Maintained current species diversity of all current Basin waterbirds and current migratory shorebirds at the Coorong Increased abundance with a 20– 25 per cent increase in waterbirds by 2024 Improved breeding events for colonial nesting waterbird species and an increase in nests and broods for other waterbirds • Waterbird diversity and population condition (abundance and population structure) • Survival and condition^ • Chicks^ • Fledglings^ Other vertebrate diversity • Adult abundance* • Young* Ecosystem Function (Basin Plan S. 8.06) Connectivity Maintained base flows - at least 60 per cent of natural levels Improved overall flow Maintained connectivity in areas where it is relatively unaffected Improved connectivity with bank-full and/or low floodplain flows Maintain the Lower Lakes above sea level • Hydrological connectivity including end of system flows* Improved movement with more native fish using fish passages • Biotic dispersal and movement* • Sediment transport* Process • Primary productivity (of aquatic ecosystems)* • Decomposition* • Nutrient and carbon cycling*
Resilience (Basin Plan S. 8.07) Ecosystem resilience • Population condition (individual refuges)^ • Individual survival and condition (individual refuges)^ • Population condition (landscape refuges)^ • Individual condition (ecosystem resistance) • Population condition (ecosystem recovery) Water quality (Basin Plan S. 9.04) Chemical • Salinity* • Dissolved oxygen* • pH* • Dissolved organic carbon^ Biological • Algal blooms
material (e.g. sediment, nutrients and organic matter) through longitudinal and lateral hydrological connectivity To maintain/improve water quality within the system, particularly dissolved oxygen, salinity and pH dissolved oxygen concentrations? nutrient concentrations? modification of the type and amount of dissolved organic matter through reconnection with previously dry or disconnected channel habitat? reducing the impact of blackwater in the system? but DO was higher in Yallakool Ck. CEW introduced only small amounts of floodplain carbon from upstream in the Barmah-Millewa forest. Flow management achieved C inputs without a blackwater event. Dilution flows from the canal were not required (Watts et al. 2016). Stream metabolism To support mobilisation, transport and dispersal of biotic and abiotic material (e.g. sediment, nutrients and organic matter) through longitudinal and lateral hydrological connectivity (Water Use Minute 10038) This is related to metabolism but not specifically addressing it. No specific targeted outcomes for metabolism (Watering action acquittal report) What did CEW contribute to: patterns and rates of decomposition? patterns and rates of primary productivity affect rates of gross primary productivity and ecosystem respiration in the Wakool River system? Flows were considered too small to have any impact on these variables – responses observed were not attributed to changes in flow (Watts et al. 2016). Riverbank and aquatic vegetation To maintain health of riparian and aquatic native vegetation communities (Water Use Minute 10038) To support the ongoing of in stream aquatic vegetation (Watering action acquittal report) What did CEW contribute to: recovery (measured through species richness, cover and recruitment) of riverbank and aquatic vegetation in Yallakool Creek and the mid and upper Wakool River that have been impacted by operational flows and drought and how do those responses vary over time? How do vegetation responses to CEW delivery vary among hydrological zones? CEW contributed to recovery in the mid and Yallakoll Creek, but not in the upper Wakool. Recruitment and cover varied among zones, but were generally higher in those that received environmental flows. Submergent vegetation richness was also higher in those zones that had a of eflows (Watts et al. 2017).
lower Goulburn River that have been impacted by drought and flood and how do those responses vary over time? longer term influence of spring freshes (Webb et al. 2017). How do vegetation responses to CEW delivery vary between sites with different channel features and different bank conditions? Differences observed in 2014-15 were not seen in 2015. Need longer data set (Webb et al. 2017). Does the CEW contribution to spring freshes and high flows trigger germination and new growth of native riparian vegetation on the banks of the lower Goulburn River? Increases in cover on banks inundated by freshes in 2014-15 were not observed in 2015-16 – attributed to drier conditions pre sampling (Webb et al. 2017). How does CEW delivered as low flows and freshes at other times of the year contribute to maintaining new growth and recruitment on the banks of the lower Goulburn River? Conditions are not discussed in terms of CEW – just other conditions (local climate, antecedent conditions) in between flows (Webb et al. 2017). Fish What did CEW contribute to: the recruitment of golden perch in the adult population in the lower Goulburn River? golden perch spawning and in particular what magnitude, timing and duration of flow is required to trigger spawning? survival of golden perch larvae in the lower Goulburn River? Spawning event associated with CEW in 2014-15, but no eggs, larvae or evidence of recruitment in 2015-16. No flows delivered for golden perch spawning in 2015-16 (Webb et al. 2017). What did CEW contribute to: the movement of golden perch in the lower Goulburn River and where did those fish move to? Movement downstream associated with CEW (Webb et al. 2017).
individual survival and condition Provide baseflows and freshes to increase lateral and longitudinal hydrological connectivity Allow for sediment transport, nutrient and carbon cycling. Mallowa wetlands Support hydrological connectivity between wetlands Support further recovery of vegetation extent and condition Provide habitat for waterbirds and native aquatic species Contribute to improved habitat quality and increased within ecosystem diversity to support survival of native birds fish and other fauna Mehi River To support in-stream ecological function and nutrient cycling, contributing to the health of in-stream habitat and maintaining water quality. Gingham, lower Gwydir and Mallowa wetlands? wetlands than in the 2014-15 (Southwell et al. 2016). Ecosystem diversity What did CEW contribute to sustainable ecosystem diversity? Were ecosystems to which CEW was allocated sustained? Was CEW delivered to a representative suite of ecosystem types? Only SA with an expected outcome for ecosystem diversity. Not sure what is meant by sustainable ecosystem diversity in KEQ. No conclusion in the Appendix. “Within the Selected Area, a total of 122 sites, accounting for 82% of all sites were inundated during the 2015-16 water year. All ecosystem types except F1.11: River cooba woodland floodplain and Lt2.2: Temporary floodplain lake were inundated.” Southwell et al. (2016). This indicate that CEW was delivered to a representative suite of the 149 sites that were sampled – and probably also of all ecosystem types in the Gywdir SA, but the whole of the area-scale evaluation is not included – easy to address. Water quality (Cat II) What did CEW contribute to: temperature regimes? pH levels? turbidity regimes? salinity regimes? dissolved oxygen levels? Expected outcomes for carbon and nutrient cycling are given but not for the parameters with KEQ for water quality per se. Describes how CEW affected the various water quality indicators in Appendix C, sampled at one location in the Gwydir. The argument made is that “this single station has permanent surface water connectivity in a defined channel and all environmental water delivered to the lower Gwydir must pass through this reach” Southwell et al. (2016). Don’t understand why there are separate treatments of water quality and stream
vegetation communities in floodplain watercourse? Macroinvertebrates What did CEW contribute to: macroinvertebrate diversity? No statistically significant effect of ewater on density, richness or diversity, but there was a significant effect on family level community composition (Southwell et al. 2016). Vegetation diversity What did CEW contribute to: vegetation species diversity? vegetation community diversity? Watering action insufficient to inundate substantial areas of wetland vegetation (Southwell et al. 2016). Summary statement that the cover of the weed species lippia decreased with native species cover increasing (from Table 4.1) is only part of the story – the result section of Appendix G states overall cover has been consistent over the two years. Cover varies in response to wetting and drying but no overall gains. CEW influenced vegetation – not a clear answer to the KEQs, but likely to be achieved. Small bodied fish and frogs What did CEW contribute to: frog and small-bodied fish populations? frog and small-bodied fish species diversity? Too early to state contribution to populations, but Olive perchlet may be sustained at Gingham waterhole if managed for this species. Only location in the Gwydir its been recorded. Been assigned yellow due to comments re SBNF in Appendix I Fish (river) What did CEW contribute to: native fish community resilience? native fish survival? native fish populations? native fish diversity? Sets context by reference to previous monitoring – not just LTIM – i.e. refers to SRA and STIM data. SBNF results are reported separately – but would be good to see area-scale evaluation of small bodied fish data - combining findings from the
dissolved oxygen levels? production with little enhancement from external supplies that could have further increased food supplies. Oxygen concentrations did not fall below acceptable levels (>50% saturation) (Ye et al. 2017, Table 1) Fish (channel) (Cat I) None specified There are no KEQ for this indicator at the SA scale; however, fish monitoring data are consolidated to evaluate a number of fish targets of DEWNR’s LTWP (Ye et al. 2017). Hydrological Regime (Cat III) What did CEW contribute to: Hydraulic diversity within weir pools? Variability in water levels within weir pools? Some increase in velocities in winter and spring with CEW. Some variability achieved in weir pools – can’t really state if on track as no expected outcomes stated, but suspect this indicator is probably okay. Matter Transport(Cat III) What did CEW contribute to: salinity levels and transport? nutrient concentrations and transport? Increased salt transport through and out of system, only minor changes in concentrations. Also some transport of nutrients. concentrations and transport of phytoplankton? No impact on concentrations, but transport did occur ecosystem function? Increased exchange of nutrients and phytoplankton between critical habitats possibly influenced ecosystem function – but early days. water quality to support aquatic biota and normal biogeochemical processes? Reduced salinity concentrations in particular may have improved conditions in the Lower Lakes and Murray Mouth (Ye et al. 2017). Microinvertebrates (Cat III) What did CEW contribute: to microinvertebrate diversity? Peak diversity matched peaks in river discharge and CEW. Most taxa were transported taxa from floodplain or riparian sources (e.g. Chowilla) Ye et al. (2017). via upstream connectivity to microinvertebrate communities of the LMR Selected Area? Likely to be achieved – some indication of taxa being transported from upstream, but could also be from lateral connections (Ye et al. 2017). to the timing and presence of key species in relation to diet of large-bodied native fish larvae (e.g. golden perch)? Relationship could not be determined.
No clear statement as to what/if CEW contributed to community diversity – patterns in community diversity reflected geomorphic zones. Add water to dry wetlands and aquatic plants grow – so yes, functional groups are different in wet and dry wetlands. Wetland fish Support the habitat and breeding requirements of native vegetation, waterbirds and fish. What did CEW contribute to: native fish populations and native fish diversity? native fish community resilience and native fish survival? Native fish diversity maintained, or increased via overbank natural flows. Evidence of dominant spp – bony herring, Aust. smelt and carp gudgeon – breeding. Breeding may have occurred post watering or that smaller fish were washed into the system post natural overbank flows. Wetland frogs and turtles Support the habitat and breeding requirements of native fish and other vertebrates. What did CEW contribute to: other aquatic vertebrates (frog and turtle) diversity and populations? the provision of habitat to support breeding and recruitment of other vertebrates? the maintenance of refuge habitats? Frog outcomes were achieved, with diversity maintained and populations of southern bell frog persisting in wetlands that were watered. Waterbird diversity Support the habitat requirements of waterbirds What did CEW contribute to: waterbird species diversity? waterbird species of conservation significance? waterbird breeding*? Waterbird breeding was assessed via complementary NSW OEH waterbird diversity and breeding. Wetlands that received water had more waterbirds than wetlands that were dry – not surprising.
Was Commonwealth environmental water delivered to a representative suite of Ecosystem types? Vegetation diversity What did CEW contribute to: vegetation species diversity? vegetation community diversity? No watering of the western floodplain, so not able to attribute vegetation response to ewater. Heavy rainfall prior to sampling had an effect on results. No discussion of constraints but if CEW doesn’t make it onto the floodplain then this indicator is not going to be achieved. Fish (river) What did CEW contribute to: native fish community resilience? native fish survival? native fish populations? native fish diversity? Provides baseline data on fish in the Warrego. No planned CEW, only a small amount derived from an upstream contribution made its way to the SA – 4% contribution. This likely contributed to increased recruitment and abundance in fish post the connecting flow. Frogs What did CEW contribute to: frog populations? frog species diversity? frog survival? Diversity and abundance post rainfall on floodplain highest. Too early to address KEQ. Waterbird diversity What did CEW contribute to: waterbird populations? waterbird species diversity? waterbird survival? Abundance and species richness corresponded to habitat and resource availability. No difference between year 1 and 2, and no difference between channel and floodplain sites except in March 2015. Good floodplain results in year 1 attributable to CEW.