Technical information for this report card
Transcription
Technical information for this report card
Technical Information Is the condition of our subtidal reefs improving? This document describes the sources of information, advice, methods, indicators and data processing procedures used to develop the reports. Reliability of data, as well as metadata attributes, are also described. State NRM Plan Guiding Target: Improve the condition of coastal and marine ecosystems. State NRM Plan Representative Measure: Trends in the condition of subtidal reefs. Data collection period: 2005–2010. Expected frequency of reporting: Annual. Data sources: 1. Data relating to subtidal reef condition are taken directly from published scientific reports based on scientific and communitybased (Reefwatch) studies undertaken between 2005 and 2011 (Turner et al. 2007; Collings et al. 2008; Department of Environment and Heritage 2008; Westphalen 2009; Westphalen 2011). Indicators used: 1. Subtidal reef condition. Methods of data collection and processing: Subtidal reef condition: The mean subtidal reef health (condition) score (presented in the trend graph) was calculated by averaging scores collected for all reefs within a particular year and NRM region (regions were AMLR and NY only). Subtidal reef health (condition) data were taken directly from reports published between 2007 and 2011 (Turner et al. 2007; Collings et al. 2008; Department of Environment and Heritage 2008; Westphalen 2009; Westphalen 2011). Subtidal reef condition scores that are presented on the map as “good, caution, bad” are based on the most recent available data for that site collected between 2005 and 2010. Subtidal reef condition scores are calculated from a combination of reef health indicators; the number of indicators measured varies between survey periods undertaken from 2005—2007 and 2009—2010 (see table below). For a detailed description of the methods and indicators used, refer to Turner et al. 2007; Collings et al. 2008; Department of Environment and Heritage 2008; Westphalen 2009; Westphalen 2011. 2005 Indicators used √ =Yes; x = No Percentage cover of canopy forming macroalgae Percentage cover of turfing macroalgae Percentage cover of mussel mats Percentage cover of bare substrate Size and abundance of blue throated wrasse Abundance of site attached fish 2006 AMLR NY √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ AMLR No survey No survey No survey No survey √ √ √ √ No survey No 2007 NY AMLR √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ (abund. only) √ 2009 2010 AMLR NY AMLR √ No survey √ √ No survey √ √ No survey √ √ NY No survey No survey No survey No survey √ No survey √ NY No survey No survey No survey No survey √ √ √ No √ √ No survey No survey x √ No survey No Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia. © Crown in right of the State of South Australia. 2005 Indicators used √ =Yes; x = No AMLR NY Abundance of mobile invertebrate predators √ √ Presence of invasive taxa √ √ Sedimentation √ √ Species richness (macroalgae) Species richness (mobile invertebrates) √ √ √ √ 2006 AMLR survey No survey No survey No survey No survey No survey 2007 NY AMLR √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ NY survey No survey No survey No survey No survey No survey 2009 2010 AMLR NY AMLR √ No survey √ √ No survey √ NY survey No survey No survey Future reporting measures: DEWNR may work with all authors/holders of data relating to reef habitat condition to develop a method to standardise available information so that it can reported in this report in the future. The following government agencies contributed to this report: 1. The Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR). 2. The South Australian Research and Development Institute (SARDI) Aquatic Sciences. The following non-government agencies contributed to this report: 1. Conservation Council of South Australia (via ReefWatch). 2. Westphalen Consulting. Key stakeholders: Natural Resources Management Council, Natural Resources Management Boards, DEWNR regional staff, DEWNR-Strategy and Advice Group, NRM communities, Primary Industries and Regions South Australia (PIRSA) – Fisheries and Aquaculture & the Environment Protection Authority (EPA). Information reliability scoring: Information is scored for reliability based on average scores given for information currency and applicability, and its level of spatial representation (Tables 1–3). Where no information is available reliability is scored as zero. Table 1. Information currency Reliability 5 4 3 2 1 Criteria Information up to 3 years old Information up to 5 years old Information up to 7 years old Information up to 10 years old Information >10 years old Table 2. Applicability of the information Reliability 5 4 3 2 1 Criteria All data based on direct indicators of the measure Most data based on direct indicators of the measure Most data based on indirect indicators of the measure All data based on indirect indicators of the measure Data are based on expert opinion of the measure Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia. © Crown in right of the State of South Australia. Table 3. Spatial representation of information (sampling design) Reliability 5 4 3 2 1 Criteria Information is collected from across the whole region/state (or whole distribution of asset within the region/state) using a stratified sampling design Information is collected from across the whole region/state (or whole distribution of asset within the region/state) using a sampling design that is not stratified Information is collected from an area that represents less than half the spatial distribution of the asset within the region/state Information is collected from an area that represents less than 25% the spatial distribution of the asset within the region/state Information is collected from an area that represents less than 5% the spatial distribution of the asset within the region/state or spatial representation unknown Based on tables 1, 2 & 3 above, respectively, the information relating to subtidal reef condition presented in this report has a reliability score of (2+5+2)/3 = 3 (Good). This report is linked to the following report cards/snapshots: 1. Are the extent and condition of our seagrass improving? 2. Are the extent and condition of our coastal dunes improving? 3. Are the extent and condition of our saltmarshes improving? 4. Are the extent and condition of our mangroves improving? 5. Is the condition of our estuaries improving? 6. Are South Australia’s marine parks effective in protecting marine habitats and species? 7. What are the distribution and abundance of aquatic pests? 8. How are diseases affecting our aquatic species? 9. Are our recreational and commercial marine fish stocks being used sustainably? 10. How many of our species are extinct or threatened with extinction? 11. How many of our ecological communities are extinct or threatened with extinction? 12. Is the ecological condition of the River Murray improving? 13. What is the ecological condition our rivers, streams and drains? 14. Are water flows out the Murray Mouth flushing sufficient salt? 15. Are water flows and water quality of the River Murray good enough to support ecosystems? 16. Is the water quality of the water from the River Murray that we drink, swim in and irrigate with improving? 17. How much of our stormwater and wastewater is recycled? Metadata description: Project/Dataset name: Subtidal reef condition Abstract/description Dataset is condition scores calculated for subtidal reefs in AMLR and NY, South Australia. Data is taken directly from reports published between 2007 and 2011 (Turner et al. 2007; Department of Environment and Heritage 2008; Westphalen 2009; Westphalen 2011). Data types Summarised numeric values in Excel spreadsheet format Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia. © Crown in right of the State of South Australia. Organisation/ DEWNR business area that sponsors/holds/manages the data DEWNR Date range Date: 2005—2010 Study area Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM region (coastal marine). Northern and Yorke NRM region (coastal marine). Data format Excel outputs Data distribution rules Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Is the dataset source data (raw), value-add data (analysed/summarised) or final indicator/score data? Value add data. Summarised/averaged by region/year Photo credit details: Title: “Dive Pearson IS Greg Adams10.jpg” Owner: Taken by Greg Adams, permission for use granted to DEWNR Marine Parks group. Scientific literature referred to in the report: Collings, G. Bryars, S., Turner, D., Brook, J. and Theil, M. (2008). Examining the health of subtidal reef environments in So uth Australia, Part 4: Assessment of community reef monitoring and status of selected South Australian reefs based on the results of the 2007 surveys. SARDI Publication Number RD. F2008/000511-1. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. Conservation Council of South Australia. Southern Australian Temperate Reefs. Accessed 19 March 2013. Conservation Council of South Australia (2009). Reef Watch South Australia: The first decade of community reef monitoring. 97 p. Department of Environment and Natural Heritage (2008). Biodiversity of Yorke Peninsula Rocky Reefs. Final Report to the Northern and Yorke Natural Resources Management Board for the Project: Initiation of Marine Biological Inventory Targeting Regional Hotspots. Prepared by the Department for Environment and Heritage, Coast and Marine Conservation Branch. 80p. Turner, D., Kildea, T. and Westphalen, G. (2007). Examining the health of subtidal reef environments in South Australia. Part 2. Status of selected South Australian Reefs based on the results of the 2005 surveys. SARDI publication number RD03/0252-6. Westphalen, G. (2009). Reef Watch South Australia. Surveys across six reefs in the Adelaide and Mt Lofty Ranges Natural Resou rce Management Region 2008-2009. A report to the Conservation Council of South Australia Inc. 16p. Westphalen, G. (2011). Reef Watch South Australia. Surveys across reefs in the Adelaide and Mt Lofty Ranges Natural Resource Management Region 2010-2011. A report to the Conservation Council of South Australia. 23p. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia. © Crown in right of the State of South Australia.