The distribution and protection of intertidal habitats in Australia

Abstract

Shorebirds have declined severely across the East Asian-Australasian Flyway. Many species rely on intertidal habitats for foraging, yet the distribution and conservation status of these habitats across Australia remain poorly understood. Here, we utilised freely available satellite imagery to produce the first map of intertidal habitats across Australia. We estimated a minimum intertidal area of 9856 km 2 , with Queensland and Western Australia supporting the largest areas. Thirty-nine percent of intertidal habitats were protected in Australia, with some primarily within marine protected areas (e.g. Queensland) and others within terrestrial protected areas (e.g. Victoria). Three percent of all intertidal habitats were protected by both marine and terrestrial protected areas. To achieve conservation targets, protected area boundaries must align more accurately with intertidal habitats. Shorebirds use intertidal areas to forage and supratidal areas to roost, so a coordinated management approach is required to account for movement of birds between terrestrial and marine habitats. Ultimately, shorebird declines are occurring despite high levels of habitat protection in Australia. There is a need for a concerted effort both nationally and internationally to map and understand how intertidal habitats are changing, and how habitat conservation can be implemented more effectively.

Protecting Migratory Species in the Australian Marine Environment: A Cross-Jurisdictional Analysis of Policy and Management Plans

“…Migratory shorebirds are highly susceptible to habitat loss through coastal development (Buler and Moore, 2011) and protecting critical habitats used by migratory shorebirds, in the context of increasingly intensive coastal development, is essential (Dhanjal-Adams et al, 2016). Australia has followed global conservation trends and has developed a large number of statutory protected area management plans, primarily terrestrial, to protect areas as a means of conserving biodiversity (Bull et al, 2013;Dhanjal-Adams et al, 2016).…”

“…Migratory shorebirds are highly susceptible to habitat loss through coastal development (Buler and Moore, 2011) and protecting critical habitats used by migratory shorebirds, in the context of increasingly intensive coastal development, is essential (Dhanjal-Adams et al, 2016). Australia has followed global conservation trends and has developed a large number of statutory protected area management plans, primarily terrestrial, to protect areas as a means of conserving biodiversity (Bull et al, 2013;Dhanjal-Adams et al, 2016). Protected areas do benefit marine migratory species (Palumbi, 2004;Dobbs et al, 2008), but many protected areas are static "paper parks" (Cullen- Unsworth and Unsworth, 2016) and often fail to address the habitat connectivity of migratory species (Dryden et al, 2008;Bull et al, 2013;Runge et al, 2015) that actively use nonprotected areas during parts of their lifecycles (Szabo et al, 2016).…”

Generating Continental Scale Pixel-Based Surface Reflectance Composites in Coastal Regions with the Use of a Multi-Resolution Tidal Model

“…This model has been successfully applied to large scale coastal remote sensing studies in Australia [16,19] and East Asia [20]. The OTPS model is based on a system of linear partial differential equations called Laplace's tidal equations, parametrised with nine harmonic tidal constituents.…”

The Australian approach to geospatial capabilities; positioning, earth observation, infrastructure and analytics: issues, trends and perspectives

“…• Continental scale long-term data bases of essential environmental variables, such as surface water cover, vegetation dynamics, and inter-tidal areas (Lewis et al 2016); ) through the Australian geoscience data cube (AGDC); (Dhanjal et al 2016). …”