Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program

Dr Julia PlayfordDirector

Water Quality and Aquatic Ecosystem Health

Where do we want to be?Healthy Ecosystems Poor Ecosystem Health

Why do we monitor?EHMP based on a conceptual model that integrates scientific understanding with community derived environmental values

Staged Approach in Design and Implementation

Design of Estuarine/Marine Program

Implementation of Estuarine/Marine Program

Establish links between agenciesSet objectives based on stakeholder needs

Extension to Northern & Southern regions

Design of Freshwater Program

Trial of Freshwater Program

Implementation of Freshwater Program

• Assess effectiveness of environmental protection measures (e.g. stormwater controls, STP upgrades, riparian vegetation)

• Meet discharge and other licensing requirements

Monitor Ecosystem Health of Waterways to:

The SEQ Waterways Ecosystem Health Report Card represents a comprehensive marine, estuarine and freshwater ecosystem health monitoring program (snapshot of the health of 18 catchments, 18 estuaries and 9 zones in Moreton Bay)

135 freshwater sites

254 estuarine and marine sites

Report Card Grades reflect ecosystem health of waterways (achieve environmental values)

What is the Report Card?

Most publicised output of the SEQ Healthy Waterways Partnership Easy-to-understand snapshot of ecosystem health A to F Designed to provide an insight into the effectiveness of investments in waterway and catchment managementSplit into two reporting zones, freshwater and estuarine/marineEach has its own objectives, parameters, methods and analysis

SoutheastSetting Guidelines

What goes into a Report Card Grade?Estuarine Report Card

Grade

Water Quality (EHI) (70%)

Biological (BHR) (30%)

i.e. mostly parameters that can be compared to an established guideline

- Bay:

TN, Chl-a, Secchi

depth, Sewage nitrogen (δ15N), Lyngbya- Estuary:

TN, TP, Chl-a, Turbidity, DO

- Bay: Seagrass distribution, Seagrass depth range, Coral cover- Estuary:

Seagrass distribution, Riparian assessment, Sewage nitrogen (δ15N), Nutrient mixing

i.e. Categorised, qualitative, not assessed against a guideline

BHR: Coral monitoring in Moreton Bay

3 x 20m replicate transects at 5 reef sites in Moreton Bay

Boat based

Designed to be used underway

Allows the entire system to be assessed (no sub sampling)

Riparian Assessment Tool

Doing the RAP

Riparian Assessment Tool

• records multiple attributes every second

% Natural for 18 Estuaries in South East Queensland in 2007

45 46

33

5847 51 54

28 29

95

4655

5

8275

62

47

92

0102030405060708090

100

AlbertBrem

erBris

bane

Cabbag

e Tree

Marooch

yOxle

yCab

oolture

CoomeraCurru

mbinEprap

ahLogan

MooloolahNera

ngNoosa

Pimpam

aPine

Talleb

udgeraTingalp

a

Estuary

Perc

enta

ge

Freshwater Streams RC 2009

Improvements in biological indicators (macroinvertebrates and fish), reflecting positive influence of higher flows – more native species and lower proportion of alien fish.Decline in nutrient cycling processes in most reporting areas, reflecting the negative influence of catchment loads (with high nutrients) on the nutrient cycling processes in river systems.

Overall score of streams in 2009 (0.805) very similar to previous year’s (0.803).

2008

2009

Spring Autumn Annual

Lower Lower Lower

Higher HigherHigherHigher

Never lose sight of the big picture

Trends from long-term datasets (Case: Bremer River)

There have been substantial improvements in some aspects of the estuarine portion of the river system, but those improvements are not yet sufficient to result in changes in EHMP grades.

EHMP 2001 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009Freshwater N/A F F D- D- D- D- D D- D+Estuarine-Marine F F F F F F F D- F F

1

5

YR99

/00

YR00

/01

YR01

/02

YR02

/03

YR03

/04

YR04

/05

YR05

/06

YR06

/07

YR07

/08

YR08

/09

YR09

/10

00.20.40.60.811.21.41.61.82

TP (mg/l)

Sites

Years

Bremer River Estuary TP

1

5

YR99

/00

YR00

/01

YR01

/02

YR02

/03

YR03

/04

YR04

/05

YR05

/06

YR06

/07

YR07

/08

YR08

/09

YR09

/10

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

TN (mg/l)

Sites

Years

Bremer River Estuary TN

How is the Report Card Used?

Why has the Report Card been successful?

Because it’s really simple, A is good, F is bad and any grade change has been made for a definable reason (environmental or human induced)

It has consistently generated lots of public interest, particularly following the launch – has become very political

From an early stage it engaged a range of decision makers – politicians, catchment groups etc

We tend to get a good media coverage from the launch

Launch of health-e-waterways : Data Integration System for SEQ waterways – first product is on-line Report Card

New Products: On-line Report Card

Reality check:

Some waterways host infrastructure/ modifications required for society to function and obtaining high levels of ecological condition in some sections may be unrealistic.We need to acknowledge that 150+ years of human impacts won’t be fixed overnight.