Summary Assessments of the ‘quality’, condition or status of stands of native vegetation or habitat are now commonplace and are often an essential component of ecological studies and planning processes. Even when soundly based upon ecological principles, these assessments are usually highly subjective and involve implicit value judgements. The present paper describes a novel approach to vegetation or habitat quality assessment (habitat hectares approach) that can be used in almost all types of terrestrial vegetation. It is based on explicit comparisons between existing vegetation features and those of ‘benchmarks’ representing the average characteristics of mature stands of native vegetation of the same community type in a ‘natural’ or ‘undisturbed’ condition. Components of the index incorporate vegetation physiognomy and critical aspects of viability (e.g. degree of regeneration, impact of weeds) and spatial considerations (e.g. area, distribution and connectivity of remnant vegetation in the broader landscape). The approach has been developed to assist in making more objective and explicit decisions about where scarce conservation resources are allocated. Although the approach does not require an intimate botanical knowledge, it is believed to be ecologically valid and useful in many contexts. Importantly, the index does not provide a definitive statement on conservation status nor habitat suitability for individual species. It purposefully takes a ‘broad‐brush’ approach and is primarily intended for use by people involved with making environmentally sensitive planning and management decisions, but may be useful within environmental research programmes. The ‘habitat hectares’ approach is subject to further research and ongoing refinement and constructive feedback is sought from practitioners.

No abstract

Aim (a) To characterize the riparian bird assemblage, and its variation, in a large area of northern Australia; (b) to examine the distinctiveness of this assemblage in relation to the broader landscape; (c) to consider the influence of disturbance on this assemblage; (d) to examine temporal variability in the riparian assemblage, and especially evidence for seasonal movements between riparian and non-riparian areas.Location c. 620,000 km 2 of the seasonal tropics of the Northern Territory, Australia.Methods (a) Synchronous sampling of birds in riparian and adjacent non-riparian areas at 100 sites stratified across 13 catchments and an extensive rainfall gradient. (b) Repeat visits to 13 of these sites at contrasting seasons. (c) Analysis of a larger distributional database to assess the relative occurrence of records in riparian areas relative to nonriparian areas.Results Species richness and the total abundance of birds was significantly greater in riparian zones than in matched non-riparian areas, especially where the riparian zones contained extensive cover of rain forest plants and Melaleuca . Similarity in bird species composition between riparian zones and adjacent non-riparian areas was generally low, and this distinction was greatest in lower reaches of the rivers and where the riparian zone contained no eucalypts. Bird species composition varied gradationally from riparian zones in high rainfall areas, through riparian zones in low rainfall areas and non-riparian zones in high rainfall areas, to non-riparian zones in low rainfall areas. Many species occurred widely across the riparian sites sampled. Of ninety-four species recorded from more than five sites, forty-five species were significantly more abundant in riparian zones than in matched non-riparian zones, whereas this pattern was reversed for only twelve species. There was little association between foraging group and preference for riparian zones. Species had highly idiosyncratic distributions across the riparian samples, with the most common trend being an association with mean annual rainfall. Many species were significantly more closely associated with riparian zones in lower rainfall areas than in higher rainfall areas. Indeed, many species typical of higher rainfall areas extended into lower rainfall areas only, or mainly, along riparian strips. There was some temporal fluidity in bird species composition of riparian zones, suggesting seasonal movements between riparian zones and the surrounding landscape. There was little evidence that disturbance was a major factor influencing the distribution of riparian birds, probably because other major geographical and environmental gradients probably dwarfed the influence of the relatively minor variation between samples in disturbance. Main conclusionsThe bird fauna of riparian areas is distinct from that of the surrounding savannas, and especially so in lower rainfall areas. Riparian vegetation allows many species to extend their distributions into lower rainfall areas. The riparian assemblage is l...

No abstract

A common approach to nature conservation is to identify and protect natural 'assets' such as ecosystems and threatened species. While such actions are essential, protection of assets will not be effective unless the ecological processes that sustain them are maintained. Here, we consider the role of ecological processes and the complementary perspective for conservation arising from an emphasis on process. Many kinds of ecological processes sustain biodiversity: including climatic processes, primary productivity, hydrological processes, formation of biophysical habitats, interactions between species, movements of organisms and natural disturbance regimes. Anthropogenic threats to conservation exert their influence by modifying or disrupting these processes. Such threats extend across tenures, they frequently occur offsite, they commonly induce non-linear responses, changes may be irreversible and the full consequences may not be experienced for lengthy periods. While many managers acknowledge these considerations in principle, there is much scope for greater recognition of ecological processes in nature conservation and greater emphasis on long time-frames and large spatial scales in conservation planning. Practical measures that promote ecological processes include: monitoring to determine the trajectory and rate of processes; incorporating surrogates for processes in conservation and restoration projects; specific interventions to manipulate and restore processes; and planning for the ecological future before options are foreclosed. The long-term conservation of biodiversity and the wellbeing of human society depend upon both the protection of natural assets and maintaining the integrity of the ecological processes that sustain them.