 Hulme MF et al (2013) Conserving the birds of Ugandarsquos banana-coffee arc land sparing and land sharing compared PLoS One 8e54597 87 Kamp J et al (2015) Agricultural development and the conservation of avian biodiversity on the Eurasian steppes a comparison of land-sparing and land-sharing

approaches Journal of Applied Ecology 521578-1587 88 Williams DR et al (2017) Land-use strategies to balance livestock production biodiversity conservation and carbon storage in Yucataacuten Mexico Global Change

Biology 235260-5272 89 Dotta G Phalan B Silva TW Green R Balmford A (2015) Assessing strategies to reconcile agriculture and bird conservation in the temperate grasslands of South

America Conservation Biology 30618-627 90 Carvalheiro Luiacutesa G et al (2011) Natural and within-farmland biodiversity enhances crop productivity Ecology Letters 14251-259 91 Ravetto Enri S et al (2017) A biodiversity-friendly rotational grazing system enhancing flower-visiting insect assemblages while maintaining animal and grassland

productivity Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 2411-10 92 Waters CM Orgill SE Melville GJ Toole ID Smith WJ (2016) Management of grazing intensity in the semi-arid rangelands of southern Australia effects on soil

and biodiversity Land Degradation and Development 281363-1375 93 Jansen A Robertson AI (2001) Relationships between livestock management and the ecological condition of riparian habitats along an Australian floodplain river

Journal of Applied Ecology 3863-75 94 Jansen A Healey M (2003) Frog communities and wetland condition relationships with grazing by domestic livestock along an Australian floodplain river

Biological Conservation 109207-219 95 Fynn RWS OConnor TG (2001) Effect of stocking rate and rainfall on rangeland dynamics and cattle performance in a semi-arid savanna South Africa Journal of

Applied Ecology 37491-507 96 Dorrough J Moxham C Turner V Sutter G (2006) Soil phosphorus and tree cover modify the effects of livestock grazing on plant species richness in Australian

grassy woodland Biological Conservation 130394-405 97 Smith HF Sullivan CA (2014) Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapesmdashfarmers perceptions Ecological Economics 9872-80 98 Tscharntke T Klein Alexandra M Kruess A Steffan-Dewenter I Thies C (2005) Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity ndash ecosystem

service management Ecology Letters 8857-874 99 Tilman D Balzer C Hill J Befort BL (2011) Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

of the USA 10820260 100 Jackson L ed (1997) Ecology in Agriculture (Academic Press San Diego USA) p 472 101 Smith BP et al (2018) Taxonomic status of the Australian dingo the case for Canis dingo Meyer 1793 Zootaxa Zootaxain press 102 Nimmo DG Watson SJ Forsyth DM Bradshaw CJA (2015) Dingoes can help conserve wildlife and our methods can tell Journal of Applied Ecology 52281-285 103 Ritchie EG Johnson CN (2009) Predator interactions mesopredator release and biodiversity conservation Ecology Letters 12982-998 104 Glen AS Dickman CR Souleacute ME Mackey BG (2007) Evaluating the role of the dingo as a trophic regulator in Australian ecosystems Austral Ecology 32492-501 105 Ritchie EG et al (2012) Ecosystem restoration with teeth what role for predators Trends in Ecology and Evolution 27265-271

23

flinderseduau

106 Prowse TAA Johnson CN Cassey P Bradshaw CJA Brook BW (2015) Ecological and economic benefits to cattle rangelands of restoring an apex predator Journal of Applied Ecology 52455-466

24

• i Summary
• ii Background
• • Box 1 Biodiversity in context
  • South Australiarsquos biodiversity
  • • iii Recent trends in South Australiarsquos biodiversity
    • • Native vegetation
      • Fauna
      • Wetlands amp aquatic ecosystems
      • Invasive species
      • • iv Steps in the right direction
        • • Focus on revegetation
          • Rewilding and Fauna Reintroduction
          • Invasive species control
          • Environmental flows
          • Wetland improvement
          • Sanctuaries
          • Climate-change strategies
          • Engaging people
          • Heritage agreements
          • • v Realistic goals for improvement
            • • No lsquono-extinctionrsquo targets
              • Generic priorities for conservation
              • Realistic baselines for recovery
              • • vi Opportunities
                • • Restoration
                  • • Box 2 Gondwana Link amp NatureLinks
                    • • Invasive species control
                      • Protected areas
                      • Fix legislation
                      • Biodiversity offsets
                      • Conservation covenants
                      • Monitoring
                      • Funding
                      • Energy
                      • Multi-agency cooperation
                      • Other
                      • • vii What we still need to learn
                        • viii Final thoughts
                        • ix Acknowledgements
                        • x References

flinderseduau

106 Prowse TAA Johnson CN Cassey P Bradshaw CJA Brook BW (2015) Ecological and economic benefits to cattle rangelands of restoring an apex predator Journal of Applied Ecology 52455-466

24

• i Summary
• ii Background
• • Box 1 Biodiversity in context
  • South Australiarsquos biodiversity
  • • iii Recent trends in South Australiarsquos biodiversity
    • • Native vegetation
      • Fauna
      • Wetlands amp aquatic ecosystems
      • Invasive species
      • • iv Steps in the right direction
        • • Focus on revegetation
          • Rewilding and Fauna Reintroduction
          • Invasive species control
          • Environmental flows
          • Wetland improvement
          • Sanctuaries
          • Climate-change strategies
          • Engaging people
          • Heritage agreements
          • • v Realistic goals for improvement
            • • No lsquono-extinctionrsquo targets
              • Generic priorities for conservation
              • Realistic baselines for recovery
              • • vi Opportunities
                • • Restoration
                  • • Box 2 Gondwana Link amp NatureLinks
                    • • Invasive species control
                      • Protected areas
                      • Fix legislation
                      • Biodiversity offsets
                      • Conservation covenants
                      • Monitoring
                      • Funding
                      • Energy
                      • Multi-agency cooperation
                      • Other
                      • • vii What we still need to learn
                        • viii Final thoughts
                        • ix Acknowledgements
                        • x References