Christian H Roth 1, Graeme Lawson 2 & Deborah Cavanagh 1. 1 CSIRO Land and ... D. Burrows (ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville). B. Butler(ACTFR ...
CSIRO LAND and WATER
Overview of key Natural Resource Management Issues in the Burdekin Catchment, with particular reference to Water Quality and Salinity Burdekin Catchment Condition Study Phase I
Christian H Roth 1, Graeme Lawson 2 & Deborah Cavanagh 1 1 2
CSIRO Land and Water, Townsville Department of Natural Resources and Mines, Townsville
December 2002
© 2002 Burdekin Dry Tropics Board, CSIRO and the State of Queensland (Department of Natural Resources & Mines). This work is copyright. It may be reproduced subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgement of the source. Important Disclaimer: Burdekin Dry Tropics Board, CSIRO Land and Water and the State of Queensland (Department of Natural Resources & Mines) advises that the information contained in this publication comprises general statements based on scientific research. The reader is advised and needs to be aware that such information may be incomplete or unable to be used in any specific situation. No reliance or actions must therefore be made on that information without seeking prior expert professional, scientific and technical advice. To the extent permitted by law, Burdekin Dry Tropics Board, CSIRO Land and Water and the State of Queensland (Department of Natural Resources & Mines) (including its employees and consultants) excludes all liability to any person for any consequences, including but not limited to all losses, damages, costs, expenses and any other compensation, arising directly or indirectly from using this publication (in part or in whole) and any information or material contained in it.
Burdekin Catchment Condition Study Phase I
Natural Resource Management Issues in the Burdekin – December 2002
Acknowledgements ____________________________________________________________________________ This study was commissioned by the Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines (NR&M) on behalf of the Burdekin Dry Tropics Board (BDTB) and the Joint Steering Committee of National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality (NAPSWQ) in 2001. It was primarily funded through Foundation Funds out of the NAPSWQ, with additional support from CSIRO Land and Water and NR&M. The authors express their thanks for this funding support. A great number of individuals were involved in various ways. Direct contributions to sections of the study were made by: D. Burrows (ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville) B. Butler (ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville) S. Campbell (NR&M, Charters Towers) P. Gilbey (NR&M, Townsville) R. Greiner (CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Townsville) B. Shepherd (DPI, Charters Towers) M.Whitehead (EPA, Townsville) Significant input to the prioritisation of natural resource management issues were provided by participants of a workshop held in April 2001, at CSIRO Davies Laboratory. In addition to the authors and the persons listed above, the workshop participants included the following individuals: A. Benson (BSES, Ayr) M. Cannon (EPA, Townsville) P. Elliot (DPI, Townsville) M. Grundy (NR&M, Indooroopilly) B. McCallum (DPI, Charters Towers) P. Onta (NR&M, Townsville) A. Solomon (NR&M, Mareeba) M. Vitelli (BRIG, Charters Towers) D. Williams (Reef CRC) The study in various draft forms was extensively reviewed by some of the above persons, Claudia Baldwin (NAPSWQ and NR&M), and the BDTB’s Biophysical Technical Advisory Panel, comprising the following members: Keith Bristow (CSIRO L&W, Townsville) Damien Burrows (ACTFR, JCU, Townsville) Mark Fenton (JCU, Townsville) Russell Kelly (WWF, Brisbane) Peter O’Reagain (DPI, Charters Towers) Peter Wilson (NR&M, Mareeba)
Jon Brodie (ACTFR, JCU, Townsville) Lex Cogle (NR&M, Mareeba) David Haynes (GBRMPA, Townsville) Mal Lorimer (EPA, Townsville) Christian Roth (Chair, CLW, Townsville)
The authors wish to express their gratitude to all those persons mentioned above for their valuable input, without which the study in its present form would not have been possible. We also gratefully acknowledge Malcolm Hodgen and Glenda Stanton for their untiring support in finalising the maps and the report.
Table of Contents _________________________________________________________________________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................... 1 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 4 2. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 6 3. CHARACTERISATION OF THE BURDEKIN CATCHMENT .............................................. 7 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6
HYDROLOGY AND RAINFALL .................................................................................................... 7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ................................................................................................................ 8 TOPOGRAPHY .......................................................................................................................... 12 BIOREGIONS, VEGETATION AND FAUNA ................................................................................ 12 LAND USE ............................................................................................................................... 17 JURISDICTIONS ........................................................................................................................ 19
4. REGIONAL NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLANNING ................................. 21 4.1 MAJOR GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES ........................................................................................ 21 4.1.1 National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality (NAPSWQ)................................... 21 4.1.2 GBRMPA Action Plan for Water Quality ........................................................................ 21 4.1.3 Reef Protection Plan........................................................................................................ 21 4.1.4 Natural Heritage Trust 2 ................................................................................................. 22 4.1.5 Rangelands to Reef Initiative ........................................................................................... 22 4.2 REGIONAL NRM STRATEGIES ................................................................................................. 23 4.2.1 Burdekin-Bowen Integrated Floodplain Management Advisory Group (BBIFMAC) ..... 23 4.2.2 Burdekin Rangelands Implementation Group (BRIG)..................................................... 23 4.2.3 Natural Resources and Environment Forum (NaREF).................................................... 23 4.2.4 Belyando Suttor Implementation Group .......................................................................... 23 4.2.5 Desert Uplands Build-up and Development Strategy Committee.................................... 23 4.3 STATUTORY PLANNING ........................................................................................................... 24 4.3.1 Water Resource Planning ................................................................................................ 24 4.3.2 Vegetation Management Planning................................................................................... 24 4.3.4 Coastal Management Planning ....................................................................................... 25 4.3.5 Integrated Planning Act................................................................................................... 25 5. KEY NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ISSUES ...................................................... 26 5.1 WATER QUALITY .................................................................................................................... 26 5.1.1 Bedload Events ................................................................................................................ 26 5.1.2 Washload Events.............................................................................................................. 28 5.1.3 Ambient Water Quality .................................................................................................... 31 5.1.4 Contaminants to Groundwater ........................................................................................ 34 5.1.5 Changes to Flow Regime ................................................................................................. 35 5.2 SALINITY ................................................................................................................................. 36 5.2.1 Dryland Salinity............................................................................................................... 36 5.2.2 Irrigation Salinity ............................................................................................................ 39 5.2.3 Seawater Intrusion........................................................................................................... 40 5.3 LAND DEGRADATION .............................................................................................................. 41 5.3.1 Soil Erosion...................................................................................................................... 42 5.3.2 Soil Acidity....................................................................................................................... 45 5.3.3 Pasture Condition ............................................................................................................ 46 5.3.4 Terrestrial Weeds............................................................................................................. 47
1
5.4 LOSS OF HABITAT ................................................................................................................... 49 5.4.1 Tree-clearing and Tree-thickening .................................................................................. 49 5.4.2 Riparian Vegetation......................................................................................................... 53 5.4.3 Degradation and Loss of Wetlands.................................................................................. 53 5.4.4 Aquatic Weeds.................................................................................................................. 55 5.5 FERAL ANIMALS ..................................................................................................................... 55 5.6 MINING AND EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRY IMPACTS ..................................................................... 56 6. PRIORITISATION OF NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ISSUES ...................... 57 6.1 METHODOLOGY FOR ISSUES PRIORISATION ........................................................................... 57 6.2 PRIORITY ISSUES FOR NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN THE BURDEKIN .................... 58 6.3 PRIORITY ACTIONS ................................................................................................................. 58 7. BIBLIOGRAPHY ORDERED BY SECTIONS ........................................................................ 62 CHARACTERISATION OF THE BURDEKIN CATCHMENT ................................................................... 62 General ....................................................................................................................................... 62 Hydrology and Rainfall .............................................................................................................. 62 Geology and Soils ....................................................................................................................... 63 Bioregions, Vegetation and Fauna ............................................................................................. 65 Land Use..................................................................................................................................... 66 REGIONAL NRM ISSUES ................................................................................................................. 66 General ....................................................................................................................................... 66 Major Government Initiatives..................................................................................................... 67 Regional NRM Strategies............................................................................................................ 67 Statutory Planning ...................................................................................................................... 67 KEY NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ISSUES ......................................................................... 68 General ....................................................................................................................................... 68 Water Quality.............................................................................................................................. 68 Salinity ........................................................................................................................................ 71 Land Degradation....................................................................................................................... 73 Loss of Habitat and Biodiversity ................................................................................................ 76 Feral Animals ............................................................................................................................. 79 FURTHER READING ......................................................................................................................... 79 Impacts on the Great Barrier Reef ............................................................................................. 79 8. BIBLIOGRAPHY ALPHABETICALLY ORDERED ............................................................. 81
2
Figures Figure 1a Monthly Streamflow and evaporation recorded for the Upper Burdekin at Sellheim Bridge ............................................................................................................... 10 Figure 1b. Long-term annual flow in the Upper Burdekin recorded at Sellheim Bridge ................. 10 Figure 2 Ranking of natural resource management issues in the Burdekin Catchments ............... 59
Tables Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8
Catchment contributions to the Burdekin River at Clare................................................. 7 Rainfall, temperatures and humidity of the Burdekin sub-catchments ............................ 8 List of endangered and rare animal species in the Desert Uplands region ...................... 15 List of endangered and rare animal species in the Burdekin region ................................ 15 Industry and Irrigation in the Burdekin Catchments........................................................ 17 Sediment budget for the Burdekin Catchments ............................................................... 45 Weeds found in the Burdekin Catchments....................................................................... 48 Areas of cleared, regrowth and remnant vegetation, derived from Qld Herbarium 1999 Remnant Vegetation mapping .............................................................. 51
Maps Map 1 Map 2. Map 3 Map 4 Map 5 Map 6 Map 7 Map 8 Map 9 Map 10
The Burdekin River Catchment showing major rivers, towns and rainfall distribution .......................................................................................................... 9 Bioregions of the Burdekin Catchment............................................................................ 13 Vegetation of the Burdekin Catchment............................................................................ 14 National Parks in the Burdekin Catchment...................................................................... 18 Predicted bedload deposition in the Burdekin Catchments ............................................. 27 Suspended sediment load in the Burdekin Catchments ................................................... 30 Dryland salinity hazard in the Burdekin Catchments ...................................................... 38 Predicted hillslope erosion hazard in the Burdekin Catchments...................................... 43 Predicted gully erosion in the Burdekin Catchments....................................................... 44 Extent of clearing and regrowth in the Burdekin Catchments ......................................... 52
3
1. Executive Summary _________________________________________________________________________________ Already, many planning activities are underway. To avoid overlap between groups, and to ensure that all planning is properly integrated and accredited, each Regional Body is developing a regional Natural Resource Management Plan. The aim is that these plans should complement any other relevant plans so that duplication is minimised and all the key issues are tackled.
Characterisation of the Burdekin Catchment The main feature of the Burdekin River is its great variability. The river’s flow can vary markedly within a single year, or from one year to another. The pattern of water movement in the river’s catchment area is well understood and supported by good data. In contrast, we have little data about regional water balances and ground water resources, with the exception of irrigation areas.
The major natural resource management issues
Soils vary widely in the Burdekin Catchment, depending on the underlying geology, the local topography and the rainfall. Our knowledge about the soils is also variable. Some areas have good soil distribution and soil chemical data (for example, the Burdekin Irrigation Area; the Desert Uplands and the Upper Burdekin). Other extensive areas (such as the Belyando) lack detailed soils information, and this is a serious impediment to improving natural resource management in these areas. Soil hydraulic property data is generally lacking.
Water quality is a central issue for the Burdekin Catchment. When assessing impacts of water quality on freshwater, estuarine and marine ecosystems, it is necessary to differentiate between the different types of flow, because this can affect the movement of sediment, nutrients and contaminants. Floods determine the total loads of sediments and nutrients and this is most important for the marine environment. Good ambient water quality during low flow is critical for freshwater habitats. Both the marine and freshwater environments are strongly affected by changes to flow as a result of current land management practices and the use of water resources (e.g. irrigation). There are reasonable estimates of sediment and nutrient delivery to the near-shore environment. Through catchment modelling there is also a reasonable understanding of the spatial distribution of sources of the materials, as well as patterns of deposition. However, there are very few data on sediment and nutrient loads in the river network, making validation of models difficult. More importantly, this indicates that we can anticipate serious difficulties in determining reliable water quality benchmarks from which to develop future water quality targets. The absence of such data is compounded by our current inability to quantify the impact of poor ambient water quality on aquatic processes.
The Burdekin Catchment is rich in biodiversity and has varied vegetation. Grazing is the predominant land use, and this has allowed extensive areas of native woodlands to remain largely intact, particularly in the northern region of the catchment. More intensive agriculture, in the form of irrigated sugar cane and horticulture, is concentrated in the Lower Burdekin floodplain. The policy and planning environment The Federal and State Governments have organised and are helping to fund a range of programs designed to protect the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon by improving water quality in adjacent catchments. One of the best ways of doing this is to involve local communities. Regional Bodies have been organised to help keep up the momentum for more sustainable management of natural resources at regional levels.
Salinity is already a significant issue in the Burdekin Catchment and is likely to become even more pressing in the near future. Three different salinisation processes need to be distinguished in the Burdekin: dryland salinity, irrigation salinity and seawater intrusion. Various salinity hazard assessments undertaken
The Burdekin Catchment is represented by a range of community groups already actively involved. A Regional Body for the Burdekin catchment has been formed (Burdekin Dry Tropics Group Inc.), drawing from these community groups. 4
for different reasons. Tree-clearing becomes a biodiversity problem when rare or high value vegetation and habitat types become affected (e.g. Brigalow). Wetlands play an important part in supporting aquatic biodiversity, often acting as refuges or reservoirs for aquatic species. Hence, the loss or destruction of wetlands is a serious problem. Understanding and dealing with the loss of habitats is still seriously hampered by inadequate or insufficient data. Obtaining baseline information on wetlands and riparian vegetation is a high priority. Without such data, it will continue to be very difficult to make rational decisions on resource allocation priorities, and we will have little base from which to rehabilitate habitats.
across the Burdekin Catchment or parts of it indicate that some areas present a high dryland salinity hazard. Small hotspots are presumed to exist in many areas of the catchment, but the area of greatest concern is the south-eastern part of the Belyando. We currently have little data to confirm the extent and severity of dryland risk under current and future land use scenarios. Until we have better data, further tree clearing in these areas should be halted. Irrigation salinity and seawater intrusion are confined to the Burdekin River Irrigation Area (BRIA) and the Burdekin Delta, respectively. Whilst there are strategies in place to manage the seawater intrusion problem, we do not yet understand the regional salt balance and hydrology of the BRIA well enough to formulate adequate responses. The main constraint for effective management is the lack of an integrated drainage management strategy and options for salt water discharge without compromising receiving waterways and adjacent ecosystems.
Priority actions In summary, the most important biophysical issues are land degradation (which includes soil erosion and poor pasture condition), water quality (both loads and ambient WQ), and dryland salinity. Next comes irrigation salinity, loss and degradation of wetlands, land degradation by weeds, and seawater intrusion.
Land degradation in its various forms is a widespread problem in the Burdekin Catchment and it directly affects productivity in many ways. Land degradation is predominantly associated with grazing, given that this is the main land use. Soil erosion, poor pasture condition and invasions of terrestrial weeds constitute the main degradation issues. All three are intricately linked and depend to a large extent on grazing management. Prolonged, excessive grazing, combined with inadequate fire management strategies, can greatly reduce ground cover and damage the soil. The end result is soil erosion, the loss of desirable, productive pasture species and increased invasion of weeds. The extent and nature of these problems is reasonably well understood and documented, and in many cases effective management strategies have been well researched and are now readily available. Whilst there are still a few critical knowledge gaps, the focus of future investment by the Regional Body will have to be on the resourcing of adoption, and implementation, of existing solutions for sustainable grazing practices.
Priority actions were grouped and discussed in three categories: capacity-building, data acquisition and on-ground works. Immediate investment in capacity-building is essential to revive the interest and motivation of community members and individual landholders so that they will take the sustainable management of their natural resources into their own hands. In some cases, there is an urgent need to complement these actions by collecting extra data to help provide benchmarks which will allow us to set targets for future achievements. In other instances, we already have enough information to guide the implementation of effective on-ground works. Initially these works should be targeted at improved grazing management to increase ground cover levels, reduce soil erosion, reverse pasture decline and reduce sediment delivery from hotspot sub-catchments.
Habitat and biodiversity loss occurs in some form in all areas of the catchment, although the impact is more significant in the coastal floodplain areas of the Lower Burdekin. Treeclearing and loss of wetlands seem to be the most significant biodiversity issues, although 5
2. Introduction _________________________________________________________________________________ Cook University (JCU) and Department of Natural Resources and Mines (NR&M).
The Commonwealth and Queensland Governments have together initiated the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality (NAPSWQ). The Plan is designed to get more participation in natural resource management (NRM) at the local level. It is also intended to devolve greater responsibility for NRM to the emergent Regional Bodies. Regional Bodies may vary from one region to another, but each will be required to prepare accredited NRM plans and investment strategies for on-ground works. While this is strongly supported by the community, it is placing unprecedented challenges and responsibilities on the Regional Bodies being formed in those regions, as it is certain that the magnitude of NRM issues will greatly surpass the availability of resources to address these issues. Hence the very real challenge for Regional Bodies, and community groups working with them, will be to use the available funding to encourage increased investment from landholders, who will become the main agents in changing current land use practices.
In addition to this industry-focussed research, there have also been many government-initiated studies on land and water resources and their capability and future use. This plethora of landbased research has been complemented by significant research in the estuary of the Burdekin River and near shore zones of the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon (GBRL) by the Australian Institute of Marine Sciences (AIMS), GBRMPA, JCU and the Reef CRC. It is the purpose of this document to bring together this knowledge in a manner that informs the community about the current condition and trend of natural resources in the Burdekin Catchment. In particular, the study was commissioned to support the Burdekin Catchment’s newly formed Regional Body – the Burdekin Dry Tropics Group Inc. – to allow the Board to become familiar with the key issues, the level of current understanding, the critical knowledge gaps, and where some of the initial funding might be targeted. The Board currently comprises a chair, four community representatives, two representatives from local government, a representative from science/academia and one for socio-economics. GBRMPA, the Commonwealth Departments of AFFA, Environment Australia and ATSIC, and NR&M provide advisory members. Given the target audience, and the short time available, this study is not intended to be a fully comprehensive, scientific review.
The fact that there is insufficient government funding to address all issues means that funds need to be targeted at measures likely to have the greatest benefit initially in terms of reduced salinity risk and/or improved water quality. A key prerequisite for the effective facilitation of this role, and the ability of Regional Bodies to foster the highest level possible of community ownership and willingness to implement change, is that these bodies need to be seen to be taking rational and transparent decisions when choosing priorities and making the hard decisions about where to allocate funds. This requires the best possible use of available data and scientific knowledge accessible to the Regional Bodies.
The first two sections provide context through a brief overview of the physical characteristics of the Burdekin Catchment and related natural resource management planning activities. The main body of the study focuses on the key issues, and gaps in our knowledge that may have to be addressed in order to help the Regional Bodies in the future. Key statements and conclusions are summarised in boxes containing bold text at the end of chapter sections. A comprehensive bibliography has been compiled listing most of the available information in the same sequence of headings to facilitate further reading.
Over the past decades, many (but not all) parts of the Burdekin Catchment have been the subject of studies. There is a tradition of longstanding research in the irrigation area of the Lower Burdekin and in the grazing areas of the Upper Burdekin, by such institutions such as Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (BSES), CSIRO, Department of Primary Industries (DPI), James
6
3. Characterisation of the Burdekin Catchment _________________________________________________________________________________ dry periods. In addition to this pronounced annual fluctuation, there is a marked variability from year to year – series of wet years are followed by series of low flow years (see Figure 1).
The Burdekin Catchment covers an immense area of remarkable tropical diversity: semi-arid drylands, wooded grasslands, mountainous tropical rainforests, coastal plains, mangroves and wetlands. The Catchment empties into the Great Barrier Reef lagoon.
Because it drains the south-western, semi-arid region of the catchment, the Belyando/Suttor sub-catchment produces unreliable streamflow and contributes comparatively less to the overall discharge from the basin. More than half the total flows come from the Upper Burdekin sub-catchment, although it only represents about 28% of the basin area (see Table 1). About 13% of the flow comes from the Bowen/Broken sub-catchment, although this represents only 7 % of the Burdekin catchment. Both sub-catchments benefit from the high rainfall on the western slopes of the coastal ranges.
Lying between 18o and 25o South, and 144 o and 149 o East, the Burdekin catchment is the second largest in Queensland. When combined with the coastal areas that also form part of the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality (NAPSWQ) investment area, the region covers 133 432 square kilometers, or almost eight percent of the State. The catchment comprises four distinct subcatchments (see Map 1): • Belyando/Suttor; • Upper Burdekin; • Bowen/Broken; • Lower Burdekin and Coastal Plains.
Table 1. Catchment contributions to the Burdekin River at Clare. (HYDSYS Database, NR&M).
3.1 Hydrology and Rainfall Above the Burdekin Falls Dam, the drainage network encompasses two large basins, the Upper Burdekin and the Belyando/Suttor. Ranging 700km from north to south, their rivers flow generally parallel to the coast and drain more than 80% of the Catchment. These subcatchments empty into the upper reaches of Lake Dalrymple, formed by the construction of the Burdekin Falls Dam.
Sub-catchment
Area (km²) % Area of Burdekin Basin at Clare
Sub-catchment % of annual total contribution flow (ML/a)
Upper Burdekin Belyando/Suttor Bowen/Broken Lower Burdekin
36,181 73,828 9,413 10,028
28% 57% 7% 8%
4 067 000 2 554 500 1 021 760 132 700
52 % 33 % 13 % 2%
Total at Clare
129,450
100%
7 775 960
100 %
Downstream from the Burdekin Falls Dam, the smaller Bowen/Broken system is partially regulated by Eungella Dam, in the upper reaches of the Broken River, and by the Collinsville Weir. The Coastal Plains drain directly to the coast via the Haughton and Burdekin Rivers as well as smaller coastal streams.
River flow in the Burdekin Catchment is affected by several dams (Burdekin Falls Dam, Eungella Dam and Paluma Dam), many weirs (6 in the Belyando/Suttor, 2 in the Upper Burdekin and 5 in the Lower Burdekin) and numerous extraction pumps (about 26 in the Belyando/Suttor). The Burdekin Dam dominates flow regulation, with an ability to store 1 860 000 ML of water, which represents about 88% of the total storage capacity in the catchment.
Dominated by wet summers and dry winters, peak flows occur from December to April with low, or negligible, flows from May to November. Smaller tributaries may cease flowing altogether. In general, flow in the Burdekin is dominated by large cyclone or monsoon-driven events, followed by extended
The climate in the Burdekin Catchment ranges from tropical sub-humid on the coastal plains and adjacent ranges, to semi-arid over the far west of the interior. Climate is generally warm and sub-humid with hot wet summers and dry warm winters. Despite its size, temperatures vary little across the catchment. In general, the
7
Belyando/Suttor and western regions of the Upper Burdekin sub-catchment experience slightly higher average maximum temperatures and lower minima than the adjacent coastal zones. At higher elevations, temperatures are cooler and there is more rainfall. The coastal regions regularly experience heavy rainfall during summer months. Relative humidity is fairly constant across sub-catchments in the mornings, though afternoon readings are lower in the west (see Table 2).
The main feature of the Burdekin River is its great variability. The river’s flow can vary markedly within a single year or from one year to another. The pattern of water movement in the river’s catchment area is well understood and supported by good data. In contrast, we have little data about regional water balances and ground water resources, with the exception of irrigation areas.
Rainfall essentially mirrors the topography, being higher near the coastal ranges, and lowest in the southern and western extremities of the Belyando/Suttor sub-catchment (Map 1). Rainfall distribution is strongly seasonal, with 70-85% occurring in November to April. The Burdekin is also characterised by an extreme variation of annual rainfall between years, with wet years regularly followed by a series of El Niño- induced drought years (see Figure 1).
3.2 Geology and Soils Upper Burdekin The Upper Burdekin consists mainly of volcanic and sedimentary rocks, remnants of sedimentary basins. Highlands and tablelands in the north-west are of young basalt, one to five million years old, with older basalt to the east. Large areas of granite and granodiorite outcrops are present in the north, north-central and eastern sections.
Table 2. Rainfall, temperatures and humidity of the Burdekin River sub-catchments. (Bureau of Meteorology, 1998). Sub-catchment
Representative Centre
Average Rainfall (mm per annum)
Average Temp oC (Jan and July)
Upper Burdekin
Charters Towers Twin Hills Collinsville Millaroo
661
27.0 17.8 28.6 15.4 27.6 – 17.1 28.0 17.7
Belyando/Suttor Bowen/Broken Lower Burdekin and Coastal Plains
615 715 875
Upper Burdekin soils vary considerably and include: extensive areas of fairly erodible, moderate productivity red duplex soils (‘Goldfields’ country); widespread areas of high productivity black and red soils on basalt; large areas of poor to moderately fertile sands; sodic duplex soils; and red and yellow earths. Most soils in the Upper Burdekin (with exception of some of the basalt soils) generally have low organic matter and nitrogen content due to the seasonal high temperatures and low humidity. Intense weathering and/or leaching have severely affected soil nutrient levels.
Average Humidity % Jan - July (9AM) 68 – 65 63 – 64 68 – 71 66 – 64
In most areas, rainfall across the catchment is far less than the amount of water used by plants for transpiration, so that in general terms there is not much water that passes through the soil to recharge ground water aquifers. However, heavy monsoonal rainfall during the wet season will usually give some recharge. Only limited water balance information is available for a few sites in the Burdekin catchment. Other than for the irrigation areas, there is not much information available on ground water resources either (for example, the depth and quality of aquifers). This represents a major gap in the knowledge needed to assess the risk of dryland salinity.
Soil and land resources have been well mapped and there is good land resources information available at 1:250 000 scale for the Dalrymple Shire. Good soil chemical data accompanies the survey data, but soil physical and soil hydraulic property data is sparse. Belyando/Suttor Most of the Belyando/Suttor sub-catchment consists of a series of remnant sedimentary basins. South of latitude 21oS, alluvial deposits of Quaternary age (less than 1.8 million years) consisting of sand, gravel and soil are present in the Cape, Campaspe and Suttor Rivers. Cemented volcanic products are common in the Drummond basin in the central sub-catchment, while to the north of latitude 21oS carboniferous
8
Ingham
rd ek
in
#
Bu
Townsville
Riv er
#
ekin Bur d Riv e
#
r
Home Hill
Ayr
iv er
rke Cla r ve Ri
Bowen
# #
Collinsville
Bu rd ekin
Fan nin g R
Greenvale
# #
#
River
# #
ve Ri pe Ca
Charters Towers
r
BURDEKIN DAM
#
Mackay
Su ttor River
Clermont
#
oR
Internal catchments
r i ve
Reser voirs Riv er network Average annual rainfall (mm)
#
nd ya Bel
Legend
#
Alpha
0 - 500 mm 500 - 750 mm 750 - 1000 mm 1000 - 1500 mm 1500 - 2000 mm
50
0
50
100
Kilomete rs
> 2000 mm
Map 1 The Burdekin River Catchment showing major rivers, towns and rainfall distribution (modified from Prosser et al., 2001)
9
600
400 350
500
Rainfall Streamflow
400
250
300
200 150
200
Streamflow (GL)
Rainfall (mm)
300
100 100
50 0
0 1998
Figure 1a. Weekly streamflow (in gigalitres; 1 gigalitre = 109 litres) recorded for a flood year (1998) in the Upper Burdekin Catchment, at Sellheim Bridge.
Annual streamflow ('000 GL)
30 25 20 15 10 5
97 19
93 19
89 19
85 19
81 19
77 19
73 19
69 19
65 19
61 19
57 19
53 19
19
49
0
Hydrologic year
Figure 1b. Annual streamflow (in thousands of gigalitres) recorded for the period 1949 – 1999 in the Upper Burdekin Catchment, at Sellheim Bridge.
10
intermediate rocks. Much of the eastern slopes of the Leichhardt Ranges to the west are covered by shallow, gravely/sandy soils associated with granite or sandstone parent material. Areas of black earths lie between Collinsville and the Burdekin and Bowen Rivers, with smaller isolated areas at Exe Creek near Redcliffe and the Broken River at Emu Plains.
sedimentary formations and isolated granite intrusions (evidenced as outcrops) occur over many thousand square kilometres. The relatively low rainfall and high evaporation typical of this region largely eliminates leaching in all but the most permeable coarse-textured soils. The accumulation of organic matter (including nitrogen) is low due to seasonal aridity, high temperatures and low humidity.
Lower Burdekin and Coastal Plain The Lower Burdekin and Coastal Plain study areas consist mainly of volcanic and sedimentary rocks. Superficial sand, gravel, silt and mud form plains in the Bowen coastal area, while small dissected tablelands of old basalt occur in the Bowen Basin. Higher rainfall in the coastal region has produced areas of deep, strongly weathered fine-textured soils on the footslopes. Many soils here have been subjected to intense weathering and/or leaching, severely affecting their nutrient value.
Cracking clay soils predominate throughout the sub-catchment due to the presence of basic igneous rocks, clay-containing sedimentary rocks and fine textured hillslope and river bank deposits. Soils include grey/brown clays and red/yellow earths, widespread throughout the Belyando and Suttor River catchments. Large areas of soils with dispersive properties due to high sodium contents occur along the eastern plains and adjacent slopes of the Drummond and Leichhardt Ranges as a result of past salinisation and leaching.
Within the Burdekin floodplain, soils are derived from very variable river deposits and include black cracking clays, sands and a range of duplex soils, some with a dispersive nature. Sand dunes, marine plains, deltas and sand bars form unique landforms close to the coast.
Some detailed land resource information with maps at a scale 1:100 000 is available for the western (Desert Uplands) section of this region, but large areas remain without any detailed soil information. This is of concern because of the relatively high incidence of salinity hazard in the south-eastern section of the Belyando/Suttor sub-catchment. However, results obtained from the Brigalow Research Station in the Fitzroy may be applicable to some of the Belyando.
Although soils in the Burdekin River Irrigation Area (BRIA) sections of the coastal floodplain have been mapped in detail, detailed soil information for the Delta areas is still lacking. Mapping is currently underway in the Delta. Some soil chemical data is available, but soil physical and soil hydraulic property data, essential for robust hydrologic modelling, is lacking.
Bowen/Broken The Bowen/Broken sub-catchment contains sedimentary and volcanic rocks. Sandstones, mudstone, siltstone and conglomerates are the main rock layers in the sedimentary basins, while conglomerates and quartz-rich sandstones form ridges and escarpments. Formations containing a high proportion of easily weathered minerals result in the gentle rises and rolling plains common to the lower Bowen valley. Limestone, originating from marine reefs formed by corals, juts out prominently and has subsequently been cut into rugged gorges.
Soils vary widely in the Burdekin Catchment, depending on the underlying geology, the local topography and the rainfall. Our knowledge about the soils is also variable. Some areas have good soil distribution and soil chemical data (for example, the Burdekin Irrigation Area; the Desert Uplands and the Upper Burdekin). Other extensive areas (such as the Belyando) lack detailed soils information, and this is a serious impediment to improving natural resource management in these areas. Soil hydraulic property data is generally lacking.
Prominent soil types along the eastern margin are the red-brown earths and yellow podsolics/soloths. On the drier western slopes of the Clarke Ranges around Dalrymple Heights, the strongly undulating landscape is covered by yellow soils derived from weathered
11
through a torturous valley system (500-300m) of rugged volcanic hills. The valley opens out near the confluence of the Massey and Urannah Creeks and joins the Bowen River valley within the Central Hill and Tablelands region near ‘Emu Plains’.
3.3 Topography Upper Burdekin Bounded by mountain ranges, a large proportion of the Upper Burdekin is strongly undulating. The Great Dividing Range to the west is largely basalt plateaus, high plains and rugged hills rising to elevations of over 900m. The eastern ranges are a complex system of rugged mountains, hills and dissected plateaux. Areas of flat to very gently undulating land are on the plateaux and along the river beds in the lower section of the catchment.
Lower Burdekin and Coastal Plains The Lower Burdekin sub-catchment consists mainly of strongly undulating, hilly, mountainous terrain bordered by the Seventy Mile Range to the south-west and the Clarke Range to the east. The Burdekin River weaves around the Leichhardt Range through the centre of the sub-catchment.
Belyando/Suttor The Suttor River rises in the Central Hills and flows at first westerly, then northwards through the Central/Southern Plains and Lowlands. These plains and lowlands constitute over half of the sub-catchment.
The Coastal Plain sub-catchment is characterized by strongly undulating terrain in the Clarke Ranges to the south-west with gently undulating lands elsewhere. Along the coast the land is level to gently undulating with elevations less than 50m.
The south-western plains, drained by the Belyando River and Mistake Creek, are gently undulating, low tablelands covered by Tertiary derital rocks and laterite. Isolated low ranges present gentle slopes up to a few hundred metres. Alluvial plains and braided channels are found along most stream tracts. Extensive, low gradient fans, several kilometers across, are characteristic of the Belyando River. The Cape and Campaspe Rivers rise within the Western Plateau and High Plains. The area slopes from a northern elevation of about 450m to 300m in the south to south-east.
3.4 Bioregions, Vegetation and Fauna Bioregions are defined on broad landscape patterns reflecting major structural geologies and climate as well as changes in plant and animal communities. The following Bioregions are present in the NAPSWQ management area: • Einasleigh Uplands (Upper Burdekin); • Desert Uplands (western portion of • Belyando); • Brigalow Belt (Lower Burdekin and Coastal Plains, Belyando/Suttor, Bowen/Broken).
The Belyando River catchment, within the Southern Lowlands, is undulating with shallow scarps and long ridges formed over dipping sedimentary rocks from the nearby Drummond Ranges. Steep ridged anticlines rise to 350 metres with gentle backslopes. Most of the area is formed on gently undulating Tertiary sandstone and crossed by rivers with wide alluvial flats.
The Bioregions are further subdivided into provinces on the basis of landscape pattern (geology and geomorphology) and climate. Provinces have characteristic landform and vegetation patterns, representing major differences in land processes, energy budgets, species distribution and patterns of movement (see Map 2).
Bowen/Broken The Bowen River rises in the Central Hills and Tablelands. The river runs through low undulating hills, with some steeper ridges and dissected tablelands.
Vegetation is predominantly savannah woodlands dominated by eucalypts (bloodwoods, ironbarks, box) and by acacias in the Brigalow Belt to the south. Pockets of high conservation value vine forests border rainforests to the north and east while areas of dense vine thickets are sparsely scattered along rivers and creeks in the form of riparian vegetation. Rainforests fringe the north-eastern and south-eastern ranges (see Map 3).
The Broken River originates in the NorthEastern Highlands. Flowing generally northwest from Mt Bruce (900m) through a shallowincised valley to Eungella Dam (550m), then
12
Einasleigh Uplands
Wet Tropics
Gulf Plains
Desert Uplands Central Queensland Coast
Brigalow Belt
Legend
Burdekin Catchment
50
0
50
100
Map 2 Bioregions of the Burdekin Catchment (map provided by QEPA, 2002)
13
Kilometers
Leg en d Acacias Bloodwoods Eucalypts Grasslands Mangroves Melaleucas Rainforest Vine forests Vine thickets Wetland Mapping incomplete
50
0
50
100
Map 3 Vegetation of the Burdekin Catchment (map provided by QEPA, 2002)
14
Kilometers
Table 3. List of endangered and rare animal species in the Desert Uplands region. (Kelly, 2002; compiled from EPA’s WildNet database; NCA = conservation status as per Nature Conservation Act 1992) Class
Scientific Name
Common Name
NCA
Mammals
Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis
eastern bent-wing bat
Common
Mammals
Sminthopsis douglasi
Julia Creek dunnart
Endangered
Mammals
Taphozous troughtoni
Troughton's sheathtail bat
Endangered
Birds
Erythrotriorchis radiatus
red goshawk
Endangered
Birds
Erythrura gouldiae
Gouldian finch
Endangered
Fish
Scaturiginichthys vermeilipinnis
red-finned blue-eye
Endangered
Fish
Chlamydogobius squamigenus
Edgbaston goby
Endangered Rare
Mammals
Chalinolobus picatus
little pied bat
Birds
Nettapus coromandelianus
cotton pygmy-goose
Rare
Birds
Stictonetta naevosa
freckled duck
Rare
Birds
Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus
black-necked stork
Rare
Birds
Accipiter novaehollandiae
grey goshawk
Rare
Birds
Lophoictinia isura
square-tailed kite
Rare
Birds
Falco hypoleucos
grey falcon
Rare
Birds
Rostratula benghalensis
painted snipe
Rare
Birds
Pyrrholaemus brunneus
redthroat
Rare
Birds
Grantiella picta
painted honeyeater
Rare
Birds
Melithreptus gularis
black-chinned honeyeater
Rare
Birds
Melithreptus gularis laetior
golden-backed honeyeater
Rare
Birds
Heteromunia pectoralis
pictorella mannikin
Rare
Reptiles
Pseudechis colletti
Collett's snake
Rare
Reptiles
Simoselaps warro
robust burrowing snake
Rare
Reptiles
Crocodylus porosus
estuarine crocodile
Vulnerable
Table 4. List of endangered and rare animal species in the Burdekin region. (Kelly, 2002; compiled from EPA’s WildNet database; NCA = conservation status as per Nature Conservation Act 1992) Class
Scientific Name
Common Name
NCA
Mammals
Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis
eastern bent-wing bat
Common
Mammals
Dasyurus maculatus gracilis
spotted-tailed quoll (northern ssp.)
Endangered
Mammals
Macrotis lagotis
greater bilby
Endangered
Mammals
Lasiorhinus krefftii
northern hairy-nosed wombat
Endangered
Mammals
Onychogalea fraenata
bridled nailtail wallaby
Endangered
Mammals
Petrogale sharmani
Sharman's rock-wallaby
Endangered
Mammals
Taphozous troughtoni
Troughton's sheathtail bat
Endangered
Birds
Casuarius casuarius johnsonii
southern cassowary (southern pop.)
Endangered
Birds
Erythrotriorchis radiatus
red goshawk
Endangered
Birds
Sterna albifrons
little tern
Endangered
Birds
Erythrura gouldiae
Gouldian finch
Endangered
Reptiles
Lerista allanae
Allan's lerista
Endangered
Amphibians
Taudactylus eungellensis
Eungella dayfrog
Endangered
Amphibians
Litoria nannotis
waterfall frog
Endangered
Amphibians
Nyctimystes dayi
Australian lace-lid
Endangered
Birds
Psephotus pulcherrimus
paradise parrot
Presumed extinct
15
Mammals
Hemibelideus lemuroides
lemuroid ringtail possum
Rare
Mammals
Pseudochirops archeri
green ringtail possum
Rare
Mammals
Petrogale mareeba
Mareeba rock-wallaby
Rare
Mammals
Saccolaimus saccolaimus nudicluniatus
bare-rumped sheathtail bat
Rare
Mammals
Chalinolobus picatus
little pied bat
Rare
Mammals
Kerivoula papuensis
golden-tipped bat
Rare
Mammals
Orcaella brevirostris
Irrawaddy dolphin
Rare
Mammals
Sousa chinensis
Indo-Pacific hump-backed dolphin
Rare
Birds
Nettapus coromandelianus
cotton pygmy-goose
Rare
Birds
Stictonetta naevosa
freckled duck
Rare Rare
Birds
Tadorna radjah
radjah shelduck
Birds
Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus
black-necked stork
Rare
Birds
Accipiter novaehollandiae
grey goshawk
Rare
Birds
Lophoictinia isura
square-tailed kite
Rare
Birds
Falco hypoleucos
grey falcon
Rare
Birds
Rallus pectoralis
Lewin's rail
Rare
Birds
Numenius madagascariensis
eastern curlew
Rare
Birds
Rostratula benghalensis
painted snipe
Rare
Birds
Neophema pulchella
turquoise parrot
Rare
Birds
Tyto tenebricosa
sooty owl
Rare
Birds
Collocalia spodiopygius
white-rumped swiftlet
Rare
Birds
Lichenostomus hindwoodi
Eungella honeyeater
Rare
Birds
Melithreptus gularis
black-chinned honeyeater
Rare
Birds
Melithreptus gularis laetior
golden-backed honeyeater
Rare
Birds
Heteromunia pectoralis
pictorella mannikin
Rare
Reptiles
Varanus semiremex
rusty monitor
Rare
Reptiles
Anomalopus brevicollis
Reptiles
Simoselaps warro
robust burrowing snake
Rare
Amphibians
Taudactylus liemi
Eungella tinkerfrog
Rare
Amphibians
Litoria genimaculata
green-eyed treefrog
Rare
Amphibians
Austrochaperina robusta
pealing chirper
Rare
Mammals
Petaurus australis unnamed subsp.
yellow-bellied glider (northern ssp.)
Vulnerable
Mammals
Taphozous australis
coastal sheathtail bat
Vulnerable
Rare
Mammals
Dugong dugon
dugong
Vulnerable
Birds
Esacus neglectus
beach stone-curlew
Vulnerable
Birds
Geophaps scripta scripta
squatter pigeon (southern subspecies)
Vulnerable
Birds
Calyptorhynchus lathami
glossy black-cockatoo
Vulnerable
Birds
Cyclopsitta diophthalma macleayana
Macleay's fig-parrot
Vulnerable
Birds
Ninox rufa queenslandica
rufous owl (southern subspecies)
Vulnerable
Birds
Ninox strenua
powerful owl
Vulnerable
Birds
Tyto novaehollandiae kimberlyi
masked owl (northern subspecies)
Vulnerable
Birds
Neochmia phaeton
crimson finch
Vulnerable Vulnerable
Birds
Neochmia phaeton iredalei
crimson finch (eastern form)
Reptiles
Crocodylus porosus
estuarine crocodile
Vulnerable
Reptiles
Chelonia mydas
green turtle
Vulnerable
Reptiles
Egernia rugosa
yakka skink
Vulnerable
Reptiles
Lerista vittata
Mount Cooper striped lerista
Vulnerable
Reptiles
Denisonia maculata
ornamental snake
Vulnerable
Insects
Ornithoptera richmondia
Richmond birdwing
Vulnerable
16
1 117 000, with an average turnover of 240 000 animals, based on an average stock density of 0.09 animals/ha.
Significant areas of intact wetlands dominate parts of the Lower Burdekin and Haughton River floodplains. These areas form part of the Bowling Green Bay National Park and are RAMSAR-listed. A variety of vegetation coexists on the different coastal landforms such as dunes, marine plains, deltas and sand bars. In contrast, vegetation on the remainder of the floodplain has been extensively cleared for agricultural land use (sugar cane, horticulture).
Most irrigated agriculture is located on the Lower Burdekin and is largely based on sugar production. Two distinct irrigation areas include Ayr and Home Hill, where irrigation is based on groundwater supplies, and the Delta region, managed through the North and South Burdekin Waterboards. Following the construction of the Burdekin Falls Dam, irrigated sugar expanded into the Burdekin River Irrigation Area (BRIA), now called the Burdekin-Haughton Water Supply Scheme (BHWSS). The scheme is managed by Sunwater and covers an area of about 45 000 hectares. Despite regulation, the industry is still exposed to fluctuating global commodity prices.
The extent to which the different vegetation communities and habitats have been affected by land use in other parts of the Burdekin Catchment and how this affects biodiversity will be discussed in greater detail in section 5.4. The Burdekin Catchment is equally diverse with respect to its fauna, given the variation of habitats in the different bioregions and vegetation communities. However, no comprehensive inventory of the region’s fauna has been compiled. Exceptions are the listings of rare and endangered species that are reasonably well known and EPA maintains a database called Wildnet that provides the relevant information. An extract from Wildnet has been compiled in Tables 3 and 4, listing the endangered and rare animal species as currently identified for the Desert Uplands and Burdekin regions.
Similarly, in the central and western districts, reliance on beef cattle production has left their regional economies open to market downturn in an industry historically hampered by climatic uncertainty (see Table 5). Table 5. Industry and Irrigation in the Burdekin River Catchment (NR&M, data collected as part of the Burdekin WRP)
3.5 Land Use
Sub-catchment
Major Industry
Secondary Industries
Upper Burdekin
Irrigated Pasture and Horticulture Dryland Cropping.
Bowen Broken
Beef Cattle Beef Cattle Beef Cattle
Lower Burdekin and Coastal Plains
Sugar Cane
Belyando Suttor
Because the focus of the Burdekin Catchment Condition Study (BCCS) Phase II is the assessment of socio-economic conditions in the catchment, only a summary account of land use information is provided in BCCS Phase I. More details can be found in the forthcoming BCCS Phase II report (Greiner et al. - Natural resource management in the Burdekin Dry Tropics: social and economic issues).
Dryland Cropping and Irrigated Horticulture. Beef Cattle and Irrigated Horticulture
Urban Centers Charters Towers (population approx. 8800) is the major urban centre of the Upper Burdekin catchment with Pentland, Alpha and Collinsville (populations 200, 395 and 2500 respectively) serving the outlying regions. The coast is more intensively settled with the major townships of Ayr, Home Hill and Bowen and smaller townships, such as Clare, Millaroo, Giru and Brandon.
Agriculture and Rural Industries The region of the Upper Burdekin, Belyando/Suttor and Bowen/Broken relies on beef cattle production and, to a lesser extent, dryland and irrigated crops. It is one of the two distinct agricultural regions of the Burdekin Catchment. Grazing is the major land use in this region, covering about 94% of the catchment area. Cattle numbers and beef productivity vary greatly across the catchment. Average cattle numbers for the period 1992-1996 were
The Burdekin Catchment is surrounded by larger centers; Ingham, Townsville-Thuringowa to the north (populations 9 200 and 142 000
17
Paluma Range National Park
Lumholtz National Park
Dalrymple National Park
#
#
#
Great Basalt Wall
Blackwood National Park
National Park
Mount Aberdeen National Park
#
#
White Mountains National Park
#
Eungella National Park
#
Wilandspey #
Conservation Park
#
Epping Forest Foprest Epping NationalPark Park National (Scientific) (Scientific)
#
Mazeppa National Park #
Cudmore National Park
#
Peak Range National Park
Legend Burdekin Catchment National Park National Park (Scientific) Resource Reserve Conser vation Park
Homevale National Park
50
0
50
100
Kilometers
Map 4 National Parks in the Burdekin Catchment (map provided by QEPA, 2002)
18
respectively) and Emerald and Clermont to the south and west (populations 9345 and 2388 respectively). Mackay, with a population close to 45 000, is also a major coastal centre, providing much of the region’s services and infrastructure.
The Burdekin Catchment is rich in biodiversity and has varied vegetation. Grazing is the predominant land use, and this has allowed extensive areas of native woodlands to remain largely intact, particularly in the northern region of the catchment. More intensive agriculture, in the form of irrigated sugar cane and horticulture, is concentrated in the Lower Burdekin floodplain. Some specific vegetation types (Brigalow) are also under clearing pressure for dryland cropping and improved pastures, mainly in the Belyando/Suttor
Mining Gold is the principal mineral mined in the Belyando/Suttor and Upper Burdekin subcatchments with current mining developments working new reserves, re-working old mines and/or transporting ore to other sites for processing. Coal measures also exist in the South Eastern section and investigations for viable mining opportunities are continuing in the upper Suttor catchment. The majority of gold deposits in central Queensland are found in the Drummond Basin, Anakie Inlier and the Yarrol Province.
3.6 Jurisdictions Upper Burdekin Seven local authorities operate within the Upper Burdekin sub-catchment. The largest is the Dalrymple Shire. The rest are Etheridge, Flinders, Hinchinbrook and Herberton Shires, Thuringowa City and Charters Towers City.
Earning an estimated $421.5M per annum, mineral resources and mining are the largest economic contributors to the Bowen/Broken sub-catchment.
The Upper Burdekin sub-catchment includes the State seats of Charters Towers to the south, the Tablelands to the north and Cook to the west. The region is part of the Federal seat of Kennedy, covering an area of 562 160 square kilometers.
Present mining activity is centered on the Collinsville and Newlands/Eastern Creek coal mines. Expansion of mining activity in the Nebo area may affect water supplied from Eungella Dam, in the south of the subcatchment.
Belyando/Suttor The Belyando/Suttor sub-catchment is part of the Northern Statistical Division of Queensland and is administered by Jericho, Belyando, Bowen, Dalrymple, and Nebo Shires. This subcatchment is within the State electoral boundaries of Charters Towers, Gregory and Mirani and the Federal seats of Kennedy and Capricornia.
Other Land Uses In general terms, the Burdekin Catchment is not well endowed with areas of conservation to protect the key vegetation and habitat types. Some of the vegetation of the Burdekin Catchment is protected in National Parks and a small number of conservation areas. These are primarily found along the borders of the catchment where they protect areas of vine forests, rainforests and desert upland vegetation (see Map 4).
Bowen/Broken Part of the Northern Statistical Division of Queensland, most of the Bowen/Broken subcatchment is included in the Bowen Shire. Mirani and Nebo Shires encroach on the south and south-eastern boundaries. The administrative centres are located outside the catchment, although Bowen Shire has a local branch at Collinsville. The catchment is represented by the State seats of Burdekin, Mirani and Whitsunday and the Federal seats of Kennedy, Capricornia and Dawson.
The Defence Department is also an important land user in the Upper Burdekin catchment, with its Townsville Field Training Area (80 km west of Townsville) occupying about 2500 square kilometers.
19
The State seats of Burdekin, Charters Towers and Whitsunday represent the region. The 22 440 square kilometre federal seat of Dawson covers the coastal plains and most of the Lower Burdekin, with the federal seat of Kennedy taking up parts of the Upper Burdekin.
Lower Burdekin and Coastal Plains The Lower Burdekin is administered by the Burdekin, Bowen and the Dalrymple Shires while the Coastal catchment is covered by the twin cities of Townsville and Thuringowa and parts of the Burdekin and Bowen Shires.
20
4. Regional Natural Resource Management Planning _________________________________________________________________________________ This section provides a synopsis of Natural Resource Management (NRM) planning initiatives across the region. More details are provided in the Burdekin Catchment Condition Study Phase II report.
• promote behavioural change and community support through a public communication program.
4.1 Major Government Initiatives
The Great Barrier Reef Catchment Water Quality Action Plan (GBR-WP) was released in September 2001. It prioritises the 26 GBR catchments according to the ecological risk they pose to the Reef and recommends minimum targets for pollutant loads. The Burdekin River catchment is rated a medium to high risk catchment due to its large size. Sediment and phosphorus exports are classified as high risk for the GBR with estimated current loads of 2.4 million tonnes per year of sediment and 2.4 thousand tonnes per year of phosphorus. Nitrogen exports pose a medium risk with an estimated current load of 11.1 thousand tonnes per year. Proposed targets are load reductions of 50% for sediment and phosphorus and 33% for nitrogen by the year 2011.
4.1.2 GBRMPA Action Plan for Water Quality
4.1.1 National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality (NAPSWQ) This State and Federal Governments initiative addresses deteriorating environmental values in several target catchments across Australia. Key focus areas are dryland salinity, water quality and sustainable land management practices. In Queensland the program will invest $161m over seven years in five designated investment regions, one of which is the Burdekin catchment, in conjunction with the Fitzroy. The Action Plan builds on previous initiatives to engage the community in NRM activities. The main feature is to further devolve responsibility for the implementation of sustainable natural resource management to accredited regional or community groups. The establishment of regional catchment management boards, such as the Burdekin Dry Tropics Group, underpins this process.
These targets were developed by a scientific working group established by the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) independently of the NAPSWQ process and with little consultation with researchers outside GBRMPA and the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS). Subsequently, the targets are being treated more as aspirational targets that will be progressively refined in consultation with community and industry groups through the Reef Protection Plan and NAPSWQ. GBRMPA sees the NAPSWQ as the appropriate process for the Federal and State Governments to deliver water quality targets for GBR catchments. Development of realistic targets is viewed as a critical first phase in a staged approach to reverse trends in declining water quality and to eventually allow for the recovery of inshore reef ecosystems.
The role of these catchment-based management boards is to: • set targets and standards for natural resource management based on good science and economics; • develop integrated catchment/regional management plans to be accredited by State and Federal governments; • develop capacity within communities and landholders to implement the accredited plans; • outline an improved governance framework to secure the necessary investments and community actions in the long term; • provide clearly articulated roles for all partners in the NAPSWQ – from government to landholders;
4.1.3 Reef Protection Plan The Premier of Queensland announced a commitment to the protection of the Great Barrier Reef from the impacts of land-based
21
many important ongoing activities. Of this additional $1 billion, the Government expects to spend at least $350 million on measures to improve Australia's water quality.
sources of nutrients, sediment and other pollution through the development of the Reef Protection Plan. The Queensland Government then established the Reef Protection Taskforce for the development and implementation of the Reef Protection Plan. More recently, the Federal and State Governments have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to cooperate on the management of the land-based impacts.
There will be a fundamental shift in the Trust towards a more targeted approach to environmental and natural resource management in Australia. The Trust intends delivering important resource condition outcomes including improved water quality, less erosion, improved estuarine health, improved vegetation management and improved soil condition.
Key elements include identifying actions to reduce the impacts of land-based sources of nutrient, sediment and other pollution on the Great Barrier Reef and coordinating, complementing and reinforcing existing mechanisms and encouraging change from polluting practices. The process also triggered the development of a ‘Consensus Document” authored by 16 eminent scientists. This document describes the current level of understanding concerning impacts of terrestrial runoff on the GBR lagoon (the statement is accessible at http://www.reef.crc.org.au/ ).
4.1.5 Rangelands to Reef Initiative This ‘whole-of-government’ initiative aims to enhance sustainability in the greater Burdekin Catchment and its surrounds. Sustainability in the context of the Burdekin Rangelands Reef Initiative is a broad concept, incorporating economic, environmental and social issues. The Burdekin Rangelands Reef Initiative evolved from a series of pilot programs established and developed over several years. The pilot schemes assessed the efficacy of catchment-scale projects. Projects are selected and developed to integrate economic, environmental and social perspectives, thus demonstrating that such linkages are practicable and involve the stakeholders. The Burdekin Rangeland Reef Initiative’s charter addresses triple bottom line initiatives and focuses on environmental sustainability. A primary objective is to form effective links with the Burdekin Dry Tropics NAPSWQ and to avoid duplication of effort.
The Reef Protection Taskforce released a draft report in December 2001 outlining a methodology designed to engage the scientific community in the protection of the reef and develop and implement a Reef Protection Plan. This has resulted in the establishment of a Reef Science Panel charged with evaluating the level of understanding of the risk-based approach for defining water quality targets in the GBRMPA WQ Action Plan and possible options to implement improved land management within GBR catchments. The Burdekin Dry Tropics Group Management Board will take advantage of the fact that the Reef Protection Plan, the NAPSWQ and National Heritage Trust are overlapping in many respects.
The Burdekin Rangelands Reef Initiative is managed by a Steering Committee of local community leaders including state members of parliament, shire council chairmen, Landcare committee representatives, community organisation representatives and other representatives invited by the Minister for Primary Industries. The Steering Committee is supported by a secretariat of staff from the Department of Primary Industries. The Steering Committee administers funds of $3 million over three years, provided through the Department of Primary Industries.
4.1.4 Natural Heritage Trust 2 The Natural Heritage Trust was set up in 1997 to help restore and conserve Australia's environment and natural resources. Since then, thousands of community groups have received funding for environmentally relevant projects. In the 2001 Federal Budget, the Government announced an additional $1 billion for the Trust (known as NHT 2), which extends the funding for five more years and ensures the future of
22
statement is ‘to make the Burdekin Rangelands a diverse, productive, healthy region supporting a positive and prosperous community.’
The Federal and State Governments have organised and are helping to fund a range of programs designed to protect the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon by improving water quality in adjacent catchments. One of the best ways of doing this is to involve local communities. Regional Bodies have been organised to help keep up the momentum for more sustainable management of natural resources at regional levels.
The Burdekin Rangelands embraces most of the upper Burdekin River catchment covering an area of over 68 580 square kilometres. Boundaries lie north of Greenvale, west to Pentland, south to Mt Coolon, east to Collinsville and Mingela. Land is used primarily for cattle grazing, although mining has made a significant contribution to the local economy for over 100 years. 4.2.3 Natural Resources and Environment Forum (NaREF)
4.2 Regional NRM strategies
Established to progress the development of a strategic plan for the management of natural resources, the NaREF is based on a community perspective in the Townsville-Thuringowa Coastal Plains sub-region. Their vision statement is ‘to achieve ecologically sustainable use of our land, water and biological resources and to protect nature irrespective of its functional values for human populations.’
The Burdekin Dry Tropics Region has four distinct sub-regions defined on the basis of bioregional provinces, catchment divides, local government boundaries, land use, climate and ecological characteristics. A fifth region, the Desert Uplands bioregion, overlaps with the Burdekin Dry Tropics Region. 4.2.1 Burdekin-Bowen Integrated Floodplain Management Advisory Group (BBIFMAC)
Townsville-Thuringowa Coastal Plains subregion contains the cities of Townsville and Thuringowa and their local government authority areas. The sub-region is the government and industrial centre of north Queensland. After South East Queensland, this is the second largest urban centre in the state.
BBIFMAC aims to promote an integrated, strategic and community-driven approach to the management of natural resources in the Burdekin-Bowen sub-region. Their vision statement is ‘to manage natural resources to ensure social well-being, primary production and ecological sustainability.’
4.2.4 Belyando Suttor Implementation Group
The Burdekin-Bowen Floodplains embraces the lower catchments of the Bogie, Don, Elliot, Burdekin and Haughton Rivers, and the Bowen and Burdekin Shires. Land uses are predominantly irrigated sugar cane farming, horticultural cropping and cattle grazing.
The Belyando/Suttor region has, to date, no formal representation through a sub-regional NRM group. Currently, a process is in train to form a representative group and to develop stronger links into the Burdekin Dry Tropics Group.
Underpinning the work of BBIFMAC is the Lower Burdekin Initiative, a partnership between the community, industry, state agencies and research agencies to better coordinate the research being undertaken or planned in the Lower Burdekin.
4.2.5 Desert Uplands Build-up and Development Strategy Committee The Desert Uplands Build-up and Development Strategy Committee was formed to address degradation and severe economic difficulties due to small property size in the desert uplands. With headquarters at Barcaldine, the Desert Uplands Committee (DUC) aims to increase the standard of living and quality of life for people living in the region through sustainable economic and environmental development.
4.2.2 Burdekin Rangelands Implementation Group (BRIG) BRIG was established to implement the Burdekin Rangelands Sub-Regional Natural Resource Management Strategy. Their vision
23
• environmental flow objectives, including the flows necessary to sustain a healthy environment; • water allocation security objectives, or reliability water users can expect from their allocations; • monitoring and reporting requirements to ensure that plans are working.
Stretching from Charters Towers west to Hughenden, south to Barcaldine and Blackall, north-east to Alpha then back north to Charters Towers, the Desert Uplands biogeographic region encompasses 69 000 square kilometres. The Burdekin Catchment is represented by a range of community groups already actively involved. A Regional Body for the Burdekin catchment has been formed (Burdekin Dry Tropics Group Inc.), drawing from these community groups.
A statutory WRP process started in the Burdekin and Haughton River catchments in January 2002. The Water Supply Appraisal Study is complete and with a Community Reference Panel to provide advice, the final WRP is scheduled for completion by late 2003.
4.3 Statutory Planning
4.3.2 Vegetation Management Planning
4.3.1 Water Resource Planning
Regional vegetation management planning provides important opportunities for landholders and others to develop shared practical visions of how vegetation will be managed in their area. Regional Vegetation Management Committees are based on bioregions or subsets of bioregions. These committees are working on the development of draft Regional Vegetation Management Plans (RVMPs). These plans will contain regionalized assessment codes to address applications for clearing remnant native vegetation on leasehold and freehold lands.
A major water planning study was completed in 1977 under the auspices of a joint Commonwealth/State Burdekin Project Committee resulting in the ‘Resources and Potential of the Burdekin River Basin, Queensland report series. A basin-wide water supply appraisal study by the NR&M is currently nearing completion. This appraisal identifies water related issues, examines current and future uses, evaluates alternative development and management options and formulates a broad water resource strategy for the Burdekin region.
The plans are legislatively driven, and aim to: • maintain or increase biodiversity; • maintain ecological biodiversity; • maintain ecological process; • ensure clearing does not cause land degradation; • allow ecologically sustainable development.
The Water Act 2000 requires the preparation of Water Resource Plans (WRPs) detailing government aims for a catchment’s social, economic and environmental needs. Where necessary, Resource Operations Plans are developed, detailing ways these objectives will be achieved. WRPs determine the right balance between competing requirements for water by detailed technical assessments and extensive community consultation. The WRPs detail the plan area, the water to which the plan applies and the plans’ aims. These include: • the outcomes for water use, such as the needs of towns, agriculture and industry; • the outcomes for the environment, including the need for certain species and general river ecology research; • strategies to achieve both water use efficiency and the best possible environmental outcome;
Nine Regional Vegetation Management Committees are currently developing RVMPs relevant to the Burdekin Catchment. These include: • Einasleigh Uplands (Southern); • Einasleigh Uplands (Northern); • Brigalow Belt (Northern); • Desert Uplands (Northern); • Desert Uplands (Southern); • Central Queensland Coast; • Northern Highlands; • Southern Highlands; • Nebo Broadsound.
24
resulted in regulatory duplication, confusion and conflict.
Prevention of salinity is one of the key performance requirements of these planning processes. Technical officers supporting the committees, work closely with agency experts to provide the best possible advice to the representative committees on salinity hazard and risks. There is potentially considerable overlap between the Vegetation Planning and NAPSWQ, particularly in the areas of information gathering, methodology for planning processes and outcomes. These plans, due to be completed by June 2003 should prove useful in the development of accredited, regional natural resource management plans.
In response to this situation, Queensland introduced the Integrated Planning Act 1997 (IPA). The IPA specifically sets out to achieve ecological sustainability and to establish a unique development assessment system called IDAS. This system is, in essence, a process for making, assessing and deciding upon development applications, regardless of the nature of the development, its location in Queensland or the authority administering the regulatory control.
4.3.4 Coastal Management Planning The State coastal plan describes how the coastal zone is to be managed to meet the requirements of the Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995. Policies for managing the major coastal issues cover the following areas: • coastal use and development; • physical coastal processes (the effects of waves, tides, currents and coastal storms); • public access to the coast; • water quality; • indigenous traditional owner cultural resources; • cultural heritage; • coastal landscapes; • conserving nature; • coordinated management; • research and information.
The IPA has three important components: • the local government planning framework, of which the local government planning scheme is an important element; • regional planning frameworks involving State, local bodies and the community; • state planning policies. Under the IPA, every local government authority must develop an IPA-consistent planning scheme by 30 March 2003. To date (June 2002), only 4 out of 125 local governments in Queensland have successfully adopted planning schemes consistent with IPA. None of the local government areas that lie within the Burdekin Catchment conform with the IPA as yet.
The State coastal plan provides coastal management policy direction. It also defines how these directions should be implemented by government, industry and the community. The state Coastal Management Plan became effective in February 2002. To date, the Dry Tropical Coastal Management Plan has not been prepared.
There are several important potential links between IPA and the Regional NRM Plans: • data being brought together for the NRM Plans may also be of use to Local Government Planning Schemes (LGPS); • regional NRM Plans may identify amendments needed to LGPS to better address certain NRM issues.
4.3.5 Integrated Planning Act
Already, many planning activities are underway. To avoid overlap between groups, and to ensure that all planning is properly integrated and accredited, each Regional Body is developing a regional Natural Resource Management Plan. The aim is that these plans should complement any other relevant plans so that duplication is minimised and all the key issues are tackled.
Changing community expectations and greater community awareness of environmental issues have been two factors influencing development of related regulation in Queensland. There has been considerable growth in the amount and complexity of the controls over the past two decades. Overlapping regulatory jurisdictions have been common, which has frequently
25
5. Key Natural Resource Management Issues _________________________________________________________________________________ replenished, by coarse sediments from the Burdekin River.
5.1 Water Quality Water quality covers a broad range of issues, and different people and institutions mean different things when using the term ‘water quality’. Therefore, it is important to clearly define which aspect of water quality is being assessed, and the following section has been structured accordingly.
Within streams, increased delivery and deposition of sediments has the potential to fill waterholes and deeper sections of streams, resulting in reduced aquatic productivity and loss of aquatic habitats. The flow regime may change, causing flooding and breakouts due to the river channel’s reduced capacity to carry floodwaters. Dams and weirs trap bedload sediment and reduce their storage capacity.
Inappropriate land management results in land degradation, which in many ways is the primary cause of problems with water quality. Whilst reference is made to some of the causes of deterioration in water quality in this section, land degradation per se will be discussed in greater detail in section 5.3.
Bedload sediment is unlikely to pass through the Burdekin Falls Dam, reducing sediment delivery to stream reaches below the dam and potentially resulting in reduced bedload reaching the coast. This may contribute to coastline erosion. Reduced sediment delivery alters stream morphology by increasing bank erosion and deepening the river channel. Thus, some sections of the catchment may experience increased sedimentation whilst those below the dam receive less bedload sediment.
5.1.1 Bedload Events Definition Bedload events refer to the off-site impact of coarse sediments moved along the riverbed during flooding. Bedload events have little impact on terrestrial systems, except in the case of over-bank floods, where floodplain deposition might affect nearby terrestrial systems. Bedload sediment is deposited in streams, estuaries or very close to the shoreline and does not penetrate very far into the GBR lagoon.
Current Level of Understanding Measuring bedload, particularly in episodic, flood-dominated systems like the Burdekin River, is technically difficult and expensive. Consequently, very little bedload transport data exists for rivers in the Burdekin Catchment. Most of our understanding of bedload in the Burdekin Catchment is derived from general scientific and engineering principles and data from similar river systems elsewhere.
Critical Issues and Impacts Sedimentation occurs naturally in streams, wetlands and along coastlines. Changes in the quantity and composition of the sediments have potentially adverse consequences for the ecosystem. The Burdekin Catchment is largely an event-driven system (i.e. dominated by major cyclones). Most of the bedload leaves the Burdekin catchment during brief, major flood events occurring every five to twenty years.
Given that bedload transport principles are reasonably well understood, it is possible to model bedload transport and deposition processes in a river network, provided we have data on river flows (discharge) and the amount of coarse sediments delivered to individual river reaches by soil erosion processes. As some of this data is available for the Burdekin, various modelling exercises have been undertaken for the whole basin as well as for individual subcatchments (e.g. the Bowen/Broken). The most recent and comprehensive analysis is the work
Coarse sediments determine the shape of the coastal environment. They are rapidly deposited close to the coastline, and then reshaped by the currents and winds to form beaches and dune systems. Cape Bowling Green, between Townsville and Ayr, was formed, and is
26
Legend Coar se sediment accumulation (m/100y) 0.0 0.1 - 0.3 0.3 - 2.0 2.0 - 10 Reser voirs Burdekin catchment
50
0
50
100
Kilometers
Map 5 Predicted bedload deposition in the Burdekin Catchment (Prosser et al., 2001)
27
associated turbidity, particulate and dissolved nutrients and contaminants, mobilised during cyclones or heavy monsoonal rainfall. The effects of washload events are mainly restricted to marine and freshwater aquatic ecosystems.
by Ian Prosser through the National Land and Water Resources Audit (NLWRA), using the newly developed SedNet model. As part of a major project funded by Meat Livestock Australia, the SedNet model was further refined and partially calibrated for the Burdekin Catchment. The results of modelling bedload deposition using the refined model are shown in Map 5.
Critical Issues and Impacts Clay particles and colloids (particles smaller than clay) are usually the main fraction of suspended solids contained within washload. Clays and colloids adsorb soil nutrients and bind organic matter. Consequently, washload is the main way in which particulate nutrients from the land reach aquatic environments. Washload further contributes to nutrient delivery because it also includes all forms of dissolved nutrients (e.g. nitrate and ammonia originating from inorganic fertilisers). Other particulate matter suspended in washload consists of fine organic particles (detritus). This is a major source of energy and food for many aquatic organisms.
Due to higher flow energy, river reaches in the northern and north-eastern parts of the Upper Burdekin and in the Bowen and Broken subcatchments generally show low rates of bedload deposition, indicating that coarse sediments will be readily transported downstream. In flatter landscapes associated with the Cape, Suttor and Belyando sub-catchments, rates of bedload deposition are predicted to be significantly higher, potentially affecting in-stream aquatic ecosystems by processes such as the burial of previously permanent waterholes.
Due to the high settling times associated with suspended particles contained in washload, it can be transported over large distances and delivered as far as the Great Barrier Reef during floods. Major Burdekin flood plumes, while predominantly remaining in the near shore zone (i.e. up to 20 km seawards) have been shown to migrate as far north as Cairns under certain circumstances, and are known to persist for many days. Smaller, more frequent plumes will extend as far as the Palm Islands. However, there is also evidence that much of the suspended sediment load flocculates and settles when salinity levels reach around one-third the strength of seawater. This usually happens within a few kilometres from the river mouth. Thus flood plumes only carry a fraction of the total washload beyond this point. Most fine sediments that settle out before this are redistributed by coastal hydrodynamics along the shoreline and trapped in estuaries and northerly facing embayments.
This information is valuable from a river management perspective, as it helps us identify where river reaches are most at risk of being impacted by bedload deposition. Map 5 shows the bedload deposition predicted from modelling. Critical data and further understanding of the processes are still required to confirm the model’s findings and to assist in refining catchment and river management responses. The sort of information needed is: • sources, amounts and composition of bedload material originating from different landscapes in the catchment; • actual, measured rates of bedload transport and deposition within different river reaches representative of the whole Burdekin Catchment; • residence times, (i.e. the time required for the material to be moved through the system, typically decades to centuries); • impact of the Burdekin Falls Dam on riverine geomorphology; • the extent to which the Burdekin Falls Dam, and other dams and weirs in the catchment, have reduced bedload sediment delivery to the GBR lagoon.
There are several estimates of the quantity of sediments being discharged into the GBR lagoon by the Burdekin. Extrapolations of estimates by Miles Furnas from the Australian Institute of Marine Science indicate that maximum annual sediment discharge ranges from 0.2 to 20 million tonnes, with 1974 and 1991 being the only years on record where sediment discharge was greater than 10 million
5.1.2 Washload Events Definition Washload includes the fine sediments suspended within the water column, and the
28
essentially turbid when it would otherwise have greater clarity. This turbid water is also redistributed into normally clear coastal creeks and wetlands on the floodplain. The delivery of turbid water is increasingly an issue for the two waterboards operating in the Burdekin Delta, because the turbidity reduces the efficiency of artificial recharge pits designed to replenish the Delta aquifers from which irrigation water is being extracted (see also section on seawater intrusion).
tonnes (Furnas, personal communication). The long-term average sediment discharge is about 3.8 million tonnes. This represents about 2040% of the total sediment being delivered to the GBR lagoon. As a result, washload, and its associated nutrients and other contaminants, is the main impact of terrestrial runoff on nearshore zones of the Great Barrier Reef lagoon. However, it is important to realise that the majority of the load is delivered in a few, infrequent major flood events, interspersed by many years of low sediment discharge.
Current Level of Understanding Recent findings from the analysis of coral cores, using innovative tracing techniques, indicate increased washload as far back as the 1870s, when livestock were introduced into the catchment. This suggests that grazing has been, and continues to be, the major source of sediments delivered by washload events.
The most recent reviews of current scientific understanding are almost unanimous in their assessment, that if unchecked, further increases in the rate of sediment and nutrient delivery to the GBR lagoon will be bad for near-shore reefs and seagrass beds. This is borne out by evidence from overseas (Hawaii and Florida), where decline in reef systems has been clearly associated with nutrients originating from terrestrial runoff. Increased levels of sediments and nutrients are not likely to have direct impacts, but there is evidence that increased levels of nutrients (in particular dissolved nitrogen) in combination with a change in the composition of suspended sediments will reduce the ability of corals to recover from damage caused by natural events such as bleaching and cyclones.
Studies of sediments in the near shore zone of the Burdekin estuary (Cape Bowling Green Bay) demonstrated a two-fold increase in mud accumulation and associated heavy metals dating from the goldmining activities in the 1890s until recent times. Several other studies, including the NLWRA work, confirm that sediment export through washload delivery has increased about four-fold since European settlement. While the Burdekin catchment also exports great quantities of nutrients annually, nutrient export is relatively low, on a per hectare basis, when compared to other Australian streams.
Less is known of the impact of terrestrial runoff (washload) on freshwater environments. There is some evidence from other GBR catchments that freshwater organisms might be adapted to episodic washload events. Under natural conditions, increased turbidity would have been a feature of streamflow although the frequency and magnitude of such events has been affected since European settlement. However, the ‘chronic’ increase of nutrient levels during low flow has a more adverse effect on freshwater systems. This is discussed in more detail in the section on ambient water quality.
However, the degree of impact of event-driven washload on marine and freshwater environments is still uncertain and requires further study. In the meantime, it is necessary to adhere to the precautionary principle and reduce the level of washload transport during flood. This requires knowledge of where the main sources of washload are located in the catchment, in order to allow for targeted management intervention.
The Burdekin Dam probably traps only a small proportion of the washload transported down the Burdekin River during large flood events. The washload trapped by the Burdekin Falls Dam stays suspended in the water column throughout most years, giving the dam its brown, turbid appearance. As this water is released downstream for irrigation throughout the year, the river below the dam is also
Map 6 shows a reach by reach prediction of the washload delivered through the river network in the Burdekin Catchment, using the SedNet model described in the previous section. There are very clear spatial patterns, with the main proportion of washload originating in smaller creeks and streams in the northern and northeastern parts of the Upper Burdekin and in the
29
Legend Fine sediment load (kt/y) 0 - 20 20 - 100 100 - 1000 1000 - 2000 2000 - 3200 Reservoirs Burdekin catchment
50
0
50
100
Kilometers
Map 6 Suspended sediment load in the Burdekin Catchment (Prosser et al., 2001)
30
turbidity in the lower Burdekin River has not been quantified, but data exist which could be collated and analysed.
Bowen and Broken sub-catchments. This information delineates where in the catchment improved grazing management might have the greatest benefit in reducing washload. However, as in the case of bedload, there is little adequate data available to fully validate the SedNet model, so that whilst we have confidence in the relative patterns of washload delivery, we are less sure about the absolute values the model predicts. The insufficient data is due to lack of water quality gauging sites distributed across the catchment that would allow for continuous sampling of flow, particularly during floods. A notable exception is the dataset collected by Miles Furnas at Clare and later Ayr, which provides measured estimates of sediment discharge from the Burdekin Catchment. The average annual washload determined at Ayr/Clare (3.8 million tonnes) agrees reasonably well with the SedNet predictions (2.4 million tonnes).
Information available about the composition of washload during major flow events is sparse and episodic. Different types and sources of sediment require different strategies for management. Sand, silt, clays and colloids have entirely different chemical composition, are transported at different times and are strikingly different in their impact on the receiving environments. Therefore, in addition to determining total sediment loads, future work must shift to a closer examination of sediment itself. In summary, the critical questions are: • Where is the washload being generated, how is it transported through the river network and what are the sediment settling rates at different stages of the storm hydrograph? • What is the physical (particle size, distribution and settling characteristics) and geochemical (nutrient form and content) composition of washload originating from different landscapes and land uses? • What are the impacts of washload on riverine and estuarine environments? • How do the different grazing management strategies, including fire management, affect washload delivery? • What is the desired level of control, and how is it best achieved?
NR&M maintains a catchment-wide streamgauging network, but the gauging is more focussed on determining river flow (see section 5.1.5), so that sampling for sediments and nutrients does not occur on a continuous basis and data cannot be generally used to determine washloads. There is however some data where flood events have been fully sampled, but until recently, this data has not been readily available. CSIRO has established a network of eight water quality gauging sites in parts of the Upper Burdekin, covering a range of small to large catchments mainly in the ‘Goldfields’ country. The monitoring period has only been between one and three years to date and reliable data is only just becoming available. The establishment of a network of automated gauging sites in other parts of the Burdekin Catchment remains a very high priority, to provide a benchmark of washload discharge data and to determine whether water quality targets related to sediment and nutrient discharge are being achieved. These gauges will also verify the SedNet model.
5.1.3 Ambient Water Quality Definition Ambient water quality refers to the quality of the water during normal, non-flood conditions (baseflow). Ambient water quality is determined by parameters such as turbidity, pH, temperature, salinity, nutrient and contaminant concentrations and oxygen levels. Ambient water quality directly affects aquatic environments, but it has little effect on nearby terrestrial systems, except where wildlife drink at waterholes or where water with too many contaminants is used for irrigation.
Other studies currently underway include an examination of suspended sediment and of the limnology (the physical, biological and chemical characteristics) of the Burdekin Falls Dam (John Faithful, ACTFR). The degree to which the Burdekin Falls Dam has increased
Critical Issues and Impacts In contrast to major floods, ambient water quality is mainly determined by local effects and the accession of nutrients through groundwater discharge into rivers. Ambient
31
into waterways leads to greater weed and algal growth. The residues of these aquatic plants consume oxygen in the water when microbes break them down. Of particular concern are injections of dissolved organic material in the form of sugar cane juice produced during harvest, and cane farm tail water enriched in organic material. The breakdown of these substances by microbes also greatly increases the demand on the oxygen dissolved in water.
water quality determines the health of freshwater and estuarine ecosystems. A steady supply of nutrients and surface water contaminants in moderate concentrations (chronic impact) may have greater impact than a single, large, infrequent pulse. This is because returns of excess irrigation water (‘tail water’), and smaller rain events, wash sediment and nutrients into local streams where they persist. The chronic impact of ambient water quality is greatest as baseflow ceases and rivers contract to a series of permanent waterholes during the dry season. In addition to these effects, there is some evidence that the deterioration of water quality as a result of cattle loitering in waterholes may be important in determining the health of aquatic ecosystems.
The general effects of nutrients and other contaminants in surface waters include: • decreased oxygen resulting in fishkills; • low pH (e.g. from acid sulfate soil discharge) causing fishkills; • accumulation of contaminants in the food chain; • sublethal toxicological effects of pesticides (direct damage, as well as changes in species composition and reduced productivity); • decline in drinking water quality (Charters Towers, Townsville and Thuringowa are dependent on surface waters); • algal blooms and weed growth.
During periods of elevated water flow, water quality is the same, or very similar, along the river. It alters where new rivers enter the stream. When the floods pass, and flows return to normal or even cease, sites begin to exhibit individual characteristics. Some may remain turbid all year (e.g., in the Suttor River) while others may become clear. Ambient conditions will be different each year depending on the rainfall patterns. Because of this substantial variation between waterholes and between different years, ambient water quality is very variable. Some waterholes naturally have poor water quality and are vulnerable to disturbance, whilst others are more tolerant of disturbance.
Additional specific contamination issues include: • pesticides in agricultural areas (mainly on cane farms on the coastal plains and cotton farms in the Belyando). These are occasionally significant in inland streams (e.g. near cattle dips); • old mining sites. These may be contaminating several areas of the Burdekin and discharging heavy metals and acid into the river network; • petroleum hydrocarbons, which may be polluting some sections of the streams below Paluma Dam; • blue-green algae, which may affect some sections of the stream below Eungella Dam.
Major impacts of ambient water quality include: increased turbidity blocking sunlight and affecting ecological processes; increased nutrient levels contributing to eutrophication, and decreased oxygen levels that can be lethal to fish and other organisms (‘fishkills’). In the floodplain, poorer water quality has increased turbidity and decreased oxygen levels. In the rangelands, the critical issue is stresses on isolated waterholes during the dry season. These include livestock incursions into the water, poor ground cover and riverbank damage. In general, fencing is an effective management strategy.
Current Level of Understanding Accessible data about water quality in the Burdekin River Catchment is limited, particularly data required to establish a baseline. The AUSRIVAS program, which monitors river health parameters across Australia, has carried out episodic monitoring of river health at a few sites in the Burdekin Catchment. A State of the River Condition report, produced for other catchments across
Increased demand for oxygen, and eventually a lack of oxygen, can be caused by a variety of different processes. The entry of nutrients and organic matter after small storms (i.e storms that generate some runoff but are unable to flush the system) or from livestock defecating
32
light exposure, temperature etc. can have a large impact on ambient water quality. Alterations to physical stream characteristics also play a major role (e.g. riparian vegetation, aquatic weeds, construction of weirs, bund walls and tidal barriers).
Queensland, has yet to be carried out for the Burdekin Catchment. More continuous records are available for subcatchments in the Townsville Field Training Area and Barratta Creek. Data about nutrients is reported in the National Land and Water Resources Atlas. Available data demonstrates the very poor oxygen conditions of wetlands on the floodplain and the likely causative agents and processes. Although the Burdekin Dam is the source of elevated turbidity in the lower Burdekin and the floodplain areas, the effect of this elevated turbidity on the 159 km of river reach below the dam, as well as the associated floodplain distributary channels and wetlands has yet to be evaluated.
Although the degree of localised impact varies between waterbodies, the additive effect of many localised impacts on ambient water quality can be significant for the whole catchment. Small isolated waterholes are most vulnerable and evidence clearly shows severe impacts resulting from instream livestock activity. Although larger, permanently flowing waterholes are less vulnerable, the impacts on these systems are less understood. Management of local water quality problems has a high chance of success because the problem is localised and landholders can see the improvements.
It is critical to understand whether altered water quality has resulted in changes to the aquatic communities. Fish communities of the floodplain streams are very poor when compared to their natural state, partly as a result of poor water quality but also habitual degradation and loss of connectivity with estuarine areas. Data is available about fish in the upper Burdekin, the Cape River, and the Bowen River system, but little is known about fish stocks in the Belyando-Suttor.
In conclusion, there are several gaps in our knowledge that need to be addressed. • Development of a classification system (typology) of waterbodies in the Burdekin Catchment, based on their biophysical characteristics to determine their expected water quality and level of vulnerability to disturbance. This applies to waterbodies in grazing as well as agricultural and urban landscapes. • Based on the above typology, establishment of efficient sampling protocols for key parameters for the major categories of waterbodies in the catchment for the routine collection of ambient water quality information. • Research to improve our understanding of the links between land use and sources of nutrients and contaminants, delivery pathways, and the impact of adverse ambient water quality on aquatic organisms. Due to the enormous area under consideration, further research is necessary to identify the most efficient management options. • Integration of this information into existing modelling tools to expand our ability to model system responses to management scenarios. This would be the basis for determining more comprehensive water quality targets (i.e. targets that go beyond sediment and nutrient loads and take into consideration ecosystem health as well).
Aquatic invertebrates are reasonably good indicators of some aspects of water quality, but relatively little is known about aquatic invertebrates in all but the Townsville Field Training Area. Fish are better indicators of specific water quality parameters, particularly oxygen levels. Because this is the major issue confronting water quality in the Burdekin, current ACTFR research is looking at the effects of different levels of oxygen depletion on the behaviour of fish and invertebrates. Generally, the overall condition of aquatic ecosystems and ambient water quality within the catchment has more to do with the accumulation of many localised effects than it does with catchment-scale processes. The main factor influencing ambient water quality, other than changes in flow, is local land use. In grazing areas, livestock and/or feral animals loiter in streams and their riparian zones, affecting water quality. In cropping areas, localised runoff to streams and entry to groundwater may be the main impact. In fact, any alteration that affects water depth, flow,
33
groundwater. If nitrates are present in groundwater used for irrigation, and are therefore available for plant growth, fertiliser application rates should be adjusted for nitrates applied in irrigation water.
5.1.4 Contaminants to Groundwater Definition This issue refers to the entry of nutrients and contaminants (pesticides and heavy metals) into the groundwater. Groundwater contaminants have an on-site impact on the quality of the groundwater itself, as well as potential off-site impact via discharge into rivers or use for irrigation.
Current Level of Understanding Nitrate levels have been monitored in groundwater wells in the Lower Burdekin Catchment for close to twenty years. In the period 1997-2000, high nitrate concentrations (above 50mg/L) were measured in 21-38% of the bores, medium nitrate concentrations (20-50 mg/L) were measured in approximately 40% of the bores. Investigations indicate that the most likely source of the nitrates was inorganic fertiliser. A comparison of the 1997-2000 data collected by Keith Weier from CSIRO with the data compiled by Jon Brodie and others (Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research) in 1984 seems to show that high nitrate concentrations associated with fertiliser use have been present since as early as the 1970s, but that the proportion of incidences where bores had high nitrate concentrations is now higher than in the 1970s. These findings indicate that the entry of nitrate into groundwater must be addressed in the irrigation areas.
Critical Issues and Impacts In order for nutrients and contaminants to be leached into groundwater, they have to be present in soluble form and there has to be some drainage of soil water below the root zone during some part of the year (usually the wet season). The key nutrient at risk of being leached is nitrogen in the form of nitrate. In very sandy soils, with low clay and organic matter contents, other nutrients (mainly cations such as ammonium, potassium and calcium) are at risk of being leached. Phosphorous is usually not leached. Soluble pesticides at risk of being leached include herbicides like atrazine, and to a lesser degree, diuron. Conditions promoting the entry of nutrients and contaminants to groundwater are most likely to be encountered in intensive agricultural systems such as irrigated sugar cane and horticultural crops in the Lower Burdekin and the expanding Belyando cotton-growing areas.
The acceptable threshold for nitrate in drinking water is 50mg/L. Nitrate levels above this threshold interfere with the ability of haemoglobin in human blood to transport oxygen. However, from an ecological perspective it is useful to distinguish between natural background levels of nitrate and increases brought about by human activity. In this case the threshold would be far lower than the drinking water standard of 50mg/L, with levels below 1mg/L of nitrate being low and probably close to natural levels, but concentrations between 1-20 mg/L indicating some level of human induced nitrate contamination.
The main adverse impacts of nutrients and contaminants in groundwater include: • groundwater becoming unfit for use as drinking water (water treatment required for urban/industrial use); • groundwater becoming unsuitable for irrigation, stock watering and aquaculture use; • accumulation of contaminants in the food chain, leading to contamination of food produced for human consumption; • impact on aquatic organisms through the discharge of contaminated groundwater into waterways during low flow or baseflow.
Outside of the irrigation areas there is little information available on groundwater contamination. Although we have no data, it is unlikely that there is any significant contamination occurring in grazing lands or other extensively used land. The exception to this may be land that was or is affected by mining activities where there are likely to be instances of groundwater contamination by
In the intensive agricultural area of the Lower Burdekin, groundwater is widely used for irrigation and domestic water supplies. Of particular concern is the concentration of nitrates. Management of fertiliser application rates is therefore critical to control nitrates in
34
flow perennially and that cattle trampling may have reduced infiltration leading to a reduction in groundwater recharge feeding these springs. The Queensland Herbarium is mapping and collecting data on the springs in the northwestern part of the catchment.
leachates originating from mine spoil materials (see section on mining impacts). 5.1.5 Changes to Flow Regime Definition This issue deals with the change in runoff brought about by land use and is usually assessed by comparing the ratio of flood flow to low flow, as well as flow amount and duration. Changes in flow patterns, due to water extraction for irrigation, impoundments etc are also covered.
The construction of dams and weirs greatly modifies the duration and pattern of a river’s flow. For instance, the Lower Burdekin River has lost some of the seasonality of its flow because water is released from the Burdekin Falls Dam for irrigation during the dry season. Consequently, the river has changed from an intermittently flowing river into a perennial system with elevated dry season baseflows. In general, construction of dams reduces the magnitude of flood flows downstream. Greater baseflows result, as water trapped after heavy rainfall is released from the dam during dry periods.
Critical Issues and Impacts A river’s flow affects all aspects of its condition and character. The characteristics of the flow determine sediment movement, channel width, channel depth and bank morphology. Flow affects water quality and the type and variety of aquatic and riparian habitats, as well as fish breeding patterns and reproductive success. Flow characteristics include not just the volume of water, but also the pattern of its delivery, such as flooding or low flows in the dry season.
Extraction of water for irrigation reduces the overall amount of water available for flow. Depending on the timing and quantities of extraction, this can significantly affect the flow regime. Excess irrigation water taken from the lower Burdekin River is put onto farms and drains into smaller coastal creeks and wetlands, changing their flow regime. This tail water elevates the water level in these wetlands as well as altering their water quality (most tail water is very turbid and may have elevated nutrients).
Hydrologists usually distinguish between flood flow (‘quickflow’) and low flow (‘baseflow’). Quickflow is mainly affected by runoff generated during major storms and cyclones and is responsible for flooding, bedload and washload transport. It is also significantly affected by land use. Changes to the infiltration properties of soils (caused, for example, by trampling from livestock or removal of ground cover) can increase the runoff. Baseflow is the flow generated by groundwater discharge; this is the rainfall that infiltrates and moves through the soil before it discharges into the river. Usually the higher the infiltrated rainfall, the greater the baseflow is. In addition, hydrologists and ecologists distinguish between perennial and seasonally flowing rivers and streams. In major rivers such as the Upper Burdekin, baseflow generally persists throughout the entire year, while smaller rivers and streams usually cease flowing during the dry season.
Consequently, use of land and water resources significantly affects flow regimes. Changes in flow regime may: • affect the reproduction/productivity of marine and freshwater species; • reduce seasonality and flooding; • change riparian and flood plain vegetation; • cause channel erosion with increasing water velocities or accretion when water velocities decrease; • reduce baseflow, leading to poorer ambient water quality; and • cut off or reduce access to habitats.
Another flow-related issue is the reputed loss of groundwater springs. The Burdekin Catchment has many springs that flow year-round, creating valuable aquatic habitat in an otherwise dry catchment. Anecdotal accounts suggests that many formerly permanent springs no longer
Current Level of Understanding The Department of Natural Resources and Mines maintains a good stream-gauging network to determine river flow, and data is now more easily accessible at
35
http://www.nrm.qld.gov.au/watershed. Consequently, good hydrographic and hydrologic data is available for the Burdekin catchment. Most of the major sub-catchments have also been well gauged. Fairly robust regionalisation techniques have also been developed recently that allow a reasonable extrapolation of hydrologic characteristics to ungauged streams.
strongly affected by changes to flow as a result of current land management practices and the use of water resources (e.g. irrigation). There are reasonable estimates of sediment and nutrient delivery to the near-shore environment. Through catchment modelling there is also a reasonable understanding of the spatial distribution of sources of the materials, as well as patterns of deposition. However, there are very few data on sediment and nutrient loads in the river network, making validation of models difficult. More importantly, this indicates that we can anticipate serious difficulties in determining reliable water quality benchmarks from which to develop future water quality targets. The absence of such data is compounded by our current inability to quantify the impact of poor ambient water quality on aquatic processes.
There is also a good understanding of how water resource use and management affects flow regime. A variety of robust hydrologic modelling tools are available to assist in this analysis, and the effect of current and future water resource management scenarios on flow regime is being thoroughly investigated as part of the development of the Burdekin Water Resource Plan. However, there are still some significant areas of uncertainty. While there is good data to show that grazing significantly alters infiltration and runoff generation at a catchment scale, the effects of various states of groundcover on patterns of water runoff and infiltration, are largely theoretical at this stage. This limits our ability to relate changes in grazing management to improved flow regimes and water quality.
5.2 Salinity 5.2.1 Dryland Salinity Definition Dryland salinity refers to the salinisation of soil and water resources triggered by changes to vegetation (particularly tree-clearing) and the subsequent effects on water balance. Dryland salinity has both on-site and off-site impacts.
Although it is clear that the change to flow regimes has altered instream habitats and impacted upon freshwater, estuarine and marine organisms, we have very little data to quantify the extent of these impacts.
Critical Issues and Impacts Large tracts of land in the Murray-Darling Basin and in south-western Australia have become affected by dryland salinity, which is arguably the most significant natural resource management issue faced by Australia. The problem is that salinity has rendered soils unproductive and water unfit for consumption or irrigation. In many instances the salinisation of soil and water resources is an irreversible process, and even where reversible, reclamation of salinised land is extremely costly.
Finally, there is little information on how much the changed pattern and frequency of freshwater pulses into the GBRL may have affected the nearshore zone. Water quality is a central issue for the Burdekin Catchment. When assessing impacts of water quality on freshwater, estuarine and marine ecosystems, it is necessary to differentiate between the different types of flow, because this can affect the movement of sediment,nutrients and contaminants.
The factors triggering dryland salinity include changes to the water balance and the presence of salt stores in the landscape. Native vegetation has been shown to extract water from soils very effectively and to great depths. Clearing native vegetation, especially trees with their deep roots, affects the water balance by reducing the
Floods determine the total loads of sediments and nutrients and this is most important for the marine environment. Good ambient water quality during low flow is critical for freshwater habitats. Both the marine and freshwater environments are 36
This could then cause saline groundwater to be discharged hundreds of kilometres further downstream in the catchment, or even outside the catchment (e.g. within the Great Artesian Basin). Often the only option in regional systems is prevention, which means stopping tree-clearing in high-risk recharge areas. The difficulty resides in identifying such areas with a sufficient degree of confidence and then having the political will to protect these areas.
ability of plants to remove water from depth, which eventually causes an accumulation of water and a rise in the water table. If the rising groundwater is saline, or if it carries up the preexisting salt stores in the soil as it rises, then salinity at the surface can result. Outbreaks of dryland salinity can express themselves as the accumulation of salts at the soil surface once the groundwater table is close enough to the surface to be affected by evaporation. Often salinity expresses itself by saline discharge into water bodies.
Current Level of Understanding Development of dryland salinity is still at a relatively minor level in the Burdekin Catchment, and the extent of the problem is generally underestimated. It can take a long time after the cause (e.g., land-clearing) before salinisation occurs. Outbreaks are possible at any time due to past land management practices.
Impacts of dryland salinity can be very severe and ultimately lead to the loss of current or future soil or water resources through increasing solute concentration. The main adverse impacts include: • loss of soil productivity; • reduced water quality; • loss of biodiversity (vegetation and fauna); • damage to built infrastructure (‘salt cancer’ in buildings and bridge foundations etc.).
The risk of dryland salinity has been reasonably well studied for the Upper Burdekin. Several studies were also conducted to determine the effect of clearing on changes to the recharge term of the water balance, but these were restricted to only a few soils of the Burdekin Catchment. They confirm the findings from other parts of Australia that tree-clearing increases groundwater recharge. Complementary to these studies was the examination of the effect of several factors at the regional scale on the probability of dryland salinity developing as a result of tree-clearing in the Dalrymple Shire. These factors included the presence and depth to the regional groundwater table, likelihood of a rising water table and the presence of a salt load in the soil. One result was the identification of salinity ‘hot spots’ in the CapeCampaspe sub-catchments. Within that region, the Balfes Creek sub-catchment (about 40 km south-west of Charters Towers) was selected for more intensive studies as part of the National Dryland Salinity Program.
The major land use change affecting dryland salinity is the removal of native vegetation so as to prepare land for grazing and agriculture. Dryland salinity requires long time periods to develop (usually decades), especially in a relatively dry catchment such as the Burdekin. Moreover, salinity may often erupt at some distance from where the clearing that caused it took place. There are three different scales of dryland salinity: local, sub-catchment and regional. The degree of reversibility of salinity and management options are different for each of these. Local outbreaks tend to occur more rapidly and can usually be managed on-farm. Often changes to cropping patterns (e.g. the introduction of perennial, deep-rooted crops or pasture species) and strategic tree-planting in the area can significantly retard or occasionally reverse rises of ground water tables.
More detailed studies in the Balfes Creek area included the investigation of relationships between hydrogeology, groundwater flow and pasture management effects on recharge on the probability of salinity at a sub-catchment level. The methodology and the salinity risk management guidelines developed as a result of this study have broader applicability in other similar hot spots where salinity is likely to express itself at a local or sub-catchment level.
Sub-catchment or regional scale outbreaks might take decades or more to express themselves, and often the outbreak is very distant from the area where increased ground water recharge is causing the problem. For instance, many areas in the Desert Uplands – with deep, well drained soils along the ridges – might be recharging deep, regional aquifers.
37
Map 7 Dryland salinity hazard in the Burdekin Catchment (map provided by NR&M, 2001)
38
Several dryland salinity outbreaks have occurred in the catchment. These, and data from other previous work, have been included as criteria in the preparation of the state-wide maps of salinity hazard at a scale of 1:2500000, published by NR&M as part of the National Land and Water Resources Audit. The map is reproduced in this report as Map 7.
• lack of robust water balance data to quantify the recharge term for key soils in the Burdekin Catchment; and • lack of studies to assess the options for management of cleared areas in salinity hazard areas.
Clearly, the map indicates a high salinity hazard for parts of the Burdekin Catchment. The high hazard in the Lower Burdekin is related to irrigation and seawater salinity and will be discussed in sections 5.2.2 and 5.2.3. The areas of most concern are the upper reaches of the Belyando catchment. However, salinisation data for the southern parts of the Burdekin Catchment is limited, making it difficult to confirm the findings in Map 7.
Definition This issue deals with the salinisation of groundwater and soils due to irrigation and includes both the off-site impact of salinity on waterbodies as well as the on-site impacts of salinisation.
5.2.2 Irrigation Salinity
Critical Issues and Impact As irrigation water always contains some level of salts, irrigation invariably leads to the accumulation of salts in the soil profile. The rate with which this process of salt accumulation will salinise the soil depends on salt loads imported with the irrigation water, plant water uptake and drainage practices. Salt accumulation is usually managed by ensuring sufficient water drains below the root zone to flush salts beneath the roots (the ratio required to achieve this is called the leaching fraction). If the drainage measures are inadequate or insufficient, flushing is constrained. Continued application of water will then invariably lead to a rise in groundwater tables. If the groundwater itself is saline, this will compound and accelerate irrigation-induced salinisation. If unmanaged, the combined process of salt accumulation and rising watertables will jeopardise the long-term viability of the land, and lead to: • reduced access to land due to waterlogging; • deterioration of groundwater quality, including the accession of nutrients and pesticides; • loss of productive capacity; • damage to infrastructure; • loss of biodiversity in adjacent wetlands or waterbodies, either through freshwater dilution in saline wetlands or salinisation of freshwater wetlands.
It is important to realise that this is only a hazard map, and whether the salinity hazard actually eventuates depends on future land management. Also, at this stage there is very little data on actual salinity levels in soils and there are very few groundwater bores with salinity data for the Burdekin Catchment. Consequently, there is still a high degree of uncertainty in relation to the salinity hazard. What Map 7 indicates, though, is that dryland salinity is likely to become a serious issue in the Burdekin Catchment if no action is taken. It is also important to understand that the hazard map is at a scale that is not appropriate for decision-making at the property level. This would require far more detailed mapping of salinity hazards, which is currently underway, and maps at a scale of 1:250 000 are being prepared. The main constraints to effectively mapping and managing the dryland salinity risk can be summarised as follows: • lack of appropriate geohydrological data (salt concentrations; depth of groundwater tables; flow directions of groundwater) for most of the Burdekin Catchment; • lack of adequate soil information in the Belyando/Suttor and, more generally, lack of data on distribution of salt within soil profiles and across the landscape;
Irrigation salinity is mainly induced by the irrigation practices themselves. However, in most irrigation areas, leaky water delivery systems (e.g. unlined irrigation channels in high leakage soils) and flow disruption structures
39
(e.g. weirs) can greatly exacerbate rising watertables. Whilst there are various management options available to deal with irrigation salinity (e.g. conjunctive water use; improved water use efficiency; dewatering bores; reduced leakage from delivery systems), these options may be constrained by soils that are hard to drain, by lack of sufficient hydraulic gradients in lowlying land, by restrictions on the permitted amount of discharge of saline and/or contaminated water from drains or dewatering bores in the vicinity of wetlands, or by high conservation value waterways.
•
•
Results of groundwater monitoring in the Burdekin River Irrigation Area (BRIA) indicate that extensive areas in the BRIA are under threat of irrigation salinity. In some areas, saline groundwater is less than 2 m from the soil surface and is now starting to express itself in loss of production. These areas include: • Mona Park; • Giru; and • Leichhardt Plains.
balance that accounts for surface and groundwater interactions and all sources of recharge (water delivery systems; applied irrigation water; rainfall etc.). Lack of appropriate drainage infrastructure and management strategies. To solve this would require the design and implementation of a drainage network, for protection of land with high watertables and a discharge plan that enables the export of excess salt from the irrigated areas without damage to adjacent ecosystems. Lack of verified groundwater-surface water interaction models that would enable an analysis of water resource management across the whole Lower Burdekin irrigation areas.
5.2.3 Seawater Intrusion Definition Salinisation due to seawater intrusion refers to the replacement of freshwater in aquifers by seawater. Critical Issues and Impacts Groundwater bodies below the coastline form an interface between freshwater and seawater (also called saltwater wedge). This interface is quite dynamic; in wet seasons with increased freshwater recharge, the freshwater aquifers can push the saltwater wedge towards the sea. Conversely, when groundwater is extracted for irrigation and other human uses, the pressure of the freshwater aquifer on the saltwater wedge lessens and the wedge moves landwards. The more groundwater is extracted, the more the seawater wedge will move inwards towards the extraction bores, until these may eventually start pumping seawater.
Current Level of Understanding Irrigation salinity within individual settings in this area is well understood as a result of several studies, including an extended pumping trial on Leichhardt Plains. Not as well understood, and less well documented, are the regional aspects of irrigation salinity – i.e. the nature of the interactions between surface waters, shallow, irrigation-affected water tables, and the regional hydrology, in particular how this interaction is affecting adjacent wetlands. The main constraints to enable future effective management of irrigation salinity in the BRIA are listed below. • An inadequate understanding of sinks and sources of salts in the BRIA. To improve our knowledge in this area would require the determination of a salt balance within the Lower Burdekin coastal zone and floodplain to quantify the salt inputs and outputs for the groundwater system within the irrigated areas of the BRIA. • An incomplete understanding of the spatial distribution of the main factors affecting the rise in groundwater tables. This would require the formulation of a regional water
Hence water quality degradation, or even loss of ground water resources due to seawater intrusion, is a major issue affecting the use of the Burdekin Delta aquifer for irrigation purposes. The areas under most threat of seawater intrusion are those closest to the shoreline, or adjacent to tidal estuaries. Current data suggests that the seawater interface extends kilometres inland, placing some inland pumping bores under threat of seawater intrusion. The regions most susceptible to this are the coastal areas of the North Burdekin Waterboard. The South Burdekin Waterboard region is less prone to the problem because it has less coastline, a
40
Green Wetlands area, capable of modelling a whole-of floodplain response; • modelling of the saltwater interface across the Lower Burdekin catchment to locate the seawater intrusion interface and the causes of the seawater interface movement; • development of management strategies for the prevention of increased seawater intrusion; and • investigations into options and strategies to remediate seawater-intruded areas.
shallower basement and a stronger hydraulic gradient. As the Burdekin Delta irrigation area also borders the RAMSAR wetlands of Bowling Green Bay, it is possible that groundwater extraction and irrigation may affect the hydrologic integrity of the wetlands. Current Level of Understanding Saltwater intrusion is confined to the delta area of the Burdekin River and only limited studies have been undertaken. Whilst a monitoring network is in place, it is currently under review and being supplemented with additional bores. A groundwater model has also been developed for the Burdekin Delta and is currently being tested and refined.
Salinity is already a significant issue in the Burdekin Catchment and is likely to become even more pressing in the near future. Three different salinisation processes need to be distinguished in the Burdekin: dryland salinity, irrigation salinity and seawater intrusion.
However, understanding the processes of seawater intrusion into coastal aquifers is a complex task. The degree to which the process is reversible varies from region to region and is not always well understood. This is compounded by our current lack of understanding of the broader geohydrology of the Lower Burdekin floodplain. As pointed out in the previous section, we know little about the hydrological interconnectedness of various aquifers, how they interact with the surface waters, and how irrigation activity in the BRIA affects regional groundwater hydrology, both of the Delta and the adjacent Bowling Green Bay wetlands.
Various salinity hazard assessments undertaken across the Burdekin Catchment or parts of it indicate that some areas present a high dryland salinity hazard. Small hotspots are presumed to exist in many areas of the catchment, but the area of greatest concern is the south-eastern part of the Belyando. We currently have little data to confirm the extent and severity of dryland risk under current and future land use scenarios. Until we have better data, further tree clearing in these areas should be halted. Irrigation salinity and seawater intrusion are confined to the Burdekin River Irrigation Area (BRIA) and the Burdekin Delta, respectively. Whilst there are strategies in place to manage the seawater intrusion problem, we do not yet understand the regional salt balance and hydrology of the BRIA well enough to formulate adequate responses. The main constraint for effective management is the lack of an integrated drainage management strategy and options for salt water discharge without compromising receiving waterways and adjacent ecosystems.
Given the dependence of a large part of the irrigation area in the Burdekin Delta on the integrity of the groundwater resource, an improved understanding of seawater intrusion within the Burdekin/Haughton Water Supply Scheme and the Burdekin Delta is critical. The following research and monitoring activities are necessary for future effective management decisions: • expansion of the sea water intrusion monitoring network and integration of the network with the BRIA network to provide better data for model refinement and validation, as well as supporting adaptive management; • development of an integrated surface – groundwater interaction model that links the Burdekin Delta with the BRIA and Bowling
5.3 Land Degradation Land degradation is an undesirable change in one or more of the elements that govern landscape health. Degradation, in this context, generally has a negative impact on the productivity of an area. 41
most visible expression of soil erosion. Gully erosion requires some accentuation of topography, so that runoff is concentrated sufficiently in drainage lines to initiate gullying (incision) of the soil. Once initiated, gullies are difficult and costly to control. Channel erosion occurs along stream and river banks during flood flows (exacerbated by increased frequencies of flood flow as a result of changes to land use – see section 5.1.5) and follows the removal of riparian vegetation.
The major types of degradation in the Burdekin Catchment include soil erosion, loss of fertility due to soil acidity, soil structural decline, pasture decline and invasion of native and exotic weeds. Other aspects of soil condition, such as soil fertility, sodicity and carbon and nutrient cycling, are also important, but are not covered in detail in the study. However, relevant references are provided in the bibliography. 5.3.1 Soil Erosion
On-site impacts of soil erosion comprise: • loss of productive capacity of the soil resource; • exposure of saline/sodic subsoils, leading to increased incidence of gully erosion; • loss of access to terrain as gullies are formed; • damage to infrastructure (roads, drains); and • increased runoff because of reduced infiltration, leading to a reduction in effective rainfall (i.e. less water for plant use).
Definition Soil erosion refers to the removal of soil by the erosive force of water and wind. The erosion process comprises the removal, transport and deposition of eroded material, but in the context of this study we restrict the assessment of erosion to the on-site impacts. Off-site impacts are covered in the sections on water quality. Critical Issues and Impacts Soil erosion by water is a widespread and serious issue in many parts of humid and semiarid tropical Australia, including the Burdekin Catchment. Wind erosion is more prevalent in semi-arid cropping areas and more arid zones, and therefore probably not a major concern in the Burdekin.
Off-site impacts include: • input of sediment/nutrients to streams and subsequent impact on water quality; and • property scale siltation of dams. The off-site impacts of sediment delivery have already been discussed in sections 5.1.1 to 5.1.3.
The main factors controlling soil erosion by water are rainfall regime (amount, intensity and energy), soil erodibility (e.g. stable cracking clays have a low erodibility, whereas many duplex soils, particularly when sodic and dispersive in nature, have a very high erodibility), topography (slope angle and length), vegetation cover (in particular ground cover) and agricultural practices (timing and intensity of tillage operations, grazing management).
Current Level of Understanding The general processes of soil erosion are well understood and some detailed studies have been carried out in the grazing lands of the Upper Burdekin region on some of the more erodible soils. Good data also exists for the effect of ground cover and soil surface condition on soil erosion. Guidelines to manage soil erosion in grazing areas, in particular sheet or hillslope erosion are available, although they have not been tested for some of the regions outside the Upper Burdekin. Soil erosion rates in cropping areas of the southern Belyando are unknown.
Three different forms of erosion can be distinguished. Sheet or hillslope erosion is a generalised stripping and lowering of the soil surface. Sheet erosion is fairly imperceptible, but results in the loss of soil fertility due to the continuous lowering of the nutrient enriched topsoil. A lowering of the soil surface by 0.1 mm per year corresponds to a soil loss of 1.5 tonnes per hectare, which is a typical value for rangelands. Ground cover and soil surface condition are the primary management factors controlling sheet erosion. Gully erosion is the
Whilst not well quantified either, soil erosion in the canelands of the Lower Burdekin, which is likely to be small given the flat topography, can be minimised through the increased adoption of trash blanket harvesting.
42
Legend Annual hillslope er osion (t/ha/y) 0- 1 1-5 5 - 10 10 - 20 20 - 50 50 - 75 75 - 100
50
0
50
100
Kilometers
Map 8 Predicted hillslope erosion in the Burdekin Catchment (Prosser et al., 2001)
43
Burdekin River Fanning River
Clarke River
Burdekin River
Bowen River
Cape River
Suttor River Diamond Creek
Logan Creek
Legend Gully density (km/km2)
Belyando River
0.0 - 0.1 0.1 - 0.5 0.5 - 1.0 >1
50
0
50
100
Kilometers
Map 9 Predicted gully erosion in the Burdekin Catchment (Prosser et al., 2001)
44
order of 10%, but is not well quantified for the Burdekin Catchment.
Various reports also provide information on the spatial extent of the type and severity of soil erosion. More recently, Prosser and others conducted a comprehensive erosion hazard assessment as part of the NLWRA and a Meat and Livestock Australia funded project in the Burdekin Catchment. Separate maps of hillslope and gully erosion hazard were produced (Map 8 and 9, respectively).
In summary, enough is already known about soil erosion to target appropriate management actions to prevent further soil erosion, in particular through the management of stock for sufficient ground cover and intact riparian zones. However, actual measured rates of erosion are still fairly sparse across the whole catchment, so that some uncertainty remains with respect to the erosion hazard maps available for the catchment.
The main result of this study is the recognition that erosion hazard is not evenly distributed across the catchment, but exhibits a distinct spatial pattern. In the case of hillslope erosion, the main areas of concern are predicted to occur in the Bowen River sub-catchment, and along the higher rainfall and more hilly north-eastern areas of the Upper Burdekin catchment. Gully erosion hazard is even more concentrated in hotspots, with the main areas of concern to the north-west and south-east of the Burdekin Falls Dam. These results can be summarised in a sediment budget, as shown in Table 6.
Uncertainty also exists regarding the best options for the remediation of land already severely degraded by soil erosion. Key knowledge gaps in the effective remediation of affected areas include: • a lack of understanding on the nature and time required for natural recovery of soil function in different landscape types – i.e. what ground cover thresholds need to be maintained, where and over what periods of time; and • insufficient understanding of the most effective and economic combinations of grazing management and active remediation works (ripping and seeding of scalded areas; gully rehabilitation strategies) to accelerate recovery of soil fertility and hydrologic function.
Table 6. Sediment budget for the Burdekin Catchment (Prosser et al., 2001). Sediment budget item Hillslope delivery Gully erosion rate Riverbank erosion rate Total sediment supply Total suspended sediment stored Total bed sediment stored Sediment delivery to estuary Total losses 1
Mean annual rate1 12.3 5.0 1.1 18.4 13.0 3.0 2.4 18.4
5.3.2 Soil Acidity Definition Soil acidification refers to the process by which land use leads to a decrease in soil pH. Acidification has few off-site effects, although in certain cases prolonged or intense soil acidification can also lead to export of acid into water bodies.
million tonnes per year
The important message from Table 6 is that hillslope erosion is the main source of sediments delivered to the river network, followed by gully erosion. More importantly, not all of the sediment is actually delivered to the mouth of the Burdekin – most of it is redeposited in the river network itself (see also Section 5.1.1) or on the floodplains. In many instances material eroded on the higher sections of the hillslope is re-deposited on the footslopes and does not actually leave the landscape. It is important to differentiate between hillslope erosion and sediment delivered to the stream network. This so-called sediment delivery ratio is assumed to be in the
Critical Issues and Impacts In most soils, the two main mechanisms for the development of acidity are the effects of nitrogen-fixing legumes and the increasing loss of cations (calcium, magnesium, potassium) from the soil through harvest or grazing of plants. Soil acidification is accelerated in areas of high rainfall, where high leaching rates constitute a natural component of the acidification process.
45
Lower Burdekin floodplains. Although adequate management strategies have been developed for acid sulfate soils in other regions, it is likely that these are applicable in the Lower Burdekin as well.
In contrast, acid sulfate soils generate acidity through the oxidation of pyrites contained in the subsoil. These pyrites produce sulfuric acid when oxygen enters the soil, which usually is the case when such soils are drained. Acid sulfate soils are restricted to the coastal fringe where ground level is 5 meters or less above sea level.
5.3.3 Pasture Condition Definition Pasture condition refers to the species composition and health of native pastures and the on-site impacts of changes in the condition of pastures resulting from any disturbance.
The on-site results of acidity are: • reduction of soil productive capacity; • loss of soil and plant biodiversity and species composition.
Critical Issues and Impacts Pasture condition is closely related to soil erosion, and often excessive soil erosion is a result of a decline in pasture condition. The primary factors causing a degradation of native pastures are prolonged periods of excessive grazing, inappropriate fire management and disturbance following tree clearing. These factors are strongly exacerbated during drought. As a consequence, pasture decline results from a combination of inadequate grazing management and poor seasons. Heavy grazing pressure tends to shift pasture species from more desirable, productive perennials to less desirable species, as cattle and sheep tend to graze preferred species selectively. Low levels of cover also preclude the use of fire as a control, further enhancing the shift towards undesirable species (promoting in particular woody weeds and regrowth; see sections 5.3.4 and 5.4.1).
In the case of acid sulfate soils, following drainage these soils can discharge considerable amounts of acid into waterways, with detrimental effects on aquatic fauna. Current Level of Understanding Soil acidification is common in canelands due to the continual harvest and export of large amounts of biomass. However, in the Lower Burdekin, due to their sodic or even saline nature, many soils are buffered against acidification. Acidification in other soils (e.g. sandy soils in the Delta) can easily be managed by regular liming, and appropriate management guidelines are available to rectify acidification in sugar cane soils. Until recently, little was known about the incidence of dryland acidity in rangelands. In the past, studies of land degradation in the rangelands have generally not identified acidification as a significant issue. However, it is now well established that the introduction of legumes to improve native pastures in the Upper Burdekin can lead to significant rates of acidification on soils with low buffering capacity (sandy soils and naturally acid soils low in organic matter). As it is economically unfeasible to lime rangelands, continued acidification of rangeland soils could ultimately lead to irreversible damage and loss of pasture productivity. Soil acidification risk maps have been produced for the Dalrymple Shire, and information with guidelines to manage dryland acidification in native or improved pastures is readily available.
The primary impacts include: • reduced levels of cattle production due to loss of productive pasture species; • loss of resilience in the system, leading to a decline in ‘drought proofing’; • loss of biodiversity, in particular pasture species, but also bird species dependant on seeds from native pasture species; • vulnerability to woody weed invasion; and • changed water balance, leading to more runoff (therefore less effective rainfall for pasture growth) and soil erosion. Current Level of Understanding A comprehensive study across Northern Australia, undertaken by Tothill and Gillies in 1992, provided evidence for significant and widespread decline in pasture condition in many of the pasture types of the Burdekin
At this stage, the only major knowledge gap relevant to managing soil acidification in the Burdekin Catchment is the need to better map the distribution of acid sulfate soils in the 46
and test the above principles of sustainable grazing management in commercial enterprises operating with large paddocks that are inherently variable and preferentially grazed by cattle. In particular, we have little objective data on the economic performance of the proposed grazing management strategies relative to existing management – and this represents a major impediment to the successful adoption of sustainable grazing management practices.
Catchment. However, there has been considerable change in management and drought periods have been followed by good seasons, so that there is a need for an update. More recent data has become available as part of land resource assessments conducted in the Dalrymple Shire and the Desert Uplands, confirming continued poor condition of some pasture systems. Also, the DPI maintains a network of pasture monitoring sites across the Burdekin Catchment through its Q-GRAZE program. The program established more than 70 sites in the Dalrymple Shire alone.
5.3.4 Terrestrial Weeds Definition Terrestrial weeds are all plants defined as undesirable in the context of a particular production land use system. They can be woody or herbaceous, native or exotic. Here we are concerned with weeds in terrestrial systems only.
A detailed body of science has been produced regarding the effects of grazing management on pasture condition, allowing for the development of comprehensive strategies to recover pasture condition. These studies were focussed on the effects of stocking rates and land management on the degradation and recovery of pastures on three properties in the Charters Towers region, and therefore are probably generally applicable to many parts of the Einasleigh bioregion. An important outcome of these studies is the development of practical grazing strategies to reduce degradation, restore degraded pastures and maintain healthy farm incomes on the rangelands (ECOGRAZE principles; DPI Grazing Land Management Package). The DPI also maintains a major grazing management trial on Wambiana, using larger experimental paddocks and testing a variety of management scenarios based on climate forecasting.
Critical Issues and Impacts As discussed in the previous section, the invasion of weed species in rangelands is closely linked to grazing management, and often reflects a combination of droughts, excessive grazing pressure and lack of fire. The key factors determining the success of invasion are: • the scale of initial introduction (i.e deliberately or accidentally introduced); • number and geographical spread of sites at which introduction occurred; • availability and spatial extent of suitable habitats, including suitability of climate; • the weed’s dispersal mechanisms and the extent to which natural dispersal is augmented by human activities; and • human activities that promote or counter invasion
Wet season spelling, rotational grazing, seasonal adjustment of stock in accordance with fodder availability and fencing to manage cattle access to critical areas such as riverbanks and areas with more palatable grasses constitute some of the key elements and were shown to be successful in mitigating some of the degradation caused by grazing.
The environmental and economic impacts of terrestrial weeds are: • loss of production due to reduction of grass cover and carrying capacity, leading to reduced fodder production; • increased costs for mustering; • toxicity to stock; • adverse impact on human health (e.g. Parthenium); • decline in the health of riparian vegetation; and • displacement of, or encroachment on, natural vegetation leading to loss of biodiversity.
The challenge is now to more broadly disseminate the results of these studies, at least in the Upper Burdekin and Bowen catchments. The degree to which these principles are applicable in some of the very different pasture systems of the Belyando and the Desert Uplands probably requires additional research. Also, many of the principles stated above were derived from stocking trials using small, uniform paddocks, and there is a need to adapt
47
sites of initial introduction are located close to settlements and roads and riparian strips often provide routes of spread.
Control of weed pests in Queensland is a responsibility of all landholders, owners and occupiers of land. Legislation does not discriminate based on tenure, public or private ownership. Local authorities are responsible for ensuring all landholders comply with the requirement of the Rural Lands Protection Act (1985). Local Authorities have developed Local Government Area Pest Management Plans with the help of NR&M. These plans set the level of pest control required.
Table 7. Weeds found in the Burdekin River Catchment.
Local Authorities with Pest Management Plans include: • Dalrymple Shire Council; • Charters Towers City Council; • Burdekin Shire Council. The Federal Government has listed 20 Weeds of National Significance (WONS) in addition to the declared weeds under the Rural Lands Protection Act (1985). The Federal Government has also prepared a National Weed Strategy for the disbursement of funding to priority areas through the National Weeds Program.
Weed
Weed of National Significance
Rubber Vine Parthenium Weed Bellyache Bush Harrisia Cactus Parkinsonia Chinee Apple Hymenachne Prickly Acacia Giant Rats Tail Grass Hyacinth Salvinia Lantana Cabomba
Yes Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes
Declared under Rural Lands Protection Act 1985 Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Weeds are also unevenly distributed at a landscape scale. This means that, for any given weed species, some landscape zones provide more favourable habitat than others. Riparian zones are especially susceptible to colonisation by certain weeds. This is presumably because water and nutrients are in greater supply in these areas. Rubber vine (Cryptostegia grandiflora) is an obvious example from the Burdekin rangelands of a weed species that thrives in riparian zones. While occurring in other parts of the landscape, plants of this species are larger, grow more densely and produce more seeds in riparian zones. Other species that develop particularly serious infestations in riparian zones are castor oil plant (Ricinus communis), Guinea grass (Panicum maximum), parkinsonia (Parkinsonia aculeata) and chinee apple (Ziziphus mauritiana). In lower rainfall zones, particular weeds will tend to be more dependent on riparian zones or other relatively mesic parts of the landscape.
Current Level of Understanding Weeds in rangelands of the Burdekin Catchment are widespread, and the occurrence of the many nationally significant weed species has been recorded (Table 7). Weed species are always unevenly spread across the regions that they occupy. This is certainly the case within the Burdekin rangelands, though for many species we do not have a comprehensive picture of their distribution across the region. Other species have a more restricted distribution. This can be attributed to either habitat or historical factors. Habitat suitability depends on many factors, such as climate, geology, soil type and condition, topography, aspect and vegetation, which can influence distribution at a regional scale. The history of an invasion can be described in terms of the locations where the species was initially introduced, which then determines, to a large extent, the pattern and rate of spread, and hence, the distribution. Thus, species that are initially introduced to many different sites within a region are likely to spread more rapidly than species that are introduced to a single site. In many cases, the
Two weed research stations currently operate in Queensland, one of which is located in Charters Towers (NR&M’s Tropical Weeds Research Centre). In collaboration with the Savanna CRC and CSIRO, the Tropical Weeds Centre has developed management strategies for some of the significant weeds. Biological control agents have also been released successfully for some weed species. The State Government publishes
48
‘Pest Facts’, available as hardcopies from NR&M offices or from the website, www.nrm.qld.gov.au .
Soil erosion, poor pasture condition and invasions of terrestrial weeds constitute the main degradation issues. All three are intricately linked and depend to a large extent on grazing management. Prolonged, excessive grazing, combined with inadequate fire management strategies, can greatly reduce ground cover and damage the soil. The end result is soil erosion, the loss of desirable, productive pasture species and increased invasion of weeds.
Weed management principles have been developed for many weeds. The most important factor is the recognition that in most cases there are no single solutions, but that weed control needs to embrace the concept of an integrated management package, which includes the following principles: • prevention - effective prevention of introduction is probably one of the most cost effective measures; • containment – retention of a particular weed in a particular region, which requires State level management and coordination; • early intervention – depends on the ability to detect weed species before they become more widespread and visible; and • integrated weed control – no single technique is effective on its own, but a combination of techniques including chemical control with herbicide, mechanical control, burning and biological control needs to be designed for each particular situation as part of a weed management strategy.
The extent and nature of these problems is reasonably well understood and documented, and in many cases effective management strategies have been well researched and are now readily available. Whilst there are still a few critical knowledge gaps, the focus of future investment by the Regional Body will have to be on the resourcing of adoption, and implementation, of existing solutions for sustainable grazing practices.
5.4 Loss of Habitat Loss or change of habitat is responsible for most of the loss in biodiversity values. These values include rare or unique habitats, rare or endangered plant and animal species, soil biodiversity and associated with these factors, the general landscape amenity values.
Irrespective of the above general level of understanding and the availability of management options, it is important to realise that our knowledge about some of the more recent, significant weeds is rudimentary in terms of their dispersal mechanisms, their occurrence and suitable control options. Continued effort will be required to refine our knowledge to answer: • Where in the Burdekin Catchment do the main weed species occur? • What are the most effective combinations of management techniques to deal with individual problem species? • Where do we best target the weed control effort, given that it is costly and that there are probably not sufficient resources to deal with all weeds everywhere?
An intact biodiversity is also critical for the functional integrity of all ecosystems, and loss of biodiversity can express itself in decline in water quality, incidence of salinity and loss of productive capacity. As these issues have already been discussed previously, this section focuses on the biodiversity implications of habitat loss. 5.4.1 Tree-clearing and Tree-thickening Definition Land use impacts considered with this issue include clearing and fire management and its effect on terrestrial vegetation and animals. The connectivity of vegetation is also taken into account.
Land degradation in its various forms is a widespread problem in the Burdekin Catchment and it directly affects productivity in a variety of ways. Land degradation is predominantly associated with grazing, given that this is the main land use.
49
Current Level of Understanding There is now very strong evidence that treethickening is a widespread phenomenon on uncleared native pastures, not just restricted to the Burdekin Catchment, but across Northern Australia. The evidence is based on a range of methods, including an analysis of the journals of early explorers like Leichhardt and Gregory, photographic evidence comparing the same sites after long periods of time, and more recently, carbon isotope methods used to determine diagnostic soil signatures to differentiate between grassland and woodland history of a site. In addition, in Queensland, DPI has established a woodland monitoring system to record the changes in tree density. This program, called TRAPPS (Transect Recording and Processing System), has established close to twenty sites across the Burdekin Catchment.
Critical Issues and Impacts As shown in section 3.4 (Map 3), woodland savannas constitute the prevalent vegetation form across much of the catchment. In many areas this vegetation is still relatively intact, in others where there has been clearing activity to develop improved pastures or open up country for cropping, the native tree vegetation has been lost and with it, it is likely that many of the biodiversity values have been lost as well. In contrast to clearing, thickening occurs in remnant woodland vegetation, mainly through a change in fire regimes (i.e. reduced frequency of fires, allowing saplings to grow out of the fire-sensitive phase). Thickening also occurs where regrowth of pulled country is not managed. Effects on biodiversity in this case are more related to the loss or change in ground layer species as a result of denser tree canopies.
From a management point of view, there are large gaps in our understanding of the options available to graziers and the economics associated with managing woodland thickening, which are compounded by the tension between clearing and the potential impact on dryland salinity and biodiversity. The key challenge is to develop cost-effective options to manage tree-thickening without having to resort to fullscale clearing in salinity hazard areas or areas of high biodiversity value. Questions in need of further investigation include the feasibility of selective tree-killing or selective clearing in smaller areas; the development of adequate fire management strategies as a follow-up to control renewed tree-thickening once trees have been selectively removed; robust tree density thresholds that balance production needs with safeguards for salinity prevention and conservation of biodiversity.
The major impacts of clearing include: • loss in species and changes in biodiversity composition and ecosystem function; • changes to water balance, particularly groundwater with implications for dryland salinity (see section 5.2.1); and • loss of aesthetic and amenity values. The major adverse effects of tree-thickening include: • changes in species and in biodiversity composition and ecosystem function; • increased costs of production and loss of management options; • reduced productive capacity of native pastures, in turn reducing carrying capacity, which if not adjusted, may lead to an increase in effective stocking rates and accelerated loss of cover ; and • loss of aesthetic and amenity values.
The current level of understanding of impacts of tree-clearing or thickening on biodiversity varies across the catchment. In general there is a lack of comprehensive field surveys in the catchment on which to draw a comprehensive baseline. This means a poor fauna dataset with most information descriptive rather than quantitative. This makes it difficult to quantify change.
Tree-thickening also has a few positive effects. Recent work by Bill Burrows (DPI Rockhampton) has identified that treethickening may provide a significant contribution to carbon sequestration and greenhouse gas mitigation. To date, landholders are not being remunerated for this benefit. As already discussed in section 5.2, retention of trees is likely to prevent dryland salinity outbreaks, and it follows that tree-thickening will also lead to a reduction in groundwater recharge in potential salinity areas.
Good information is available for the Brigalow Belt and Desert Uplands in the southern portion of the catchment. The northern portion,
50
marginal economic benefits (if any) has probably constrained further clearing in these areas.
Einasleigh Uplands, is poorly documented. Because of its proximity to the Wet Tropics and Gulf Plains Bioregions, the Einasleigh Uplands bioregion is the most diverse in North Queensland.
Table 8: Areas of cleared, regrowth and remnant vegetation, derived from Qld Herbarium 1999 Remnant Vegetation mapping.
A current Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) study of the Desert Upland Bioregion is assessing land resources to establish a baseline of capability and sustainable levels of production. The report will be available in late 2002. Also, an EPA study to determine priorities for remnant vegetation protection in the Brigalow Belt has been completed and is about to be published. This work is being complemented by several three-year programs the Tropical Savanna CRC has initiated, including: • monitoring biodiversity health; • methods of off reserve conservation; and • small mammal decline.
Area of cleared vegetation in subcatchment (ha) 88 477
Area of regrowth vegetation in subcatchment (ha) 58
Area of remnant vegetation in sub-catchment (ha) 93 742
49
145 071
4 789 282
35
2 451
796 881
16
148 685
1 085
896 841
14
74 828
8 994
3 541 486
2
34 932
5 141
181 785
18
Total for Burdekin 2 947 487 Basin
162 800
10 300 017
23
Barratta Creek
Belyando, Suttor 2 455 268 Cape Rivers Bowen River 145 297 Lower Burdekin River Upper Burdekin River (Sellheim) Haughton River
Vegetation has been mapped at 1:100 000 for 1960 (see Map 3). Based on soils and other parameters, the map represents the extent of cover pre-clearing as well as vegetation cover in pre-European times.
% of subcatchment which is nonremnant
Many biodiversity issues in the woodland savannas are still unresolved, although there is increased activity to fill some of the most pressing information gaps. Some of the key priorities for future research to underpin vegetation and biodiversity management in the Burdekin Catchment are: • an immediate need to obtain better baseline information on key fauna and flora species in threatened habitats; • improved understanding of the impacts of land development and changes in land use on biodiversity (species distribution, biodiversity function); • identification of areas suitable for various land uses to minimise impacts on biodiversity; • a better understanding of impacts of land use practices on biodiversity e.g. grazing pressures, agricultural practices, ponded pastures, introduction of exotics; • developing appropriate management strategies to conserve native vegetation and protected areas; • identifying appropriate strategies to deal with tree-thickening in order to maintain pasture productivity, in particular the role of fire; • principles to guide targeted and cost effective revegetation to prevent further degradation; and
Vegetation cover was updated in 1995, 1997 and 1999. Burdekin catchment mapping is currently under review and will be complete in about three years. As a result, reasonably robust information is available concerning the current level of tree clearing. The latest data is presented in Map 10 and summarised in Table 8. As can be seen in Map 10 and Table 8, the Burdekin Catchment has been subjected to a significant level of clearing in some areas, while other areas are less affected and only show pockets of clearing. A large portion of the coastal floodplains in the Lower Burdekin has been cleared for irrigation. Quite large tracts of land in the Belyando have also been cleared, some for cropping, some for improved pastures, and where much of the original Brigalow cover has been targeted for clearing. In the Upper Burdekin and Desert Uplands, clearing is far less evident, although there are some significant pockets where clearing has been undertaken to enhance native pastures. Regrowth in these areas is proving to be a challenge, and the difficulty in managing regrowth coupled to
51
Burdekin River Fanning River
Clarke River
Burdekin River
Bowen River
Cape River
Suttor River Diamond Creek
Logan Creek
Legend Vegetation Type
Belyando River
Remnant Regrowth Cleared
Waterbody
50
0
50
100
Kilometers
Map 10 Extent of clearing and regrowth in the Burdekin Catchment (map provided by QEPA, 2002)
52
• optimisation of strategies to conserve remnant areas and to regenerate degraded areas.
Parthenium, the use of fire as a management tool and damage by livestock. In the cropping lands, the most important issues are invasion by exotic grasses such as paragrass, and the replanting of trees lost from riparian systems.
5.4.2 Riparian Vegetation Definition Riparian refers to vegetation along streams, wetlands, waterholes and estuaries. This issue deals with the on-site impacts of loss of riparian vegetation as well as taking into account its connection with other habitats and its influence on downstream water quality.
Current Level of Understanding The importance and underlying processes of riparian vegetation have been well studied, and although there have not been many studies in the Burdekin Catchment, there is a good body of knowledge from which we can draw (e.g. the work carried out as part of the National Riparian Management Program). The main impediments to a more effective management of riparian vegetation in the catchment are: • a lack of baseline data on type, distribution and condition of riparian vegetation throughout the river network, and for riparian vegetation fringing wetlands and lakes; • insufficient understanding of the impact of land use on condition of riparian vegetation, in particular in the grazing lands; and • lack of a framework to prioritise future rehabilitation or revegetation activities. For example, we need to know which reaches on which waterways or waterbodies would benefit biodiversity and water quality goals most?
Critical Issues and Impacts Riparian vegetation is important, not only as a different habitat type in itself, but also for aquatic ecosystems. Leaf litter provides an important food source for many aquatic animals, riparian vegetation provides shade, which controls water temperatures and other water quality processes. The physical habitat provided by tree roots and snags is important to many aquatic animals and riparian vegetation acts as a filter to trap nutrient and other contaminants before they enter streams. Riparian ecosystems support plants and animals that do not occur anywhere else in the landscape. They also have a greater biodiversity than many surrounding ecosystems. During dry periods, animals from surrounding woodlands move into riparian ecosystems for refuge. In some places, especially the Burdekin floodplain, the riparian vegetation is seriously degraded. Law protects all intertidal mangrove vegetation. It is illegal to interfere with any mangrove plant in any way, without a permit.
5.4.3 Degradation and Loss of Wetlands Definition This issue deals with degradation and loss of wetlands, both in the coastal floodplains and inland wetlands. On-site impacts, connections with other habitats and the role as environmental filter are discussed.
The major issues arising out of degradation or loss of riparian vegetation are: • loss of biodiversity; • increased risk of channel and bank erosion; • increased weed infestation (e.g. rubbervine, chinee apple); • loss of filter function (increased leakage of sediments and nutrients from adjacent land use into waterways); • reduced productivity and health of aquatic systems; and • loss of aesthetic and amenity values.
Critical Issues and Impacts Degradation of wetlands can occur through a variety of factors. A significant factor is the state of fringing riparian vegetation or even its removal, exposing the wetland to increased sunlight and higher water temperatures, increased inputs of sediments, nutrients and contaminants due to a reduced buffering capacity. Other important degradation factors are direct access of stock into the wetlands, causing disturbances to water quality (turbidity, nutrient enrichment), trampling of banks and vegetation, changes to flow regime, weeds, lost connectivity with estuarine habitats, construct-
In the grazing lands, the most important issues are invasion by weeds such as rubber vine, chinee apple, bellyache bush, Lantana and
53
suffer a variety of serious problems such as loss of their riparian zone, very poor water quality, significantly altered faunal communities, and infestation by terrestrial or aquatic weeds.
ion of fish passage barriers and irrigation tail water. In the coastal floodplains, drainage in adjacent cane land often lowers watertables in remnant wetlands, in many cases eventually leading to a complete loss of the wetland. In some cases this is compounded by infilling of the wetland depressions to increase the area and accessibility of cropping land.
The Bowling Green Bay wetlands are an exception to this. This area constitutes an asset of international significance and is one of Queensland’s few RAMSAR-listed wetlands. Although the wetlands appear healthy, we know little about the hydrological links between them and the broader irrigation activities in the Lower Burdekin, by which the wetlands are surrounded. Future drainage management needs in the BRIA will have to be mindful of potential adverse impacts on these valuable systems.
The major issues associated with degradation or loss of wetlands are: • loss of biodiversity; • loss of habitat for fish production; • loss of aesthetic and amenity values; • loss of filter function (floodplains retain less sediment and nutrients, increasing export to estuarine and marine environments); • loss of or reduced efficacy of geomorphic function and flow regulation; and • introduction of substances and processes that create oxygen demand and lack of oxygen (e.g. weeds, see section 5.4.4).
Wetlands in the rangelands, although not as frequent as in the coastal plains, play a significant refuge role for fauna. In some instances, direct cattle access and the establishment of ponded pastures degrade wetlands in rangelands. As is the case for riparian vegetation, we know quite a lot about the general significance of wetlands for biodiversity. However, there are insufficient data on the distribution, state and value of the remaining wetlands, precluding rational decisions on which wetlands to protect, or which wetlands to target for rehabilitation. The main impediments to progress in protecting and rehabilitating wetlands in the catchment are: • a lack of baseline data on type, distribution and condition of wetlands, both in the floodplain as in the rangelands; • insufficient understanding of the impact of land use in on condition of wetlands; • the lack of a framework to prioritise future rehabilitation activities. Which wetlands and where in the catchment should be rehabilitated to benefit biodiversity and water quality goals the most? • insufficient knowledge on the links between wetland habitat and estuaries for some of the prime fisheries species (e.g. Barramundi); and • determination of the relative benefits of various potential restorative actions.
Many floodplain wetlands are in poor health due to weeds, irrigation run-off and loss of riparian vegetation. Management decisions must take into account a broad range of variables. Harvesting surface aquatic weeds, for example, has proven to have immediate, positive results. However, the long-term effects of some restoration methods are yet to be determined. In some sites it may even be beneficial to retain irrigation discharge. All restorative works should include environmental monitoring, also necessary to determine the productivity of wetlands affected by irrigation discharge and loss of riparian vegetation Many coastal floodplain wetlands are also affected by bund walls and sand dams. These create weed problems and block normal tidal influences that improve water quality. There is a need for comprehensive mapping of bund wall and sand dam locations and the extent of the resultant habitat modification. Current level of understanding The Burdekin floodplain was once teeming with productive wetlands. Most have been destroyed or filled. The remaining wetlands
54
placed on an audit of the types of waterbodies, their condition and remedial needs.
5.4.4 Aquatic Weeds Definition Invasive aquatic weeds are mainly weeds occurring in waterbodies, but also includes those that may infest adjacent terrestrial systems.
Habitat and biodiversity loss occurs in some form in all areas of the catchment, although the impact is more significant in the coastal floodplain areas of the Lower Burdekin.
Critical Issues and Impacts Aquatic weeds are a significant factor in the degradation of habitat values of waterways and wetlands. The major effects of aquatic weeds include: • increased biomass through vigorous growth, leading to decline in water quality, especially oxygen; • accumulation of contaminants (by uptake and incorporation into bottom sediments following decomposition); • reduced biodiversity through habitat degradation, e.g. loss of fish species; • alterations to flow regime; can increase the frequency of flooding due to the accumulation of sediments and the flow resistance of the weed body; and • loss of aesthetic and amenity values.
Tree-clearing and loss of wetlands, associated with loss of plant and animal species, seem to be the most significant habitat issues, although for different reasons. Tree-clearing becomes a biodiversity problem when rare or high value vegetation and habitat types become affected (e.g. Brigalow). Wetlands play an important part in supporting aquatic biodiversity, often acting as refuges or reservoirs for aquatic species. Hence, the loss or destruction of wetlands is a serious problem. Understanding and dealing with the loss of habitats is still seriously hampered by inadequate or insufficient data. Obtaining baseline information on wetlands and riparian vegetation is a high priority. Without such data, it will continue to be very difficult to make rational decisions on resource allocation priorities, and we will have little base from which to rehabilitate
Current Level of Understanding Aquatic and semi-aquatic weeds are the major water quality and habitat issues in the coastal floodplain wetlands. They have dramatic effects on water quality, aquatic flora and fauna and ecosystem processes. Increased use of paragrass and hymenachne as species for ponded pastures is likely to increase the pressure on coastal and inland wetlands as these species are very aggressive and tend to migrate out of ponded pastures into downstream waterbodies and wetlands.
5.5 Feral Animals Definition This issue deals with the damage, on and offsite, that feral animal activity may cause. Critical Issues and Impacts Primary pests include pigs, dingoes, wild dogs and rabbits. Other pests are horses, deer, foxes and cats.
The Burdekin weed harvester is proving to be effective in controlling floating aquatic plants. Emergent grasses associated with aquatic weeds must be ripped. Controlled grazing is an effective technique for grass control in some wetlands. Control of aquatic weeds requires a coordinated, ongoing removal program incorporating several different methods depending on the situation and degree of infestation. While there is a strong general understanding of what is required to repair degraded wetlands, the solutions are very often site-specific. In line with the recommendations in section 5.4.3, a high priority needs to be
Pigs cause a general disturbance of the ground (culturally sensitive areas and rare and endangered species are at risk). They spread weed seeds and consume small vertebrates (for instance, native frogs and lizards). A National Threat Abatement Plan under the Commonwealth Conservation and Biodiversity Act is being prepared to address the feral pig problem.
55
spoils. Off-site impacts (e.g. contamination of water) are covered in sections 5.1.3 and 5.1.4.
Dingoes and dogs are responsible for killing stock. Deer were recently reported in the Rita Island area and have damaged crops in this area. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the rabbit population in north Queensland has increased considerably in recent years.
Critical Issues and Impacts Mining and extraction activities clearly have significant but localised impacts, particularly in the case of open-cut mining, which is prevalent in the Burdekin. However, many mine sites continue to exert some level of impact on the environment, depending on the standard of the mine-site rehabilitation works. In recent years, the quality of mine site remediation has improved significantly, so that longer term impacts are being more effectively minimised.
The main impacts of feral animals are: • increased release of nutrients and sediments and turbidity due to disturbance of soil in riparian vegetation and near waterholes; • loss of production due to crop damage; • higher incidences of diseases and weeds (e.g. harbouring of Foot and Mouth Disease is a major potential risk should this disease ever break out in Australia); and • damage to riparian vegetation, wetlands and soils (uncontrolled access of feral animals into riparian zones may undermine managed cattle access).
The main impacts of mining and extractive industries include: • release of contaminants (including salts and acid discharge) to groundwater and surface water; • causing surface disturbance which increases erosion and sediment delivery; • aesthetics; • residual effects of alluvial mining; • impact on water use, extraction and dams; and • being a source of weed infestation.
Current level of understanding Research on feral pigs in the dry tropics area continues. There is one feral animal research centre in the State, Robert Wicks Research Station at Inglewood. Some mapping of distribution has been undertaken in the Charters Towers area, but exact numbers of feral populations and their distribution are not well known.
Current Level of Understanding Mining throughout the catchments includes coal mining in the southern and eastern areas, gold mining in the central and northern areas, and extraction of heavy metals in the central and western areas.
The key actions for future management are: • assessing exotic disease ramifications; • promoting the adoption of improved management techniques for the control of feral animals; • improving awareness of the feral animal problem in the community; • determining priorities for research; and • supporting pest management planning at the property level.
Extraction of bed sands for the building industry is generally concentrated in the lower reaches of the Burdekin River. The impact of mining and extractive industries tends to be a point source problem. Many impacts may be addressed when dealing with the other issues such as weed invasion and sediment deposition. However, to date a comprehensive inventory of mine-sites, the nature of the spoil materials and possible risks emanating from them is lacking and constitutes an impediment to future targeted remediation activities.
Depending on food and soil conditions, some riparian habitat types may be more attractive to feral pigs than others. It is necessary to determine pigs’ habitat preferences for various types of riparian zones in the Burdekin. 5.6 Mining and Extractive Industry Impacts Definition This issue refers to on-site impacts of mining and extraction activities, tailings dams and
56
6. Prioritisation of Natural Resource Management Issues _________________________________________________________________________________ Seven criteria to assess the issues were developed:
As illustrated in the preceding chapter, the natural resource management issues that the Burdekin Catchment is confronted with are very diverse, and vary in both location and severity. Any future investment to address these issues be it through the NAPSWQ process, or other programs such as NHT2 and Rangelands to Reef will require guidance as to what priority should be given to individual issues, in which locations of the catchment specific issues might be best targeted and where the greatest likely benefit will be obtained to achieve specified natural resource management outcomes.
Four biodiversity/ecosystem health criteria: 1. Impacts on marine in-shore zones of the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon; 2. Impacts on estuarine and coastal wetlands (excluding dry floodplain areas); 3. Impacts on rivers and inland wetlands (encompasses river bank and bed, i.e. not just at the water column); and 4. Impacts on terrestrial ecosystems and coastal and inland floodplains (i.e. all non-aquatic ecosystems).
6.1 Methodology for Issues Priorisation Given the limitations in time and resources available to this study, a prioritisation approach was selected that allowed for a transparent and systematic evaluation, without the need to go through a more detailed analysis (for instance, involving more sophisticated modelling approaches). The approach used involved a semi-quantitative, structured ranking process. Eighteen workshop participants from a wide range of technical and research agencies (NR&M, DPI, EPA, QPWS, James Cook University, CSIRO, BSES, AIMS, Reef CRC) were involved in the process. They represented a broad spectrum of technical expertise and/or research background in the Burdekin Catchment. The ranking process consisted of the following steps:
Two criteria assessing impact on productive resources: 5. Land productivity: i.e. the impact of the issues on productive capacity of soil and land resources; 6. Water resources: impacts of the issues on the quality and quantity of water available for use as a resource, including the related impacts on water infrastructure (dams, irrigation systems etc.). One criterion assessing spatial distribution: 7. Spatial extent of the issue in the catchment. Scores were allocated against these criteria for each issue using the following rating scales: Criteria 1 to 6
1. Identifying and defining the list of natural resource management issues relevant to the Burdekin catchment (the agreed list being the 18 issues addressed in chapter 5); 2. Developing, defining and agreeing on a suite of criteria against which the natural resource management issues should be scored; 3. Setting up a spreadsheet-based scoring tool that enables the compilation of individual scores into generalised scores; and 4. Scoring the issues, analysing the resultant ranking and assessing the robustness of the process.
Criterion 7
1 No importance 2 Little importance
1 Local scale 2 Individual subcatchments 3 Moderate importance 3 Many sub-catchments 4 High Importance 4 Major catchments 5 Very high importance 5 Whole of basin
The scores were then processed in a spreadsheet program. There was significant discussion about the relative importance individual criteria or groups of criteria should be accorded. Rather than attempt to achieve an agreed suite of
57
weighting factors, it was decided to run several different scenarios, using different weightings: • ranking with a bias towards weighting the production criteria more heavily (criteria 5 + 6 = 66.7 %; the remaining criteria evenly weighted); • ranking with a bias towards greater weighting of the impact of issues on ecosystems (criteria 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 66.7 %; the remaining criteria evenly weighted); • ranking with all three blocks of criteria evenly weighted (i.e. 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 33.3 %; 5 + 6 = 33.3 %; 7 = 33.3 %).
Second order priority issues: • irrigation salinity; • seawater intrusion; • loss/degradation of wetlands; • land degradation – weeds. Therefore, although ranking is affected by the choice of weighting, some clear priorities emerge. The ranking procedure also clearly delineated consistent low priority issues, and ranking at the lower end is fairly unaffected by changes to weightings: Low priority issues: • Ferals; • water quality – groundwater; • land degradation – acidity; • mining and extraction.
6.2 Priority Issues for Natural Resource Management in the Burdekin The results of the ranking process outlined above are summarised in Fig. 2. Using the value of 300 in Fig. 2 as an arbitrary cut-off, the following were the highest priority issues for each scenario:
In summary, relative ranking of the issues as measured by the total scores is fairly consistent irrespective of the weighting scenario used.
Productivity bias 1. dryland salinity; 2. irrigation salinity; 3. land degradation – erosion; 4. seawater intrusion; 5. land degradation - pasture condition.
Further scenario analysis simulating gross assessment error by an individual assessor resulted in only marginal effect on the final scores and their ranking, indicating that the approach is reasonably robust in this regard (provided the group of assessors is large). The approach taken here lends itself easily to use in workshops with landholders or community representatives, and could be an additional step undertaken to assess the robustness of the ranking presented here.
Environmental/biodiversity bias 1. loss/degradation of wetlands; 2. water quality – washload; 3. water quality – ambient. Equal weighting 1. land degradation – erosion; 2. water quality – ambient; 3. land degradation - pasture condition; 4. water quality – washload; 5. dryland salinity; 6. land degradation – weeds.
It is important to point out that the prioritisation undertaken here only evaluated biophysical criteria. For instance, issues with a lower ranking in Fig. 2 because of their localised occurrence (such as seawater intrusion) are likely to be more highly ranked once the economic value of land and the subsequent value of production from irrigation using groundwater is accounted for.
These three rankings can be summarised into two levels of priority based on frequency within each scenario:
6.3 Priority Actions
First order priority issues: • land degradation – erosion; • water quality – washload; • water quality – ambient; • dryland salinity; • land degradation - pasture condition;
The workshop members that participated in the issues prioritisation process were also asked to provide an assessment of possible priority
58
Land degr. - erosion WQ - ambient Land degr. - pasture cond. WQ - washload Dryland salinity Land degr. - weeds WQ - bedload Changed flow regime Loss of riparian veg. Loss of native veg./thickening Loss/degr. of wetlands Irrigation salinity Aquatic weeds
Productivity bias Impact bias
Feral animals
Equal weighting
WQ - groundwater Seawater intrusion Land degr. - acidity Mining/extract. Impacts
150
200
250
300
350
Figure. 2. Ranking of natural resource management issues in the Burdekin Catchment (WQ = water quality; productivity bias = weighting of assessment criteria towards resource productivity; impact bias = weighting of assessment criteria towards environmental impact; equal weighting = all assessment criteria equally weighted; assessment criteria described in section 6.1). The working group also made recommendations on some of the criteria and principles that might be considered by the Burdekin Dry Tropics Board for the selection of appropriate investments.
actions to be considered by the Burdekin Dry Tropics Group (BDTG) for priority (‘no regrets’) investments. The intent of ‘no regrets’ actions is to bridge the period in which the accredited Natural Resource Management Plan for the Burdekin is to be prepared.
Capacity Building The main issue here was seen to be the need to invest in increasing the level of community engagement and actions aimed at motivating landholders to become involved in the implementation of better natural resource management practices or in the rehabilitation of degraded land. Some of the specific suggestions were:
Three categories of ‘no regrets’ investments or actions were identified with respect to the biophysical aspects of natural resource management in the Burdekin Catchment: • capacity building; • data acquisition and management; and • on-ground works.
59
• targeted geohydrological studies in the Belyando to verify the extent of the dryland salinity hazard in that catchment; • development of a geohydrological groundwater-surface water interaction model coupled to a regional salt balance for the Lower Burdekin, to enable the development of a whole-of-systems drainage management strategy for the BRIA; • use of Enhanced Resource Assessment techniques to rapidly acquire detailed soil property information in the Belyando, to allow for a better assessment of groundwater recharge; • catchment-wide surveys to obtain baseline data on type, distribution and condition of riparian vegetation and wetlands; • catchment-wide monitoring of grass cover and pasture condition using remote sensing technology, coupled to the calibration on the ground using the Q-GRAZE sites and other pasture monitoring sites; and • development of frameworks to prioritise future rehabilitation or revegetation activities required to maintain critical wetland habitats and to prioritise river reaches for reestablishment of riparian vegetation.
• continue to support awareness-raising; work through Landcare groups, fire brigades etc.; • resource more one-to-one ‘holistic’ extension and knowledge or skills acquisition support for landholders; • disseminate more widely success stories and case studies; • finance travel for landholder groups to visit and participate in activities in other catchments with similar problems but different solutions; • establish a mentor or ‘community development officer’ to assist generational change (make use of growers and graziers of high standing and skills); • target young landholders entering industry; • support landholders in developing property management plans as part of industry best management practice; and • link grants for “on ground” funds to compliance with attendance at courses, development of Property Management Plans etc. Data acquisition and management There was agreement by the workshop group that some fundamental baseline data is still not available and needs to be acquired soon in order to provide adequate benchmarks to support target setting processes. Moreover, given that the BDTG will have to target resources to ‘hot spots’, critical data sets will also be required to enable the development of appropriate prioritisation frameworks to guide decisions on resource allocations.
Any decisions in regard to the above recommended actions need to be coordinated with the NAP Queensland State-wide Investment Program (SIP), as some of the activities might be resourced through the SIP projects. The acquisition of the this data needs to be complemented by an effective data management system. It is fundamental to the successful implementation of NAPSWQ and similar initiatives that the Regional Bodies charged with the implementation have easy and unrestricted access to the data held by various State agencies and research institutions. Easy access has to be accompanied by support in interpretation and querying of data.
From the analysis of the key NRM issues in chapter 5 of this study, the following would seem to be the main priorities: • establishment of a network of water quality monitoring and gauging sites; initially at least five sites (complementing the existing NR&M stream flow gauging sites), in order of priority: Bowen River, upgrade of the CSIRO facility at Sellheim – Upper Burdekin River, Belyando River, Cape River and Suttor River; • targeted ambient water quality sampling to refine and extend the existing ambient water quality assessment framework developed by ACTFR to the whole of the Burdekin Catchment;
At present data management in the Burdekin Catchment is disparate and many datasets are held by many different organisations and are not always accessible. Unless effective data management systems are set in place, progress will be severely curtailed. Models of effective community-based data management exist (e.g.
60
fish habitat values. However, a better overview of the existing remnant wetlands and a prioritisation of wetlands for intervention is essential in order to target resources as efficiently as possible. Similar considerations hold for the revegetation of riparian zones, which is a fairly costly intervention and possibly not the best option for ground works until we have a better picture of which river reaches or wetlands stand to produce the greatest benefit.
Herbert Resource Information Centre) or could be explored (central hubs in major regional centres, reaching out to local ‘shopfronts’ in rural towns). Clarification and agreement at the State agency level on appropriate data management protocols and support structures is therefore urgently required. On-ground works As the issues review in Chapter 5 highlights, we have sufficient information and a broad range of management options at our disposal for land managers to address some of the most urgent land degradation issues. The main question, then, for implementation is how to facilitate and accelerate adoption. To some degree, this can be achieved by investments into capacity building as specified earlier.
In summary, the most important biophysical issues are land degradation (which includes soil erosion and poor pasture condition), water quality (both loads and ambient WQ), and dryland salinity. Next come irrigation salinity, loss and degradation of wetlands, land degradation by weeds, and seawater intrusion.
Based on the outcomes of the prioritisation in the previous sections, the future focus for ‘no regrets’ on-ground actions is clear – on-ground works need to target grazing management for better ground cover to effectively reduce soil erosion and improve pasture condition. To be effective, this needs to be implemented in a concerted action within a particular subcatchment to show benefits for reduction of sediment and nutrient loads. Based on the knowledge we already have on spatial distribution of soil erosion hazard, the Bowen River and parts of the Upper Burdekin catchment are clearly the hot spots requiring intervention.
Priority actions were grouped and discussed in three categories: capacitybuilding, data acquisition and on-ground works. Immediate investment in capacitybuilding is essential to revive the interest and motivation of community members and individual landholders so that they will take the sustainable management of their natural resources into their own hands.
In addition to actions leading to improved grazing management, fencing off waterways and wetlands are also possible high priority actions, based on the experience gained from several successful NHT projects in the CapeCampaspe and Upper Burdekin sub-catchments that promoted fencing river frontage. Fencing off waterways and wetlands and appropriate stock management near waterways is essential in improving ambient water quality and has been shown to deliver tangible results within short time frames.
In some cases, there is an urgent need to complement these actions by collecting extra data to help provide benchmarks which will allow us to set targets for future achievements. In other instances, we already have enough information to guide the implementation of effective on-ground works. Initially these works should be targeted at improved grazing management to increase ground cover levels, reduce soil erosion, reverse pasture decline and reduce sediment delivery from hotspot subcatchments.
Future priority on-ground works could also be targeted toward rehabilitation of degraded wetlands in the Lower Burdekin floodplain (e.g. control or eradication of aquatic weeds; improved quality of irrigation return flows), with fairly immediate gains in water quality and
61
7. Bibliography Ordered by Sections _________________________________________________________________________________ Characterisation of the Burdekin Catchment
Hydrology and Rainfall
General
Alexander J, Fielding CR, Pocock GD (1999): Flood behaviour of the Burdekin River, tropical north Queensland, Australia. In: Alexander, J and Marriott, S (Eds) (1999): Floodplains: Interdisciplinary Approaches. Geological Society of London, Special Publication, 163, 2740.
Burdekin Project Committee (1977): Resources and potential of the Burdekin River Basin, Queensland. Main report and 5 volumes of appendices. Department of Natural Resources (1999): Scoping study of water infrastructure development options and related issues in the Burdekin River Catchment. 3 Volumes. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane. Finlay MC (1976): The Handbook. DPI, Brisbane.
Bowen
Ceplecha VJ, Kaminskas A, (1972): Water Resources. In, Burdekin-Townsville Region Resource Series, pp 1-30. Department of National Development, Canberra. Department of Natural Resources (1999a): Scoping study of water infrastructure development options and related issues in the Burdekin River catchment. 3 Volumes. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Shire
Finlay MC, Lloyd PL (1983): The Dalrymple Shire Handbook. DPI, Brisbane.
Department of Natural Resources (1999b): Scoping study of water infrastructure development options and related issues in the Burdekin River catchment. Supplementary report. Department of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Fleming PM, Gunn RH, Reece AM, McAlpine JR (Eds.) (1981): Burdekin Project Ecological Study. CSIRO and Department of National Development and Energy. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. Gregory AC, Gregory FT (1884): Journals of Australian Explorations. James Beal, Government Printer, Brisbane.
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2000): Water Management in the lower Burdekin: Groundwater model conceptualisation. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Brisbane.
Greiner R, Stoeckl N, Stokes C, Bachmaier J, Herr A, Lavery D, Rickert A (2002): Natural resource management in the Burdekin Dry Tropics: social and economic issues. CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Townsville.
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2001): Water Infrastructure Planning Study: Burdekin River Catchment. Dept of Natural Resources and Mines, Brisbane.
Ingram GJ, Raven RJ (1991): An Atlas of Queensland’s Frogs, Reptiles, Birds and Mammals. Queensland Museum, Brisbane.
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2002): Burdekin Basin draft water resource plan. Supply planning study report. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Brisbane.
Leichhardt L (1847): Journal of an overland expedition in Australia from Moreton Bay to Port Essington. Boone Publishers, London.
Fielding CR, Alexander J (1996): Sedimentology of the upper Burdekin River of north Queensland, Australia – an example of a tropical, variable discharge river. Terra Nova 8, 447-457.
Mortiss P (1995): The environmental issues of the Upper Burdekin Catchment. DPI, Brisbane.
62
Isdale PJ, Stewart BJ, Tickle KS Lough JM (1998): Palaeohydrological variation in a tropical river catchment: a reconstruction using fluorescent bands in corals of the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. The Holocene 8,1-8.
Clarke DE, Paine AGL. (1970): Geological Series – Explanatory Notes - Charters Towers, Queensland. Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics. Tasmanian Govt Printer, Hobart.
Lough JM (1991): Rainfall variation in Queensland, Australia 1891-1986, International Journal of Climatology 11, 745-68.
Day KJ (1994): Irrigated land suitability assessment of Leichhardt Downs relift section Burdekin River irrigation area. DPI, Brisbane.
Geology and Soils
Department of Natural Resources (1998): Preliminary investigation into water harvesting potential in Alpha and Jericho for irrigation use. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Ahern C, Shaw R, Eldershaw V (1988): Predicted deep drainage loss for Burdekin soils. Interpretation by landscape units and agronomic groups. Part A, Publication QB88004. DPI, Queensland.
Department of Natural scoping study of water and related issues in Catchment. Dept of Brisbane.
Ahern CR, Shields PG, Enderlin NG, Baker DE (1994): The soil fertility of central and northeast Queensland grazing lands. DPI Information Series QI96065. DPI, Brisbane. Aldrick J (2000): Landform Generalisation, Bowen Shire. Unpublished manuscript.
Resources (1998): A infrastructure options the Burdekin River Natural Resources,
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (1999): Native Companion Creek. Preliminary hydrologic rustic analysis investigating the reliability of both a major water storage and private water harvesting proposals on Native Companion Creek. Compiled by Mark Jeffery. Unpublished.
Pattern EPA.
Bonell M, Williams J (1986): The generation and redistribution of overland flow on a massive oxic soil in a eucalypt woodland within the semi-arid tropics of North Australia. Hydrological Processes. 1:31–46.
Department of Primary Industries (1984): Land suitability study of the Collinsville-NeboMoranbah region. DPI, Brisbane.
Cannon MG, Coventry RJ (1989): Soils of the CSIRO experimental area, “Redlands”, Balfes Creek, North Queensland. Division of Soils Report 99. CSIRO Div. of Soils, Canberra.
Department of Primary Industries (1994): Overview of water resources and related issues: The Upper Burdekin Region. DPI, Brisbane. Donnollan T (1989): The Burdekin River Right Bank Assessment Yellow Gin Creek to Elliot River. DPI, Ayr.
Christianos NG, Martin AD (1998): Preliminary soil investigations: Upper Burdekin River study area. Resource Management Division, Ayr. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Fleming PM, Loos PM (1991): Flood generation and transmission in the Burdekin and Haughton Rivers, North Queensland. Technical Memorandum 15. CSIRO Division of Water Resources, Canberra.
Christianos NG, Martin AD (1998): Preliminary soil investigations Burdekin Basin: Suttor River Sub-Basin. Resource Management Division, Ayr. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Gillard P (1979): Improvement of native pasture with Townsville stylo in the dry tropics of sub-coastal northern Queensland. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 19: 325–336.
Christianos NG, Martin AD (1998): Soils and land suitability of the Salisbury Plains-Summer Hill Area, Bowen, North Queensland. Resource Management Division, Ayr. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
63
Lorimer M (1998): Catchment Management in the Desert Uplands Part 2. A Land Resource Description and Evaluation. EPA, Townsville.
Gregory CM (1969): Geological Series – Explanatory Notes, Ayr, Queensland. Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Canberra.
Mabin MCG, Lowry JBC (1996): Lower delta geology, river geomorphology and flooding frequency of the Burdekin River. Appendix B. In strategic plan for management and improvement of the lower Burdekin River. Burdekin River Improvement Trust.
Grundy M, Bryde NJ (1991): Land Resources of the Einasleigh – Atherton Dry Tropics. DPI Report QO89004. DPI, Brisbane. Gunn RH, Galloway RW, Pedley L, Fitzpatrick EA (1967): Lands of the Nogoa-Belyando area, Queensland. Land Research Series No. 18. CSIRO, Melbourne.
McClurg J (1997): Soils and irrigation suitability assessment of proposed Strathalbyn irrigation area, Burdekin River irrigation area, North Queensland. Dept of Natural Resources, Townsville.
Hyder Consulting (1998): Collinsville Irrigation Soil Survey. Report submitted to Dept of Natural Resources, Townsville.
McClurg J, Ahern C, Donnollan T (1986): Characteristics of inherently saline and sodic soils of the lower Burdekin. Landscape, soil and water salinity. Proceedings of the Burdekin Regional Salinity Workshop, Ayr, April 1986. Conference and workshop series QC86003 B7: 1-12. DPI, Qld.
Hyder Consulting (2000): Upper Burdekin River irrigation soil survey. Report submitted to Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Townsville. Isbell RF (1954): Survey of the NeboCollinsville Region. DPI, Brisbane.
McGowan R, Bore. Hydrograph database (a digital database) for the Burdekin Delta. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Townsville.
Isbell RF (1966): Soils of the East Bald Hill Area, Collinsville District, North Queensland. Soils and Land Use Series No. 48. CSIRO, Canberra. Soil
Murtha G (1982): Soils and land use on the northern & southern section of the Townsville Coastal Plain. CSIRO, Canberra.
Isbell RF, Hubble GD (1967): Soils. Fitzroy Region, Queensland. Resources Series. Geographic Section, Department of National Development: Canberra.
Nelson P, Ham G (1998): Soil sodicity: its influence on cane yield in the Burdekin. Proceedings of the Conference of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists, pp. 248250.
Isbell RF, Murtha GG (1972): BurdekinTownsville Region, Queensland. Resources Series, Vegetation. Geographic Section, Dept. of National Development, Canberra.
Olgers F (1970): Geological Series – Explanatory Notes, Buchanan, Queensland. Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Canberra.
Kent DJ, Shields PG (1984): Land capability study of the Northern Burdekin Region. DPI, Brisbane.
Paine AGL, Smith J (1972): BurdekinTownsville Region: Geology and Minerals, Queensland. Resources Series. Department of National Development, Canberra.
Isbell RF (1996): The Australian Classification. CSIRO, Melbourne.
Levingston, KR (1981): Geological evolution and economic geology of the Burdekin River region. Department of National Development, Canberra.
Rogers LG, Musumeci JB (1997): Land resources of the Majors Creek area North Queensland. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
64
Blackman JG, Gardiner SJ, Morgan MG (1995): Framework for biogeographic inventory, assessment, planning and management of wetland systems – the Queensland approach. In: Finlayson CM (Ed). : Wetland research in the wet-dry tropics of Australia: Workshop, Jabiru, NT, 22-24 March 1995, p.114-122. LWRRDC, Canberra.
Rogers LG, Barry EV, Henderson AE, Roth CH (1999): Land Resource Assessment of the Townsville Field Training Area. Technical Report 46/99 CSIRO, Canberra. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/technical Rogers LG, Cannon MG, Barry EV (1999): Land resources of the Dalrymple Shire. Land Resources Bulletin, Q980090. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Fensham RJ (1995): Floristics and environmental relations of inland dry rainforest in north Queensland, Australia. Journal of Biogeography 22: 1047–1063.
Shields K (1984): Land capability of the Northern Burdekin Region. DPI, Brisbane.
Fensham RJ (1999): Temporal and spatial patterns in drought-related tree dieback in Australian savanna. EPA, Brisbane.
Thompson WP, Cannon MG, Shaw RJ, Clem RL (1982): Soils and special land use assessment of a mining lease area, Collinsville, North Queensland. Agricultural Chemistry Branch Technical Report No. 19. ISSN 03129926. DPI, Brisbane.
Fensham RJ, Skull SD (1999): Before cattle: a comparative floristic study of Eucalyptus savanna grazed by macropods and cattle in North Queensland, Australia. Biotropica 31(1): 37–47.
Venz B (1968): Soils and land capability of the Bowen/Broken Rivers Region. Unpublished draft report and maps. DPI and Northern Division of the Department of National Development, Canberra.
Jackes, BR (1984): A guide to the plants of the Burra Range. James Cook University, Townsville.
White DA (1962): Geological Series – Explanatory Notes, Clarke River. Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Canberra.
Kahn TP, Lawrie BC (1987): Vine thickets of the inland Townsville region. In: Australian Heritage Commission. (Ed) (1987): The Rainforest Legacy: Australian National Rainforest Study. 1: 159–19. Australian Government Publishing, Canberra.
Wyatt DH (1968): Geological Series – Explanatory Notes, Townsville, Queensland. Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Canberra.
Kutt A, Kemp J (1998): Flora and fauna survey of the Inkerman and Molongle Blocks, Burdekin River irrigation area right bank. Report No. 97/24. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Bioregions, Vegetation and Fauna Australian Nature Conservation Agency (1996): A directory of important wetlands in Australia. 2nd edition. ANCA, Canberra.
Lukacs GP (1995): Wetlands of the lower Burdekin Region, North Queensland. In: Finlayson CM (Ed). : Wetland research in the wet-dry tropics of Australia: Workshop, Jabiru, NT, 22-24 March 1995, p 86-92. LWRRDC, Canberra.
Bean AR (1992): Dalrymple National Park Vegetation Survey. DEH, Townsville. Blackman G, (1996): A directory of important wetlands in Australia. EPA, Townsville. Blackman G (In Prep 2002): Biogeographic Inventory of Queensland Wetlands. EPA, Townsville.
Newman-Sutherland E (1995): Ecology of bottomland flora, Upper Burdekin River, North Queensland. Unpublished Thesis. University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Blackman JG, Lawrie BC, Locke DK (1987): Dalrymple Fauna Survey Data Report. Internal Report. DEH, Townsville.
Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage (1991): Proposal for nomination of
65
Department of Primary Industries (1995): Report on future development of the Burdekin River Irrigation Area. DPI, Brisbane.
Bowling Green Bay, Queensland, Australia as a site for listing under the convention on wetlands of international importance especially as Waterfowl habitat. (RAMSAR Convention). DEH, Townsville.
Department of Primary Industries (1999): Burdekin agro-economic study. Report to Department of Natural Resources & Mines. DPI, Townsville.
Sattler PS, Williams RD (1999): The conservation status of Queensland bioregional ecosystems. Conservation Technical Report. DEH, Brisbane.
Environmental Protection Agency (1999): Cultural Heritage in the Burdekin Basin. Report to Department of Natural Resources & Mines. EPA, Townsville.
Williams PR, Cumming RJ (1999): The vegetation of Mt Fox, Lumholtz National Park, north Queensland. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Queensland 108: 107–115.
Mallawaarachchi T, Rayment G, Cook F Grundy M (2001): Externalities in cane production and environmental best practice. Paper presented to AARES2001 45th Annual Conference of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, Stamford Plaza, Adelaide, 23 - 25 January.
Woinarski JCZ, Andersen AN, Churchill T, Ash AJ (2002): Response of ant and terrestrial spider assemblages to pastoral and military land use, and to landscape position, in a tropical savanna woodland in northern Australia. Austral Ecology, 27: 324-333.
Queensland Department of Mines and Energy (1998): Queensland Minerals and Energy Review 1997-1998, DME, Brisbane.
Land Use AEC Group (2000): Report on the Townsville Regional Economy. Vol.3 No.2. AEC Group.
Queensland Fisheries Management Authority (1996): Fisheries resources between Bowen and Tully. QFMA, Brisbane.
Anon (1997): Australian Sugar Yearbook 1997. Rural Press Qld. Pty. Ltd.
Sinclair Knight Merz Consulting Engineers (1997): North and South Burdekin Water Boards – Burdekin River Issues - Technical Issues, Crop Water Use and Economics Analysis and Legal issues. SKM
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2001): Regional Statistics – Queensland. www.abs.gov.au Bortolussi G, Hodgkinson JJ, Holmes CR, McIvor JG, Coffey SG (1999): Report on the northern Australian beef industry survey activity. CSIRO Division of Tropical Agriculture, Brisbane.
Regional NRM Issues General Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand and Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (1994): Water Quality Management – an outline of the policies. National Water Quality Management Strategy.
Departments of Environment and Heritage and Natural Resources (1999): Testing the waters, a report on the quality of Queensland waters. DEH and Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane. Department of Natural Resources & Mines (1998): Queensland Minerals and Energy Review 1997-1998. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Brisbane.
Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand and Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council, Artarmon.
Department of Primary Industries (1973): Bowen – Broken Rivers region land capability. DPI, Brisbane.
Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand and Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (1996): National
66
Principles for the Provision of Water for Ecosystems. Occasional Paper No. 3. Sustainable Land and Water Resources Management Committee, Subcommittee on Water Resources. ANZECC/ARMCANZ, Canberra.
Bristow KL, Charlesworth PB, Lowis B, Laidlow G, Gilbey P (2001): The Lower Burdekin Initiative: An industry/science partnership to facilitate improved water management. In: Proceedings of the ANCID Conference, 29th July – 1 August, Bunbury, Western Australia.
Commonwealth of Australia (1992): National strategy for ecologically sustainable development. AGPS.
Kinhill Cameron McNamara. (1996): Burdekin River Improvement Trust strategic plan for management and improvement of the Lower Burdekin River. Part 1 Planning Report.
Queensland Government (1999): Vegetation Management Act, 1999.
Lower Burdekin Initiative (2002): http://www.clw.csiro.au/lbi/
Queensland Government (2000): Water Act, 2000.
Morgan G (2000): The Desert Uplands. Draft Bioregional Conservation Strategy. EPA, Townsville.
Major Government Initiatives Anon (1997): The National Weeds Strategy: a strategic approach to weed problems of national significance. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
Musso B, Rickert A , James D (2001): A Community Plan for Natural Resource Mangement in Townsville-Thuringowa. Compiled for Townsville-Thuringowa Landcare Association Inc.
Dept of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestries Australia (AFFA) (2002): National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality Website http://www.napswq.gov.au/index.html and http://www.affa.gov.au/search/searchresults.cf m.
Rickert A (2001): Burdekin Dry Tropics Regional strategy for community based Natural Resource Management. Compiled for the Burdekin Dry Tropics Regional Strategy Group. Rickert A, Herbert S (2000): Burdekin Rangelands sub-regional strategy for managing our Natural Resources. DPI, Charters Towers.
Brodie J, Furnas M, Ghonim S, Haynes D, Mitchell A, Morris S, Waterhouse J, Yorkston H, Audas D, Lowe D, Ryan M (2001): Great Barrier Reef Catchment Water Quality Action Plan. 116pp. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville. http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/key_issue s/water_quality/action_plan/
Tait J (2000): Burdekin Bowen Floodplain community based Natural Resource Management Strategy. Compiled for the Burdekin-Bowen Integrated Floodplain Management Advisory Committee (BBIFMAC).
Garnett ST, Crowley GM (2000): The Action Plan for Australian Birds. Environment Australia, Canberra.
Statutory Planning Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2002): Fact Sheets website www.nrm.qld.gov.au/factsheets/
Marine & Water Division, Environment Australia (2003) Reef Water Quality Protection Plan: website http://www.ea.gov.au/coasts/pollution/reef/
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2002): Land Planning website: www.nrm.qld.gov.au/land/planning/
Regional NRM Strategies
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2002): Water Resource Planning website www.nrm.qld.gov.au/wrp/
Bristow KL (2001): Partnership makes progress in the lower Burdekin. Land and Water Link Number 11. CSIRO Land and Water, Adelaide, Australia. ISSN No. 1329–3389 pp.11-12.
67
Alexander JA, Fielding CR, Jenkins G (1999): Plant material deposition in the tropical Burdekin River, Australia: implications for ancient fluvial sediments. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 153, 105125.
Key Natural Resource Management Issues General Department of Primary Industries (1993): The condition of river catchments in Queensland: A broad overview of catchment management issues. DPI, Brisbane.
Alexander JA, Fielding CR, Wakefield SJ, George MT, Cottnam CF (2001): Fluvial geochemistry through a short-duration, tropicalcyclone induced discharge event in the Burdekin River and Hann Creek, north Queensland, Australia. Aquatic Geochemistry.7, 275-293.
Department of Primary Industries (1994): Overview of water resources and related issues: the upper Burdekin region. DPI, Brisbane. Gardner CJ, McIvor JG, Williams J (1990): Dry tropical rangelands: solving one problem and creating another. Proceedings of the Ecological Society of Australia 16: 279-286.
Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (2000): Australian water quality guidelines for fresh and marine waters.
Harris G (2002): Simple rules underlie the complex and non-linear dynamics of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems: Implications for catchment biogeochemistry and modelling. CSIRO Land and Water Technical Report 11\02. CSIRO, Canberra. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/technical
Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research (1991): Effects of irrigation discharge on the Barrattas Wetlands. Report 91/06. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville. Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research (1999): An initial environmental assessment of water infrastructure options in the Burdekin catchment. Report submitted to the Dept of Natural Resources & Mines. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Kinhill Cameron McNamara (1996): Strategic plan for management and improvement of the lower Burdekin River. Report submitted to the Burdekin River Improvement Trust. Landsberg RG, Ash AJ, Shepherd RK, McKeon GM (1998): Learning from history to survive in the future: management evolution on Trafalgar Station, north-east Queensland. Rangeland Journal 20: 104-118.
Belperio AP (1979): The combined use of wash load and bed material load rating curves for the calculation of total load: an example from the Burdekin River, Australia. Catena 6, 317-329.
Mortiss, PD (1995): The environmental issues of the Upper Burdekin catchment. DPI Report QO95017. DPI, Brisbane.
Biggs JS, Thorburn PJ, Weier KL, Hopp ML (2001): Nitrate in groundwaters in Mackay and Burdekin Regions, Queensland. Proceedings of the Australian Society Sugar Cane Technologists, 23,77-83.
National Land and Water Resources Audit (2001): Australian Natural Resources Atlas http://audit.ea.gov.au/ANRA/atlas_home.cfm
Brodie J, Furnas MJ (in press). Status of nutrients and sediment inputs from the Great Barrier Reef catchments and impacts on the reef. In: Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference on Aquatic Environments: Sustaining our aquatic environments- implementing solutions. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Brisbane.
White ME (1997): Listen our land is crying. Australia's Environment: Problems and Solutions. Kangaroo Press, Sydney. Water Quality Alexander JA, Fielding CR (1997): Gravel antidunes in the tropical Burdekin River Queensland, Australia. Sedimentology 44,327337.
Brodie JE, Hicks WS, Richards GN, Thomas FG (1984): Residues related to agricultural chemicals in the groundwaters of the Burdekin River delta, north Queensland. Environmental Pollution (Series B) 8: 187-215.
68
effects of land use, pp 73-76. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Brodie JE, Christie C, Devlin M, Haynes D, Morris S, Ramsay M, Waterhouse J, Yorkston H (2001a): Catchment management and the Great Barrier Reef. Water Science and Technology 43(9), 203-211.
Faithful JW (1991): Lake Dalrymple Limnological Study. Report 12 ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Brodie J, Furnas M, Ghonim S, Haynes D, Mitchell A, Morris S, Waterhouse J, Yorkston H, Audas D, Lowe D, Ryan M (2001b): Great Barrier Reef Catchment Water Quality Action Plan. 116pp. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville. http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/key_issue s/water_quality/action_plan/
Faithful JW (in prep): Limnology of the Burdekin Falls Dam. PhD Thesis. James Cook University, Townsville. Faithful JW, Griffiths DJ (2000): Turbid flows through a tropical reservoir (Lake Dalrymple, Queensland, Australia). Lakes and Reservoirs, Research and Management 5, 231-247
Burdekin Rangelands Implementation Group (2001): Community forum on water quality in the Burdekin Catchment – 3 December 2001. 58pp. BRIG, Charters Towers.
Fanning DJ, Bohl HP, (2002): Oxygen depletion in waterways in sugarcane growing areas in north Queensland 1999-2002: methods of stream monitoring and runoff experiments. Technical bulletin 2002/31. CSIRO Land & Water, Canberra.
Burrows DW (2000): Monitoring of riparian environments with respect to the benefits of fencing – Years 1 & 2. Reports 00/09 & 01/03. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Fielding CR, Alexander JA, NewmanSutherland E (1997): Preservation of in situ, arborescent vegetation and fluvial bar construction in the Burdekin River of north Queensland, Australia. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 135, 123144.
Burrows DW, Butler B (2000): Aquatic Ecology of the Townsville Field Training Area. Report 00/08. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville. Burrows DW, Butler B (2001): Managing livestock to protect the aquatic resources of the Burdekin Catchment, North Queensland. In: Rutherford I, et al (Eds) Third Australian Stream Management Conference, Brisbane, pp.95-101.
Fielding CR, Alexander JA, McDonald R (1999): Sedimentary facies from groundpenetrating radar surveys of the modern, upper Burdekin River of north Queensland, Australia: consequences of extreme discharge fluctuations. International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 28, 347362
Cavanagh JE, Burns KA, Brunskill GJ, Coventry RJ (1999): Organochlorine pesticide residues in soils and sediments of the Herbert and Burdekin River Regions, North Queensland – Implications for contamination of the Great Barrier Reef. Marine Pollution Bulletin 39, Issue 1-9, 367-375.
Fleming PM, Gunn RH, Reece AM, McAlpine JR (Eds.) (1981): Burdekin Project Ecological Study. CSIRO and Department of National Development and Energy. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
Clarke RD (1998): Water quality of the Burdekin River Catchment and proposed monitoring network. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Furnas M, Mitchell A (2001): Runoff of terrestrial sediment and nutrients into the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area. In: Wolanski E (ed.) Oceanographic processes of coral reefs: physical and biological links in the Great Barrier Reef. CRC Press, Boca Raton. pp 37-51.
Congdon RA, Lukacs GP (1996): Water quality aspects of irrigation runoff from the Burdekin River Irrigation Area. In: Hunter HM, Eyles AG, Rayment GE (Eds.). (1996): Downstream
69
Griffith DJ, Faithful JW (1996): Effects of the sediment load of a tropical north Australian river on water column characteristics in the receiving impoundment. Arch. Hydrobiol. Suppl. 113 Large Rivers 10, 147-157.
Pringle AW (1983): Sand development along the East coast, Queensland, Australia. Geography, Monograph Series University, Townsville.
spit and bar Burdekin Delta Department of 12. James Cook
Gutteridge Haskins & Davey (2000a): Burdekin River Sediment Modelling. Report on Preliminary HEC-6 Model. GHD Report submitted to Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Townsville.
Pringle AW (1991): Fluvial sediment supply to the north-east Queensland coast, Australia. Australian Geographic Studies 29:114-138. Prosser IP, Moran CJ, Lu H, Scott A, Rustomji P, Stevenson J, Priestly G, Roth CH, Post D (2002): Regional Patterns of Erosion and Sediment Transport in the Burdekin River Catchment. Technical Reports 2002 5/02. CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/technical2 002/tr5-02.pdf
Gutteridge Haskins & Davey (2000b): Burdekin River extraction and sediment management plan. Including environmental assessment. Report submitted to the Burdekin River Improvement Trust, Ayr. Gutteridge Haskins & Davey (2000c): Burdekin River sediment modeling. GHD Report submitted to Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Townsville.
Pusey BP, Arthington AH (1996): Stream flow variability within the Burdekin River basin, Queensland: Implications for in-stream flow assessments. In: Water and the Environment. Proceedings of the 23rd Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium, pp213-220. Australian Institution of Engineers, Barton.
Hook R (Ed) (1998): Catchment management, water quality and nutrient flows and the Northern Australian Beef Industry. Occasional Publication No.3. Meat & Livestock Australia, Sydney.
Roth CH, Aldrick J, Ash A, Hook R, Novelly P, Orr D, Quirk M, Sallaway M (1999): Catchment management, water quality & nutrient flows as they relate to the northern beef industry. Scoping study to identify appropriate catchments for NAP3-funded research. NAP Occasional Publication No. 4. 182 pp. Meat & Livestock Australia, Sydney.
Hunt RJ, Christiansen IH (2000): Understanding Dissolved Oxygen in StreamsInformation Kit. CRC Sugar Technical Publication ISBN 1 876679 13 1. CRC Sugar, Townsville. National Land & Water Resources Audit (2001) :Nutrient Loads to Australian rivers and estuaries website http://audit.ea.gov.au/ANRA/agriculture/docs/n ational/Agriculture_nutrient_loads.html
Roth CH, Kemei J, Fanning D, Whiting M, (2000): Cattle grazing and military vehicle impacts on soil surface condition, runoff and sediment generation of tropical savanna woodland sites in Northern Queensland. In: Proceedings of NZSSS/ASSSI Soil 2000 Conference, Canterbury NZ, 3-8 Dec. 2000.
Neil DT, Yu B (1996): Fluvial sediment yield to the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon: Spatial patterns and the effect of land use. In: Hunter HM, Eyles AG, Rayment GE (Eds.) (1996): Downstream Effects of Land Use. Pp.281-6. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Roth CH, Prosser I, Post D, Gross J, Ksiksi T, (2001): Reducing sediment and nutrient export from grazed land in the Burdekin catchment for sustainable beef production. In: Proceedings Northern Australia Beef Industry Conference, Kununurra. 35-39.
Neil DT, Orpin AR, Ridd PV, Bofu Y (2002): Sediment yield and impacts from river catchments to the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon. Marine Freshwater Research, 53:733-752.
Roth CH (in review): Relationships between land use, soil surface condition and sediment and nutrient mobilisation by overland flow in tropical savanna woodlands of north eastern
70
Bui E, Henderson BL (in press): Vegetation indicators of salinity in northern Queensland. Australian Ecology
Queensland. Earth Surface Processes and. Landforms. Submitted. Weier KL (1999): The quality of groundwater beneath Australian sugarcane fields. Australian Sugarcane 3(2): 26-27.
Bui EN, Cannon MG, Penny RS, Beech A, Riley G (1996): On the nature and distribution of soluble salts in the Upper Burdekin river basin. Technical Report 34/96, CSIRO Division of Soils, Canberra.
Salinity Ahern CR, Weinand MMG, Eldershaw VJ (1989): Salinity of Burdekin soil profile classes II - duplex and miscellaneous soils. DPI, Brisbane.
Bui EN, Smettem KRJ, Moran CJ, Williams J (1996): Use of soil survey information to assess regional salinization risk using GIS. Journal of Environmental Quality 25:433-439.
Amerasena P, Bui EN, Krogh L, Mazza GM, Penny RS, Whiting J (1996): Recharge studies in the Dalrymple Shire. Results of drilling program 1992-93. Technical Report. CSIRO Division of Soils, Canberra.
Charlesworth P (2001): Sustainable management of the Burdekin groundwater system. Water balance components for ten field sites (a digital database for the Burdekin Delta). Milestone Report to NPIRD. CSIRO, Townsville.
Arunakumaren NJ, McMahon GA, Bajracharya K (2000): Water Management in the Lower Burdekin: Groundwater model conceptualisation. Dept of Natural Resource , Brisbane.
Charlesworth PB, Chinn C, Bristow KL, Ham G (2002): Healthy crop and healthy groundwater: Sugarcane in the Burdekin delta. Irrigation Association of Australia (IAA) National Conference, 22-24 May 2002, Sydney.
Bristow KL, Charlesworth PB, McMahon GA, Arunakumaren J, Bajracharya K, Ham G, Sutherland P, Laidlow G, Lowis B, Nielson G, Qureshi E, Christianos N, Enderlin N, Eldridge S (2000): Towards a more integrated approach to water management in the Burdekin delta irrigation area. ANCID Conference, 10-13 September 2000, Toowoomba, 12 pages.
Charlesworth PB, Narayan KA, Bristow KL, Carthew M, Lowis B, Laidlow G, McGowan. R (2002): The Burdekin delta – Australia’s oldest artificial recharge scheme. ISAR-4, 4th International Symposium on Artificial Recharge, 22-26 September 2002, Adelaide.
Bristow KL, Charlesworth PB (2002):. Effective water management vital to the longterm economic viability of the lower Burdekin. In: Proceedings of the ANCID Conference, 1-4 September 2002, Griffith, NSW, Australia (Proceedings on CD).
Day K, McShane T, (1986): Predicting potential toposequence salinisation - lower Burdekin. Landscape, soil and water salinity. Proceedings of the Burdekin Regional Salinity Workshop, Ayr, April 1986. Conference and workshop series QC86003, B5:1-12. DPI, Qld.
Bui E (1997): Assessing the regional risk of salinization over the Dalrymple Shire. Technical Report 26/97, CSIRO Division of. Soils, Canberra. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/technical
Department of Natural Resources (1997): Salinity management handbook, 214 pp. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane. Department of Primary Industries (1986): Landscape, soil and water salinity: Proceedings of Burdekin Regional Salinity Workshop. DPI, Brisbane.
Bui EN, Moran CJ (2000): Regional-scale investigation of the spatial distribution and origin of soluble salts in central north Queensland. Hydrological Processes, 14: 237250.
71
Gordon I, Roth CH, Littleboy M, Kalma S, Rogers G (2000): Paddock scale guidelines for salinity management in the Balfes Creek catchment. Final Report QNR12. Land and Water Resource Research and Development Corporation Queensland. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Brisbane.
Doherty J, (1987): Leichhardt Downs resistivity survey. Report 87/01. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville. Doherty J, (1989): Leichhardt Downs electromagnetic survey. Report 89/09. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Lu H, Gallant J, Prosser I, Moran C, Priestley G (2001): Prediction of sheet and rill erosion over the Australian Continent, incorporating monthly soil loss distribution. CSIRO Land & Water Technical Reports 2001 13/01. CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/technical
Doherty J (1990): Salt and water movement in hillslope soil toposequences in the Burdekin River irrigation area. ACTFR Report 90/13. James Cook University, Townsville. Dowling A, Elliott P, Ross P, Peter P, Thorburn P (1988a): Salt and water movement in a furrow irrigated sodic duplex soil from the Burdekin River Irrigation Area. Proceedings of the National Soils Conference, Canberra, May 1988: p.241. Soil Society of Australia.
Lynch SM (1997): The prediction of soil moisture status using a digital terrain model: A case study within Balfe’s Creek, north Queensland. Unpublished Honours Thesis. James Cook University, Townsville.
Dowling A, Elliott P, Thorburn P, Ross P, Hunt S (1988b): Chloride and water movement in a furrow irrigated sodic duplex soil from the Burdekin River Irrigation Area. In: Smith RJ & Rixon A (Eds): Soil Management 88, Proceedings of a symposium, Toowoomba, September 1988: 321-335. Darling Downs Institute of Advanced Education.
Maltby J, McShane T (1986): Quality of underground water and related effects on rice growth in the lower Burdekin area, north Queensland. Landscape soil and water salinity. Proceedings of the Burdekin Regional Salinity Workshop, Ayr, April 1986. Conference and workshop series QC86003: B3: 1-6. DPI, Qld.
Duncan I (1998): Sustainability of Leichhardt Downs Lot 56 and Section 2A for Future Development. Dept of Natural Resources, Queensland.
McClelland L (1996): Soil and water chemistry and their relationship to land degradation in the Upper Burdekin Catchment, North Queensland. Post-Graduate Diploma in Science Thesis. University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Evans PA (1988): Preliminary report on hydrosalinity investigations, West Inkerman section, Burdekin River Irrigation Area. Water Resources Commission, Brisbane.
McShane T (1986): A review of salinity in the Burdekin. Landscape soil and water salinity. Proceedings of the Burdekin Regional Salinity Workshop, Ayr, April 1986. Conference and workshop series QC86003: B1: 1-8. DPI, Qld.
Gardner E, Coughlan K (1982): Physical factors determining soil suitability for irrigated crop production in the Burdekin-Elliott River area. Technical Report no. 20. Agricultural Chemistry Branch, DPI, Queensland.
Narayan KA, Schleeberger C, Charlesworth P, Bristow KL (2002): Modeling saltwater intrusion in the lower Burdekin delta, north Queensland, Australia. The Geological Society of America Conference, 27-30 October, Denver, Colorado, USA.
Gardener E, Shaw R, McShane T, Brebber L (1989): Leichhardt hydro-salinity project, Burdekin River Irrigation Area. Water Resources Commission.
PPK Environment and Infrastructure (2001): The proposed management strategy for the Burdekin Haughton Water Supply Scheme. Draft discussion paper submitted to Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Townsville.
Gillard P, Williams J, Monypenny R (1989): Clearing trees from Australia’s semi-arid tropics. Agricultural Science, 2 34-39.
72
Management of Salinity in South-eastern Australia, Albury, September 1989. Australian Society of Soil Science Inc., Riverina Branch.
Rolfe JC, Bennett JW, Blamey RK (2000): An economic evaluation of broadscale tree clearing in the Desert Uplands region of Queensland. Choice Modelling Research Report No 12. University of NSW, Canberra.
Werner A. (1999) Report on the preliminary groundwater modelling study of the Leichhardt Downs dewatering project. Dept of Natural Resources, Queensland.
Shaw R (1986): Predicted hydrology, salinity and sodicity changes under irrigation development in the lower Burdekin right bank. Landscape soil and water salinity. Proceedings of the Burdekin Regional Salinity Workshop, Ayr, April 1986. Conference and workshop series QC86003: B8: 1-16. DPI, Qld.
Williams J, Bui EN, Gardner EA, Littleboy M, Probert ME (1997): Tree clearing and dryland salinity hazard in the upper Burdekin catchment of north Queensland. Australian Journal of Soil Research 35, 785-801.
Shaw R (1989): Predicted deep drainage loss under dryland and irrigation managements for Burdekin soils. In: Rayment G and Eldershaw V (Eds): Soils of the Burdekin River Irrigation Area. Workshop proceedings Ayr. QC89003: 37-48, DPI, Qld.
Land Degradation Allingham J (1990): Some observations on historical changes in basalt soils and pastures. In The management of basalt country in North Queensland. Dalrymple Landcare Committee: Charters Towers.
Shaw R, Thorburn P, McShane T, Maltby J, Robson C (1983): The effectiveness of drainage in a region of variable aquifer hydraulic conductivity in the lower Burdekin region, north Queensland. In: Smith R and Rixon A (Eds): Proceedings of symposium, rural drainage in Northern Australia: 129-142. Darling Downs Institute of Advanced Education.
Ash AJ, McIvor JG (1995): Land condition in the tropical tall grass pasture lands 2. Effects on herbage quality and nutrient uptake. Rangelands Journal. 17: 86–98. Ash AJ, McIvor JG (1998a): How season of grazing and herbivore selectivity influence monsoon tall-grass communities of northern Australia. Journal of Vegetation Science 9: 123–132.
Shaw RL, Eldershaw V, Thompson W, Smith G (1984): Hydrology and salinity changes under irrigation - lower Burdekin right bank (Fort Site). Bulletin QB84004, DPI, Brisbane.
Ash AJ, McIvor JG (1998b): Forage quality and feed intake responses of cattle to improved pastures, tree killing and stocking rate in open eucalypt woodlands of north-eastern Australia. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 131:211–219.
Sinclair Knight Merz (1993): Environmental Review of the Burdekin River Irrigation Area. SKM and ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Ash AJ, McIvor JG, Mott JJ, Andrew MH (1997): Building grass castles: integrating ecology and management of Australia’s tropical tall grass rangelands. Rangelands Journal 19: 123-144.
Sinclair Knight Merz (1997): North and South Burdekin Water Boards, Burdekin River Issues 1996. Technical Issues Volume 1 of 3. Stenson M, Keys J, Lait R, Gordon I, Shepherd B, Bui E, Roth CH, Landsberg R (1998): Groundwater resources of the Balfes Creek Catchment. Final Report to LWRRDC. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Ash AJ, Bastin G, Burrows D, Roth CH (2000): Determining how livestock grazing and military training activities affect long-term sustainability of tropical savannah ecosystems. Final Report CTC14 submitted to Land and Water Resource Research and Development Corporation CSIRO, Division of Tropical Agriculture, Townsville.
Thorburn P, Rose C, Shaw R, Yule D (1990): Predictions of deep drainage below the root zone under irrigation from soil properties and a simple salt balance model. Proceedings,
73
Ash AJ, Corfield JP, Ksiksi T (2001): The Ecograze Project – developing guidelines to better manage grazing country. CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Townsville.
Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 19: 325–336. Greene RSB, Kinnell PIA, Wood JT (1994): Role of plant cover and stock trampling on runoff and soil erosion from semi-arid wooded rangeland. Australian Journal of Soil Research 32: 953–973.
Boulter SL, Wilson BA, Westrup J, Anderson E, Turner EJ, Scanlon JC (Eds) (2000): Native vegetation management in Queensland: background, science and value. Dept of Natural Resources, Queensland.
Grice AC (1996): Seed production, dispersal and germination in Cryptostegia grandiflora and Ziziphus mauritiana, two invasive shrubs in tropical woodlands of northern Australia: Australian Journal of Ecology 21: 324–331.
Cook FJ, Hicks W, Gardner EA, Carlin GD, Froggatt DW (2000a): Export of acidity in drainage water from acid sulfate soils. Marine Pollution Bulletin 41,319-326.
Grice AC (1998): Ecology in the management of invasive rangeland shrubs: a case study of Indian Jujube (Ziziphus mauritiana). Weed Science 46: 467–474.
Coventry RJ, Holt JA, Sinclair DF (1988): Nutrient cycling by mound-building termites in low-fertility soils of semi-arid tropical Australia. Australian Journal of Soil Research 26: 375–390.
Grice AC (2000): Weed management in Australian rangelands. In: Sindel BM (Eds). Australian Weed Management systems. Richardson RG & FJ, Melbourne.
De Corte MWM, Barry EV, Bright MJ, Cannon MG, Scanlan JC (1994): Land degradation in the Dalrymple Shire: a preliminary assessment method and results. Project report. DPI, Brisbane.
Grice AC, Radford IJ, Abbott BN (2000): Regional and landscape-scale patterns of shrub invasion in tropical savannas. Biological Invasions 2: 187-205.
Fensham RJ (1998): The influence of cattle grazing on tree mortality after drought in savanna woodland in north Queensland. Australian Journal of Ecology 23: 405–407.
Hodgins IW, Rogers RW (1997): Correlations of stocking with the cryptogamic soil crust of a semi-arid rangeland in southwest Queensland. Australian Journal of Ecology 22: 425–431.
Fensham RJ, Fairfax RJ, Cannell RJ (1994): The invasion of Lantana camara L. in Forty Mile Scrub National Park, north Queensland. Australian Journal of Ecology 19: 297–305.
Hodgkinson KC, Harrington GN (1985): The case for prescribed burning to control shrubs in eastern semi-arid woodlands. Australian Rangeland Journal 7: 64-74.
French K, Zubovic A (1997): Effect of the weed Chrysanthemoides monilifera (Bitou bush) on bird communities. Wildlife Research 24: 727–735.
Holt JA (1987): Carbon mineralization in semiarid northeastern Australia: the role of termites. Journal of Tropical Ecology 3: 255–263.
Gallant J (2001): Topographic scaling for the NLWRA sediment project CLW 12. Technical Reports 27. CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/technical
Holt JA, Coventry RJ (1988): The effects of tree clearing and pasture establishment on a population of mound-building termites (Isoptera) in northern Queensland. Australian Journal of Ecology 13: 321–325.
Gill AM (1975): Fire and the Australian flora: a review. Australian Forestry 38: 4–25.
Holt JA, Coventry RJ (1991): Nutrient cycling in Australian savannas. In: Werner, PA (Ed.): Savanna ecology and management: Australian perspectives and intercontinental comparisons. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.
Gillard P (1979): Improvement of native pasture with Townsville stylo in the dry tropics of sub-coastal northern Queensland. Australian
74
McIvor JG (1998): Pasture management in semi-arid tropical woodlands: Effects on species diversity. Australian Journal of Ecology 23: 349–364.
Holt JA, Coventry RJ, Sinclair DF (1980): Some aspects of the biology and pedological significance of mound-building termites in a red and yellow earth landscape near Charters Towers, north Queensland. Australian Journal of Soil Research 18: 97-109.
McIvor JG, Orr DM (1991): Sustaining productive pastures in the tropics 2. Managing native grasslands. Tropical Grasslands 25: 91– 97.
Holt JA, Bristow KL, McIvor JG (1996): The effects of grazing pressure on soil animals and hydraulic properties of two soils in semi-arid tropical Queensland. Australian Journal of Soil Research 34: 69–79.
McIvor JG, Gardener CJ (1991): A description of the ECOSSAT experimental site at Cardigan near Charters Towers, north Queensland. Technical Memorandum No. 68. CSIRO, Canberra.
Hughes AO, Prosser IP, Stevenson J, Scott A, Lu H, Gallant J, Moran CJ (2001): Gully erosion mapping for the National Land and Water Resources Audit. CSIRO Land &Water Technical Reports 2001, 26/01. CSIRO Land & Water, Canberra http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/scientific_ reports.html
McIvor JG, Gardener CJ (1995): Pasture management in semi-arid tropical woodlands: effects on herbage yields and botanical composition. Australian Journal of Experiment -al Agriculture 35: 705–15.
Jackson J, Ash AJ (1998): Tree-grass relationships in open eucalypt woodlands of north-eastern Australia: influence of trees on pasture productivity, forage quality and species distribution. Agroforestry Systems 40: 159–176.
McIvor JG, Gardener CJ, Spain AV (1991): A description of the ECOSSAT experimental site at Hillgrove near Charters Towers, north Queensland. Technical Memorandum No. 70. CSIRO Divisions of Soils, Canberra.
Jackson J, Ash AJ (2001): The role of trees in enhancing soil nutrient availability for native perennial grasses in open eucalypt woodlands of north-east Queensland. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 52: 377–386.
McIvor JG, Williams J, Gardener CJ (1995): Pasture management influences runoff and soil movement in the semi-arid tropics. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 35: 55–65. McIvor JG, Noble AD, Orr DM (1996): Review of stability and productivity of native pastures oversown with tropical legumes. NAP Occasional Publication No. 1. Meat Research Corporation, Sydney.
Karfs R, Applegate R, Fisher R, Lynch D, Mullin D, Novelly P, Peel L, Richardson K, Thomas P, Wallace J (2000): Regional land condition and trend assessment in tropical savannas: The Audit, Rangeland Monitoring Implementation Project, Final Report. National Land & Water Resources Audit, Canberra.
Noble AD, Nelson PN (2001): Sustainablity of Stylosanthes based pasture systems in Northern Australia – managing soil acidity. Project NAP3.218 Final Report. Meat and Livestock Australia, Sydney.
Landsberg RG, Ash AJ, Shepherd RK, McKeon GM (1998): Learning from history to survive in the future: Management evolution on Trafalgar Station, north-east Queensland. Rangeland Journal 20(1): 104-118.
Noble AD, Orr DM, Middleton CH, Rogers LG (2000): Legumes in native pasture – asset or liability? A case history with stylo. Tropical Grasslands 34: 199–206.
McIvor JG (1981): Seasonal changes in the growth, dry matter distribution and herbage quality of three native grasses in northern Queensland. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 21: 600– 609.
Noble AD, Middleton C, Nelson PN, Rogers LG (2002): Risk mapping of soil acidification under Stylosanthes in northern Australian rangelands. Australian Journal of Soil Research 40: 257–267.
75
Noble JC (1997): The delicate and noxious scrub: CSIRO research into native tree and shrub proliferation in the semi-arid woodlands of Eastern Australia. CSIRO, Canberra.
industry. Scoping study to identify appropriate catchments for NAP3-funded research. NAP Occasional Publication No. 4. 182 pp. Meat & Livestock Australia, Sydney.
Northup BK, Brown JR (1999a): Spatial distribution of soil carbon in grazed woodlands of dry tropical Australia: tussock and intertussock scales. In: Eldridge D, Freudenberger D (Eds.) (1999): Proceedings of the VI International Rangeland Congress. People and Rangelands Building the Future. 1: 120–121. VI International Rangeland Congress Incorporated, Townsville.
Roth, CH, Kemei J, Fanning D, Whiting M, (2000): Cattle grazing and military vehicle impacts on soil surface condition, runoff and sediment generation of tropical savanna woodland sites in Northern Queensland. In: Proceedings NZSSS/ASSSI Soil 2000 Conference, Canterbury NZ, 3-8 Dec. 2000. Roth, CH, Prosser I, Post D, Gross J, Ksiksi T, (2001): Reducing sediment and nutrient export from grazed land in the Burdekin catchment for sustainable beef production. Proceedings Northern Australia Beef Industry Conference, Kununurra. 35-39.
Northup BK, Brown JR (1999b): Spatial distribution of soil carbon in grazed woodlands of dry tropical Australia: meso-patch to community scales. In: Eldridge D, Freudenberger D (Eds.) (1999): Proceedings of the VI International Rangeland Congress. People and Rangelands Building the Future. 1: 121–122. VI International Rangeland Congress Incorporated, Townsville.
Scanlan JC, Pressland AJ, Myles DJ (1996): Run-off and soil movement on mid-slopes in north-east Queensland grazed woodlands. Rangeland Journal 18: 33–46. Tongway D, Hindley N (1995): Manual for soil condition assessment of tropical grasslands. CSIRO, Canberra.
Northup BK, Brown JR, Holt JA (1999): Grazing impacts on the spatial distribution of soil microbial biomass around tussock grasses in a tropical grassland. Applied Soil Ecology 13: 259–270.
Tothill JC, Gillies C (1992): The pasture lands of Northern Australia. Tropical Grassland Society of Australia. Occasional Publication No5. Meat Research Corporation, Sydney.
Partridge I (1999): Managing grazing in Northern Australia – a grazier’s guide. DPI, Brisbane.
Vitelli JS (2000): Options for effective weed management. In: Pastures for Production and Protection. Working Papers, pp. 104–113. Tropical Grassland Conference, Emerald.
Prosser IP, Moran CJ, Lu H, Scott A, Rustomji P, Stevenson J, Priestly G, Roth CH, Post D (2002): Regional patterns of erosion and sediment transport in the Burdekin River Catchment. Technical Reports 2002 5/02. Land and Water, CSIRO. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/technical2 002/tr5-02.pdf
Wasson RJ (1997): Run-off from the land to the rivers and the sea. In: Proceedings of the Great Barrier Reef. Science, Use and Management. National Conference. 1: 23–41. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville.
Prove BG, Hicks WS (1991): Soil and nutrient movements from rural lands of north Queensland. In: Yellowlees D, (Ed.) (1991): Land use patterns and nutrient loading of the Great Barrier Reef region. Pp. 67-76. James Cook University, Townsville.
Woinarski JCZ, Andersen AN, Churchill T, Ash AJ (2002): Response of ant and terrestrial spider assemblages to pastoral and military land use, and to landscape position, in a tropical savanna woodland in northern Australia. (in press).
Roth, CH, Aldrick J, Ash A, Hook R, Novelly P, Orr D, Quirk M, Sallaway M, (1999): Catchment management, water quality & nutrient flows as they relate to the northern beef
Loss of Habitat and Biodiversity Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater
76
Burrows DW, Tait JP (1999): Fish and Crustacean Survey of the Townsville Field Training Area (TFTA). Report No. 99/18. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Research (1992): Townsville Field Training Area Biological Surveys. Report No. 91/14. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville. Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research (1994): Burdekin River Irrigation Area Flora and Fauna Survey. Report No. 94/10. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Burrows DW, Kutt AS, Kemp JE (1998): Burdekin Catchment Study – A desktop study of environmental issues associated with dam and irrigation development. Report 19 ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research (1995): Limnology and classification of tropical floodplain wetlands with particular reference to the effects of irrigation drainage on the Barrattas Wetlands. Reports 94/02 and 95/12. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Burrows DW, Kutt AS, Tait JP, Faithful J, Blunden L (1999): Environmental assessment of a proposed dam site at Mt. Douglas on the Belyando River. Report 29. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville. Burrows WH (1993): Deforestation in the savanna context: problems and benefits for pastoralism. In: Proceedings of the XVII International Grassland Congress. 3: 2223– 2230. NZ Institute of Agricultural Science, Auckland, New Zealand.
Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research (1998a): Flora and Fauna Survey of the Inkerman and Molongle Blocks, Burdekin River Irrigation Area, Right Bank: Final Report No. 97/24. for Dept of Natural Resources. James Cook University, Townsville.
Burrows WH, Scanlan JC, Anderson ER (1988): Plant ecological relations in open forests, woodlands and shrublands. In: Burrows WH, Scanlan JC, Rutherford MT (Eds.). Native pastures in Queensland: The resources and their management. Information Series Q187023. DPI, Brisbane.
Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research (1998b): Reconnaissance Flora and Fauna Survey of three areas near Bowen associated with the proposed Elliot Main Channel Extension: Report No. 97/23. Prepared for Dept of Natural Resources, Townsville. James Cook University, Townsville.
Burrows WH, Coopton JF, Hoffman MB (1998): Vegetation thickening and carbon sinks in the grazed woodlands of north-east Australia. In: Dyason R, Dyason L, Garsden R (Eds.): Plantation and regrowth forestry: a diversity of opportunity. Proceedings of the 1998 Australian Forest Growers Conference. Lismore, NSW.
Australian Nature Conservation Agency (1996): A directory of important wetlands in Australia. 2nd edition. ANCA, Canberra. Back PV, Anderson R, Burrows WH, Kennedy MKK, Carter JO (1997): TRAPS – transect recording and processing system: field guide and software manual. DPI, Rockhampton.
Café LM, McKeon GM, Dyer RM, Heywodd JM (1999): Trees compete with pastures in the semi-arid tropics of the Northern Territory. In: Eldridge D and Freudenberger D (Eds): People and Rangelands Building the Future. Proceedings of the VI International Rangeland Congress.1: 291–292. VI International Rangeland Congress Incorporated, Townsville.
Burrows DW (1999): A scoping study of environmental issues associated with eight potential dam options in the Burdekin Catchment. Report 29 ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville. Burrows DW, Tait JP (1998). Environmental assessment of Reed Beds Lagoon. Report 98/14. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Calvert G (2001): The effect of grazing regime on plant diversity in tropical savannas of northeastern Australia. PhD Thesis. James Cook University, Townsville.
77
Campbell SD, Grice AC (2000): Weed biology: a foundation for weed management. In: Pastures for Production and Protection. Working Papers. Tropical Grassland Conference, Emerald.
Franklin DC (1999): Evidence of disarray amongst granivorous bird assemblages in the savannas of northern Australia, a region of sparse human settlement. Biological Conservation 90: 53–68.
Clayton PD, Skull SD, Kutt AS, Clarke G (1994): Charters Towers Weir E.I.S. Report No. 09. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Garnett S (1992b): Threatened and Extinct Birds of Australia. RAOU Report No. 82. RAOU, ANPWS: Melbourne. Hannah D (2000): The response of some reptile and bird groups to tree clearing in central Queensland. Life Lines 6.
Crome FHJ (1976): Breeding, moult and food of the squatter pigeon in north-eastern Queensland. Australian Wildlife Research 3: 45–59.
Hannah D, Thurgate NY (in press): The effects of tree clearing on wildlife in the eucalypt woodlands of the Northern Brigalow Belt and Southern Desert Uplands, central Queensland.
Crowley G, Garnett S (1999): Seeds of the annual grasses Schizachyrium spp. as a food resource for tropical granivorous birds. Australian Journal of Ecology 24: 208–220.
Hogan A, Graham P, Vallance T (1997): Redesign of the Clare Weir Fishway: Identification of Fish Movement. Report to Dept of Natural Resources. 11pp.
Crowley GM, Garnett ST (2001): Growth, seed production and effect of defoliation in an early flowering perenniel grass, Alloteropsis semialata (Poaceae), on Cape York Peninsula, Australia. Australian Journal of Botany 49: 735–743.
Hogan AE, Vallance TD (2000): Burdekin catchment water infrastructure proposals: initial appraisal of fisheries aspects. DPI, Freshwater Fisheries and Aquaculture Centre, Walkamin. 55pp.
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2000): SLATS: land cover assessment. Unpublished Data. Department of Primary Industries (1997): Declared Fish Habitat Areas in Queensland. DPI, Brisbane.
Jackson J, Ash AJ (2001): The role of trees in enhancing soil nutrient availability for native perennial grasses in open eucalypt woodlands of north-eastern Queensland. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 52: 377-386.
Fensham RJ, Holman JE (1999): Temporal and spatial patterns in drought-related tree dieback in Australian savannah. Journal of Applied Ecology 36: 1035–1050.
Kutt AS (in press): Ecology and Distribution of Vertebrates of the Desert Uplands Bioregion. PhD Thesis. James Cook University, Townsville.
Fensham RJ, McCosker JC, Cox MJ (1998): Estimating clearance of Acacia-dominated ecosystems in central Queensland using landsystem mapping data. Australian Journal of Botany 46: 305–319.
Kutt AS, Skull S (1995): Future development of the Burdekin River Irrigation Area Right Bank: Environmental Considerations. Report No. 95/02. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Fleming PM, Gunn RH, Reece AM, McAlpine JR (Eds.) (1981): Burdekin Project Ecological Study. CSIRO and Department of National Development and Energy. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
Kutt AS, Burnett SB (1997): PNG-Queensland Gas Project: Vertebrate fauna and habitats study, Townsville to Gladstone. Report No. 97/16. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
78
Kutt AS, Kemp J (1998): Flora and Fauna Survey of the Inkerman and Molongle Blocks, Burdekin River Irrigation Area, Right Bank. Report No. 97/24. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Pusey BJ, Arthington AH, Read MG (1998): Freshwater fishes of the Burdekin River, Australia: biogeography, history and spatial variation in community structure. Environmental Biology of Fishes 53: 303-318.
Kutt AS, Burrows DW, Cumming RC (1996): Pandora onshore gas pipeline Palmer River to Townsville: Flora and Fauna Studies. Report No. 96/35. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Tait JP (1998): Design of borrow pit for functional wetland basin – BRIA Conservation Area. Report 99/09. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville. Williams, S. (1993): The importance of riparian habitats to vertebrate assemblages in north Queensland woodlands. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 35: 248.
Lavery HJ (1968): Mammals and birds of the Townsville district, north Queensland. 2. Birds. Queensland Journal of Agriculture and Animal Science. 25: 243-54.
Williams S, Pearson R, Burnett S (1993): Survey of the vertebrate fauna of the Dotswood area, north Queensland. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 33: 361-378.
Lavery HJ, Johnson PM (1968): Mammals and birds of the Townsville district, north Queensland. 1. Introduction and mammals. Queensland Journal of Agriculture and Animal Science. 25: 29-37.
Woinarski JCZ, Ash AJ (2002): Responses of vertebrates to pastoralism, military land use and landscape position in a tropical savanna near Townsville, Australia. (in press).
Lavery HJ, Johnson PM (1974): Mammals and birds of the lower Burdekin district, north Queensland. 1. Introduction and mammals. Queensland Journal of Agriculture and Animal Science. 31: 97-104.
Feral Animals BRS Managing the Impacts of Dingoes and Wild Dogs.
Lavery HJ, Seton D (1974): Mammals and birds of the lower Burdekin district, north Queensland. 2. Birds. Queensland Journal of Agriculture and Animal Science. 31: 371-82.
Coman B (1991): The ecology and control of feral cats in Australia. In: The impact of cats on native wildlife. Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service.
Lukacs GP (1993): A review of the environmental effects of ponded pasture systems. Reports 92/11 and 93/09. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Harrington GN (1979): The effects of feral goats and sheep on the shrub populations in a semi-arid woodland. Australian Rangeland Journal 1: 334–345.
Lukacs GP, Thomas MOWG (eds.) (1997): Proceedings of the 1995 Tropical Floodplain Development Workshop. ACTFR and Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation.
Paton D (1991): Loss of wildlife to domestic cats. In: Potter C (Ed): The impact of cats on native wildlife. pp. 64 –69. Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service.
Mc Callum BS (1998): An investigation of native tree incursion into native grassland at Moorrinya National Park, north Queensland. Honours Thesis. James Cook University, Townsville.
Further Reading Impacts on the Great Barrier Reef Alibert C, Kinsley L, Fallon SJ, McCulloch MT, Berkelmans R, et al (2003): Source of trace element variability in Great Barrier Reef corals affected by the Burdekin flood plumes. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 67, 231246.
McGill D (2001): Broken River Fish Fauna Survey. Report to Qld Parks and Wildlife Service. Queensland Fisheries Service, Mackay.
79
Belperio AP (1978): An innershelf sedimentation model for the Townsville Region, Great Barrier Reef. PhD Thesis. James Cook University, Townsville.
Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference on Aquatic Environments: Sustaining our aquatic environments- Implementing solutions. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Brisbane.
Belperio AP (1983): Terrigenous sedimentation in the Great Barrier Reef lagoon: a model from the Burdekin region. Journal of Australian Geology and Geophysics 8,179-190.
Mitchell AW, Furnas MJ, (1996): Terrestrial inputs of nutrients and suspended sediments to the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon. In: The Great Barrier Reef: Science, Use and Management, Proceedings Volume 1, pp. 59-71.
Belperio AP, Johnson DP (1985): Postglacial sedimentation, Burdekin delta and Townsville coastal plain. In: Johnson DP, Stevens AW (Eds). Guide to the Permian to quaternary geology of the Mackay-Collinsville-Townsville Region, Northeastern Queensland. Field Conference Geological Society of Australia, pp 62-80. James Cook University.
State of the Environment Advisory Council (Australia) (1996): Australia State of the Environment Report. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Australia. Williams DMcB, (2001): Review of Impacts of Terrestrial Run-off on the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area http://www.reef.crc.org.au/aboutreef/coastal/wa terqualityreview.html. CRC Reef Research Centre Ltd and Australian Institute of Marine Science.
Devlin M, Waterhouse J, Taylor J, Brodie J (2001a): Flood plumes in the Great Barrier Reef: spatial and temporal patterns in composition and distribution. GBRMPA Research Publication No 68, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville.
Williams DMcB et al (2002): The current level of scientific understanding on impacts of terrestrial run-off on the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area http://www.reef.crc.org.au/aboutreef/coastal/wa terquality_consensus.html
Devlin M, Brodie J, Waterhouse J, Mitchell A, Audas D, Haynes D (2001b): Exposure of Great Barrier Reef inner-shelf reefs to river-borne contaminants. In: Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference on Aquatic Environments: Sustaining our aquatic environments Implementing solutions. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Brisbane.
Wolanski E (Ed.) (2001): Oceanographic processes of coral reefs. Physical and Biological links in the Great Barrier Reef. CRC Press, Boca Raton.
Furnas M, Mitchell A (2001): Runoff of terrestrial sediment and nutrients into the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area. In:. Wolanski E (Ed.) Oceanographic processes of coral reefs: Physical and Biological Links in the Great Barrier Reef. CRC Press, Boca Raton. pp 37-51.
Wolanski E, Jones M (1981): Physical properties of the Great Barrier Reef lagoon waters near Townsville I. Effects of Burdekin River floods. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 32:321-34 Wolanski E, Van Senden D (1983): Mixing of Burdekin River flood water in the Great Barrier Reef. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 34: 49-64.
Goh S (1992): A morphological prediction of Cape Bowling Green. Unpublished Honours Thesis. James Cook University, Townsville. McCulloch M, Fallon S (2001): Terrestrial runoff into the Great Barrier Reef: direct evidence from the coral record for major increases in anthropogenic fluxes. In:
80
8. Bibliography Alphabetically Ordered _______________________________________ AEC Group (2000): Report on the Townsville Regional Economy. Vol.3 No.2. AEC Group
Queensland, Australia. Sedimentology 44,327337.
Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand and Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (1994): Water Quality Management – an outline of the policies. National Water Quality Management Strategy. Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand and Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council, Artarmon.
Alexander JA, Fielding CR, Jenkins G (1999): Plant material deposition in the tropical Burdekin River, Australia: implications for ancient fluvial sediments. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 153, 105125. Alexander J, Fielding CR, Pocock GD (1999): Flood behaviour of the Burdekin River, tropical north Queensland, Australia. In: Alexander, J and Marriott, S (Eds) (1999): Floodplains: Interdisciplinary Approaches. Geological Society of London, Special Publication, 163, 27-40.
Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand and Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (1996): National Principles for the Provision of Water for Ecosystems. Occasional Paper No. 3. Sustainable Land and Water Resources Management Committee, Subcommittee on Water Resources. ANZECC/ARMCANZ, Canberra.
Alexander JA, Fielding CR, Wakefield SJ, George MT, Cottnam CF (2001): Fluvial geochemistry through a short-duration, tropical-cyclone induced discharge event in the Burdekin River and Hann Creek, north Queensland, Australia. Aquatic Geochemistry.7, 275-293. Alibert C, Kinsley L, Fallon SJ, McCulloch MT, Berkelmans R, et al (2003): Source of trace element variability in Great Barrier Reef corals affected by the Burdekin flood plumes. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 67, 231246.
Ahern C, Shaw R, Eldershaw V (1988): Predicted deep drainage loss for Burdekin soils. Interpretation by landscape units and agronomic groups. Part A, Publication QB88004. DPI, Queensland. Ahern CR, Weinand MMG, Eldershaw VJ (1989): Salinity of Burdekin soil profile classes II - duplex and miscellaneous soils. DPI, Brisbane.
Allingham J (1990): Some observations on historical changes in basalt soils and pastures. In The management of basalt country in North Queensland. Dalrymple Landcare Committee: Charters Towers.
Ahern CR, Shields PG, Enderlin NG, Baker DE (1994): The soil fertility of central and north-east Queensland grazing lands. DPI Information Series QI96065. DPI, Brisbane. Aldrick J (2000): Landform Generalisation, Bowen Shire. Unpublished manuscript.
Amerasena P, Bui EN, Krogh L, Mazza GM, Penny RS, Whiting J (1996): Recharge studies in the Dalrymple Shire. Results of drilling program 1992-93. Technical Report. CSIRO Division of Soils, Canberra.
Pattern EPA.
Anon (1997): Australian Sugar Yearbook 1997. Rural Press Qld. Pty. Ltd.
Alexander JA, Fielding CR (1997): Gravel antidunes in the tropical Burdekin River,
81
Australian Bureau of Statistics Regional Statistics – Queensland. www.abs.gov.au
Anon (1997): The National Weeds Strategy: a strategic approach to weed problems of national significance. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
(2001):
Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research (1991): Effects of irrigation discharge on the Barrattas Wetlands. Report 91/06. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Arunakumaren NJ, McMahon GA, Bajracharya K (2000): Water Management in the Lower Burdekin: Groundwater model conceptualisation. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research (1992): Townsville Field Training Area Biological Surveys. Report No. 91/14. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Ash AJ, McIvor JG (1995): Land condition in the tropical tall grass pasture lands 2. Effects on herbage quality and nutrient uptake. Rangelands Journal. 17: 86–98.
Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research (1994): Burdekin River Irrigation Area Flora and Fauna Survey. Report No. 94/10. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Ash AJ, McIvor JG (1998): Forage quality and feed intake responses of cattle to improved pastures, tree killing and stocking rate in open eucalypt woodlands of northeastern Australia. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 131:211–219.
Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research (1995): Limnology and classification of tropical floodplain wetlands with particular reference to the effects of irrigation drainage on the Barrattas Wetlands. Reports 94/02 and 95/12. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Ash AJ, McIvor JG (1998): How season of grazing and herbivore selectivity influence monsoon tall-grass communities of northern Australia. Journal of Vegetation Science 9: 123–132. Ash AJ, McIvor JG, Mott JJ, Andrew MH (1997): Building grass castles: integrating ecology and management of Australia’s tropical tall grass rangelands. Rangelands Journal 19: 123-144.
Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research (1998a): Flora and Fauna Survey of the Inkerman and Molongle Blocks, Burdekin River Irrigation Area, Right Bank: Final Report No. 97/24. for Dept of Natural Resources. James Cook University, Townsville.
Ash AJ, Bastin G, Burrows D, Roth CH (2000): Determining how livestock grazing and military training activities affect longterm sustainability of tropical savannah ecosystems. Final Report CTC14 submitted to Land and Water Resource Research and Development Corporation CSIRO, Division of Tropical Agriculture, Townsville.
Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research (1998b): Reconnaissance Flora and Fauna Survey of three areas near Bowen associated with the proposed Elliot Main Channel Extension: Report No. 97/23. Prepared for Dept of Natural Resources, Townsville. James Cook University, Townsville.
Ash AJ, Corfield JP, Ksiksi T (2001): The Ecograze Project – developing guidelines to better manage grazing country. CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Townsville.
Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research (1999): An initial environmental assessment of water infrastructure options in the Burdekin catchment. Report submitted to the Dept of Natural Resources & Mines. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (2000): Australian water quality guidelines for fresh and marine waters.
82
Blackman JG, Gardiner SJ, Morgan MG (1995): Framework for biogeographic inventory, assessment, planning and management of wetland systems – the Queensland approach. In: Finlayson CM (Ed). : Wetland research in the wet-dry tropics of Australia: Workshop, Jabiru, NT, 22-24 March 1995, p.114-122. LWRRDC, Canberra.
Australian Nature Conservation Agency (1996): A directory of important wetlands in Australia. 2nd edition. ANCA, Canberra. Back PV, Anderson R, Burrows WH, Kennedy MKK, Carter JO (1997): TRAPS – transect recording and processing system: field guide and software manual. DPI, Rockhampton.
Bonell M, Williams J (1986): The generation and redistribution of overland flow on a massive oxic soil in a eucalypt woodland within the semi-arid tropics of North Australia. Hydrological Processes. 1:31–46.
Bean AR (1992): Dalrymple National Park Vegetation Survey. DEH, Townsville. Belperio AP (1978): An innershelf sedimentation model for the Townsville Region, Great Barrier Reef. PhD Thesis. James Cook University, Townsville.
Bortolussi G, Hodgkinson JJ, Holmes CR, McIvor JG, Coffey SG (1999): Report on the northern Australian beef industry survey activity. CSIRO Division of Tropical Agriculture, Brisbane.
Belperio AP (1979): The combined use of wash load and bed material load rating curves for the calculation of total load: an example from the Burdekin River, Australia. Catena 6, 317-329.
Boulter SL, Wilson BA, Westrup J, Anderson E, Turner EJ, Scanlon JC (Eds) (2000): Native vegetation management in Queensland: background, science and value. Dept of Natural Resources, Queensland.
Belperio AP (1983): Terrigenous sedimentation in the Great Barrier Reef lagoon: a model from the Burdekin region. Journal of Australian Geology and Geophysics 8,179-190.
Bristow KL, (2001): Partnership makes progress in the lower Burdekin. Land and Water Link Number 11. CSIRO Land and Water, Adelaide, Australia. ISSN No. 1329–3389 pp.11-12.
Belperio AP, Johnson DP (1985): Postglacial sedimentation, Burdekin delta and Townsville coastal plain. In: Johnson DP, Stevens AW (Eds). Guide to the Permian to quaternary geology of the Mackay-CollinsvilleTownsville Region, Northeastern Queensland. Field Conference Geological Society of Australia, pp 62-80. James Cook University.
Bristow KL, Charlesworth PB (2002): Effective water management vital to the long-term economic viability of the lower Burdekin. In: Proceedings of the ANCID Conference, 1-4 September 2002, Griffith, NSW, Australia (Proceedings on CD)
Biggs JS, Thorburn PJ, Weier KL, Hopp ML (2001): Nitrate in groundwaters in Mackay and Burdekin Regions, Queensland. Proceedings of the Australian Society Sugar Cane Tech- nologists, 23,77-83.
Bristow KL, Charlesworth PB, Lowis B, Laidlow G, Gilbey P (2001): The Lower Burdekin Initiative: An industry/science partnership to facilitate improved water management. In: Proceedings of the ANCID Conference, 29th July – 1 August, Bunbury, Western Australia.
Blackman G (1996): A directory of important wetlands in Australia. EPA, Townsville. Blackman G (In Prep 2002): Biogeographic Inventory of Queensland Wetlands. EPA, Townsville.
Bristow KL, Charlesworth PB, McMahon GA, Arunakumaren J, Bajracharya K, Ham G, Sutherland P, Laidlow G, Lowis B, Nielson G, Qureshi E, Christianos N, Enderlin N, Eldridge S (2000). Towards a more integrated approach to water management in the Burdekin delta irrigation area. ANCID Conference,
Blackman JG, Lawrie BC, Locke DK (1987): Dalrymple Fauna Survey Data Report. Internal Report. DEH, Townsville. 83
10-13 September 2000, Toowoomba, 12 pages.
basin. Technical Report 34/96, Division of Soils, Canberra.
CSIRO
Brodie JE, Hicks WS, Richards GN, Thomas FG (1984): Residues related to agricultural chemicals in the groundwaters of the Burdekin River delta, north Queensland. Environmental Pollution (Series B) 8: 187215.
Bui EN, Smettem KRJ, Moran CJ, Williams J (1996): Use of soil survey information to assess regional salinization risk using GIS. Journal of Environmental Quality 25:433-439 Burdekin Project Committee (1977): Resources and potential of the Burdekin River Basin, Queensland. Main report and 5 volumes of appendices.
Brodie JE, Christie C, Devlin M, Haynes D, Morris S, Ramsay M, Waterhouse J, Yorkston H (2001): Catchment management and the Great Barrier Reef. Water Science and Technology 43(9), 203-211.
Burdekin Rangelands Implementation Group (2001): Community forum on water quality in the Burdekin Catchment – 3 December 2001. 58pp. BRIG, Charters Towers.
Brodie J, Furnas M, Ghonim S, Haynes D, Mitchell A, Morris S, Waterhouse J, Yorkston H, Audas D, Lowe D, Ryan M (2001): Great Barrier Reef Catchment Water Quality Action Plan. 116pp. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville. http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/key_issu es/water_quality/action_plan/
Burrows DW (1999): A scoping study of environmental issues associated with eight potential dam options in the Burdekin Catchment. Report 29 ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville. Burrows DW (2000): Monitoring of riparian environments with respect to the benefits of fencing – Years 1 & 2. Reports 00/09 & 01/03. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Brodie J, Furnas MJ (in press). Status of nutrients and sediment inputs from the Great Barrier Reef catchments and impacts on the reef. In: Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference on Aquatic Environments: Sustaining our aquatic environmentsimplementing solutions. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Brisbane.
Burrows DW, Butler B (2000): Aquatic Ecology of the Townsville Field Training Area. Report 00/08. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
BRS Managing the Impacts of Dingoes and Wild Dogs.
Burrows DW, Butler B (2001): Managing livestock to protect the aquatic resources of the Burdekin Catchment, North Queensland. In: Rutherford I, et al (Eds) Third Australian Stream Management Conference, Brisbane, pp.95-101.
Bui E (1997): Assessing the regional risk of salinization over the Dalrymple Shire. Technical Report 26/97, CSIRO Division of. Soils, Canberra.
Burrows DW, Tait JP (1998). Environmental assessment of Reed Beds Lagoon. Report 98/14. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Bui EN, Moran CJ (2000): Regional-scale investigation of the spatial distribution and origin of soluble salts in central north Queensland. Hydrological Processes, 14: 237-250.
Burrows DW, Kutt AS, Kemp JE (1998): Burdekin Catchment Study – A desktop study of environmental issues associated with dam and irrigation development. Report 19 ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Bui E, Henderson BL (in press): Vegetation indicators of salinity in northern Queensland. Australian Ecology. Bui EN, Cannon MG, Penny RS, Beech A, Riley G (1996): On the nature and distribution of soluble salts in the Upper Burdekin river
Burrows DW, Kutt AS, Tait JP, Faithful J, Blunden L (1999): Environmental assessment 84
residues in soils and sediments of the Herbert and Burdekin River Regions, North Queensland – Implications for contamination of the Great Barrier Reef. Marine Pollution Bulletin 39, Issue 1-9, 367-375.
of a proposed dam site at Mt. Douglas on the Belyando River. Report 29. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville. Burrows WH (1993): Deforestation in the savanna context: problems and benefits for pastoralism. In: Proceedings of the XVII International Grassland Congress. 3: 2223– 2230. NZ Institute of Agricultural Science, Auckland, New Zealand.
Ceplecha VJ, Kaminskas A, (1972): Water Resources. In: Burdekin-Townsville Region Resource Series, pp 1-30. Department of National Development, Canberra. Charlesworth P (2001): Sustainable management of the Burdekin groundwater system. Water balance components for ten field sites (a digital database for the Burdekin Delta). Milestone Report to NPIRD. CSIRO, Townsville.
Burrows WH, Scanlan JC, Anderson ER (1988): Plant ecological relations in open forests, woodlands and shrublands. In: Burrows WH, Scanlan JC, Rutherford MT (Eds.). Native pastures in Queensland: The resources and their management. Information Series Q187023. DPI, Brisbane.
Charlesworth PB, Chinn C, Bristow KL, Ham G (2002): Healthy crop and healthy groundwater: Sugarcane in the Burdekin delta. Irrigation Association of Australia (IAA) National Conference, 22-24 May 2002, Sydney.
Burrows WH, Coopton JF, Hoffman MB (1998): Vegetation thickening and carbon sinks in the grazed woodlands of north-east Australia. In: Dyason R, Dyason L, Garsden R (Eds.): Plantation and regrowth forestry: a diversity of opportunity. Proceedings of the 1998 Australian Forest Growers Conference. Lismore, NSW.
Charlesworth PB, Narayan KA, Bristow KL, Carthew M, Lowis B, Laidlow G, McGowan. R (2002): The Burdekin delta – Australia’s oldest artificial recharge scheme. ISAR-4, 4th International Symposium on Artificial Recharge, 22-26 September 2002, Adelaide.
Café LM, McKeon GM, Dyer RM, Heywood JM (1999): Trees compete with pastures in the semi-arid tropics of the Northern Territory. In: Eldridge D and Freudenberger D (Eds): People and Rangelands Building the Future. Proceedings of the VI International Rangeland Congress.1: 291–292. VI International Rangeland Congress Incorporated,Townsville.
Christianos NG, Martin AD (1998): Preliminary soil investigations: Upper Burdekin River study area. Resource Management Division, Ayr. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Calvert G (2001): The effect of grazing regime on plant diversity in tropical savannas of north-eastern Australia. PhD Thesis. James Cook University, Townsville.
Christianos NG, Martin AD (1998): Preliminary soil investigations Burdekin Basin: Suttor River Sub-Basin. Resource Management Division, Ayr. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Campbell SD, Grice AC (2000): Weed biology: a foundation for weed management. In: Pastures for Production and Protection. Working Papers. Tropical Grassland Conference, Emerald.
Christianos NG, Martin AD (1998): Soils and land suitability of the Salisbury PlainsSummer Hill Area, Bowen, North Queensland. Resource Management Division, Ayr. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Cannon MG, Coventry RJ (1989): Soils of the CSIRO experimental area, “Redlands”, Balfes Creek, North Queensland. Division of Soils Report 99. CSIRO Div. of Soils, Canberra.
Clarke DE, Paine AGL. (1970): Geological Series – Explanatory Notes - Charters Towers, Queensland. Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics. Tasmanian Govt Printer, Hobart.
Cavanagh JE, Burns KA, Brunskill GJ, Coventry RJ (1999): Organochlorine pesticide 85
Day K, McShane T, (1986): Predicting potential toposequence salinisation - lower Burdekin. Landscape, soil and water salinity. Proceedings of the Burdekin Regional Salinity Workshop, Ayr, April 1986. Conference and workshop series QC86003, B5:1-12. DPI, Qld.
Clarke RD (1998): Water quality of the Burdekin River Catchment and proposed monitoring network. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane. Clayton PD, Skull SD, Kutt AS, Clarke G (1994): Charters Towers Weir E.I.S. Report No. 09. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Day KJ (1994): Irrigated land suitability assessment of Leichhardt Downs relift section Burdekin River irrigation area. DPI, Brisbane.
Coman B (1991): The ecology and control of feral cats in Australia. In: The impact of cats on native wildlife. Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service.
De Corte MWM, Barry EV, Bright MJ, Cannon MG, Scanlan JC (1994): Land degradation in the Dalrymple Shire: a preliminary assessment method and results. Project report. DPI, Brisbane.
Commonwealth of Australia (1992): National strategy for ecologically sustainable development. AGPS.
Dept of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestries Australia (AFFA) (2002): National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality Website http://www.napswq.gov.au/index.html and http://www.affa.gov.au/search/searchresults.cf m.
Congdon RA, Lukacs GP (1996): Water quality aspects of irrigation runoff from the Burdekin River Irrigation Area. In: Hunter HM, Eyles AG, Rayment GE (Eds.). (1996): Downstream effects of land use, pp 73-76. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Departments of Environment and Heritage and Natural Resources (1999): Testing the waters, a report on the quality of Queensland waters. DEH and Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Cook FJ, Hicks W, Gardner EA, Carlin GD, Froggatt DW (2000a): Export of acidity in drainage water from acid sulfate soils. Marine Pollution Bulletin 41,319-326. Coventry RJ, Holt JA, Sinclair DF (1988): Nutrient cycling by mound-building termites in low-fertility soils of semi-arid tropical Australia. Australian Journal of Soil Research 26: 375–390.
Department of Natural Resources (1997): Salinity management handbook, 214 pp. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane. Department of Natural scoping study of water and related issues in Catchment. Dept of Brisbane.
Crome FHJ (1976): Breeding, moult and food of the squatter pigeon in north-eastern Queensland. Australian Wildlife Research 3: 45–59.
Resources (1998): A infrastructure options the Burdekin River Natural Resources,
Department of Natural Resources (1998): Preliminary investigation into water harvesting potential in Alpha and Jericho for irrigation use. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Crowley G, Garnett S (1999): Seeds of the annual grasses Schizachyrium spp. as a food resource for tropical granivorous birds. Australian Journal of Ecology 24: 208–220. Crowley GM, Garnett ST (2001): Growth, seed production and effect of defoliation in an early flowering perenniel grass, Alloteropsis semialata (Poaceae), on Cape York Peninsula, Australia. Australian Journal of Botany 49: 735–743.
Department of Natural Resources (1999a): Scoping study of water infrastructure development options and related issues in the Burdekin River Catchment. 3 Volumes. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
86
Department of Primary Industries (1984): Land suitability study of the CollinsvilleNebo-Moranbah region. DPI, Brisbane.
Department of Natural Resources (1999b): Scoping study of water infrastructure development options and related issues in the Burdekin River catchment. Supplementary report. Department of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Department of Primary Industries (1986): Landscape, soil and water salinity: Proceedings of Burdekin Regional Salinity Workshop. DPI, Brisbane.
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (1998): Queensland Minerals and Energy Review 1997-1998. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Brisbane.
Department of Primary Industries (1993): The condition of river catchments in Queensland: A broad overview of catchment management issues. DPI, Brisbane.
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (1999): Native Companion Creek. Preliminary hydrologic rustic analysis investigating the reliability of both a major water storage and private water harvesting proposals on Native Companion Creek. Compiled by Mark Jeffery. Unpublished.
Department of Primary Industries (1994): Overview of water resources and related issues: The Upper Burdekin Region. DPI, Brisbane. Department of Primary Industries (1995): Report on future development of the Burdekin River Irrigation Area. DPI, Brisbane.
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2000): SLATS: land cover assessment. Unpublished Data.
Department of Primary Industries (1997): Declared Fish Habitat Areas in Queensland. DPI, Brisbane.
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2000): Water Management in the lower Burdekin: Groundwater model conceptualisation. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Brisbane.
Department of Primary Industries (1999): Burdekin agro-economic study. Report to Department of Natural Resources & Mines. DPI, Townsville.
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2001): Water Infrastructure Planning Study: Burdekin River Catchment. Dept of Natural Resources and Mines, Brisbane.
Devlin M, Brodie J, Waterhouse J, Mitchell A, Audas D, Haynes D (2001a): Exposure of Great Barrier Reef inner-shelf reefs to riverborne contaminants. In: Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference on Aquatic Environments: Sustaining our aquatic environments- Implementing solutions. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Brisbane.
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2002): Burdekin Basin draft water resource plan. Supply planning study report. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Brisbane. Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2002): Fact Sheets website www.nrm.qld.gov.au/factsheets/ Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2002): Land Planning website www.nrm.qld.gov.au/land/planning/
Devlin M, Waterhouse J, Taylor J, Brodie J (2001b): Flood plumes in the Great Barrier Reef: spatial and temporal patterns in composition and distribution. GBRMPA Research Publication No 68, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville.
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2002): Water Resource Planning website www.nrm.qld.gov.au/wrp/
Doherty J (1987): Leichhardt Downs resistivity survey. Report 87/01. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Department of Primary Industries (1973): Bowen – Broken Rivers region land capability. DPI, Brisbane.
Doherty J (1989): Leichhardt Downs electromagnetic survey. Report 89/09. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville. 87
Fanning DJ, Bohl HP, (2002): Oxygen depletion in waterways in sugarcane growing areas in north Queensland 1999-2002: methods of stream monitoring and runoff experiments. Technical bulletin 2002/31. CSIRO Land & Water, Canberra.
Doherty J (1990): Salt and water movement in hillslope soil toposequences in the Burdekin River irrigation area. ACTFR Report 90/13. James Cook University, Townsville. Donnollan T (1989): The Burdekin River Right Bank Assessment Yellow Gin Creek to Elliot River. DPI, Ayr.
Fensham RJ (1995): Floristics and environmental relations of inland dry rainforest in north Queensland, Australia. Journal of Biogeography 22: 1047–1063.
Dowling A, Elliott P, Ross P, Peter P, Thorburn P (1988): Salt and water movement in a furrow irrigated sodic duplex soil from the Burdekin River Irrigation Area. Proceedings of the National Soils Conference, Canberra, May 1988: p.241. Soil Society of Australia.
Fensham RJ (1998): The influence of cattle grazing on tree mortality after drought in savanna woodland in north Queensland. Australian Journal of Ecology 23: 405–407.
Dowling A, Elliott P, Thorburn P, Ross P, Hunt S (1988): Chloride and water movement in a furrow irrigated sodic duplex soil from the Burdekin River Irrigation Area. In: Smith RJ & Rixon A (Eds): Soil Management 88, Proceedings of a symposium, Toowoomba, September 1988: 321-335. Darling Downs Institute of Advanced Education.
Fensham RJ (1999): Temporal and spatial patterns in drought-related tree dieback in Australian savanna. EPA, Brisbane.
Duncan I (1998): Sustainability of Leichhardt Downs Lot 56 and Section 2A for Future Development. Dept of Natural Resources, Queensland.
Fensham RJ, Skull SD (1999): Before cattle: a comparative floristic study of Eucalyptus savanna grazed by macropods and cattle in North Queensland, Australia. Biotropica 31(1): 37–47.
Fensham RJ, Holman JE (1999): Temporal and spatial patterns in drought-related tree dieback in Australian savannah. Journal of Applied Ecology 36: 1035–1050.
Environmental Protection Agency (1999): Cultural Heritage in the Burdekin Basin. Report to Department of Natural Resources & Mines. EPA, Townsville.
Fensham RJ, Fairfax RJ, Cannell RJ (1994): The invasion of Lantana camara L. in Forty Mile Scrub National Park, north Queensland. Australian Journal of Ecology 19: 297–305.
Evans PA (1988): Preliminary report on hydrosalinity investigations, West Inkerman section, Burdekin River Irrigation Area. Water Resources Commission, Brisbane.
Fensham RJ, McCosker JC, Cox MJ (1998): Estimating clearance of Acacia-dominated ecosystems in central Queensland using landsystem mapping data. Australian Journal of Botany 46: 305–319.
Faithful JW (1991): Lake Dalrymple Limnological Study. Report 12 ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville. Faithful JW (in prep): Limnology of the Burdekin Falls Dam. PhD Thesis. James Cook University, Townsville.
Fielding CR, Alexander J (1996): Sedimentology of the upper Burdekin River of north Queensland, Australia – an example of a tropical, variable discharge river. Terra Nova 8, 447-457.
Faithful JW, Griffiths DJ (2000): Turbid flows through a tropical reservoir (Lake Dalrymple, Queensland, Australia). Lakes and Reservoirs, Research and Management 5, 231-247
Fielding CR, Alexander JA, NewmanSutherland E (1997): Preservation of in situ, arborescent vegetation and fluvial bar construction in the Burdekin River of north Queensland, Australia. Palaeogeography,
88
Gardner CJ, McIvor JG, Williams J (1990): Dry tropical rangelands: solving one problem and creating another. Proceedings of the Ecological Society of Australia 16: 279-286.
Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 135, 123144. Fielding CR, Alexander JA, McDonald R (1999): Sedimentary facies from groundpenetrating radar surveys of the modern, upper Burdekin River of north Queensland, Australia: consequences of extreme discharge fluctuations. International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 28, 347362
Gardner E, Coughlan K (1982): Physical factors determining soil suitability for irrigated crop production in the BurdekinElliott River area. Technical Report no. 20. Agricultural Chemistry Branch, DPI, Queensland. Gardner E, Shaw R, McShane T, Brebber L (1989): Leichhardt hydro-salinity project, Burdekin River Irrigation area. Water Resources Commission.
Finlay MC (1976): The Bowen Shire Handbook. DPI, Brisbane. Finlay MC, Lloyd PL (1983): The Dalrymple Shire Handbook. DPI, Brisbane.
Garnett S (1992): Threatened and Extinct Birds of Australia. RAOU Report No. 82. RAOU, ANPWS: Melbourne.
Fleming PM, Gunn RH, Reece AM, McAlpine JR (Eds.) (1981): Burdekin Project Ecological Study. CSIRO and Department of National Development and Energy. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
Garnett ST, Crowley GM (2000): The Action Plan for Australian Birds. Environment Australia, Canberra.
Fleming PM, Loos PM (1991): Flood generation and transmission in the Burdekin and Haughton Rivers, North Queensland. Technical Memorandum 15. CSIRO Division of Water Resources, Canberra.
Gill AM (1975): Fire and the Australian flora: a review. Australian Forestry 38: 4–25. Gillard P (1979): Improvement of native pasture with Townsville stylo in the dry tropics of sub-coastal northern Queensland. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 19: 325– 336.
Franklin DC (1999): Evidence of disarray amongst granivorous bird assemblages in the savannas of northern Australia, a region of sparse human settlement. Biological Conservation 90: 53–68.
Gillard P, Williams J, Monypenny R (1989): Clearing trees from Australia’s semi-arid tropics. Agricultural Science, 2 34-39.
French K, Zubovic A (1997): Effect of the weed Chrysanthemoides monilifera (Bitou bush) on bird communities. Wildlife Research 24: 727–735.
Goh S (1992): A morphological prediction of Cape Bowling Green. Unpublished Honours Thesis. James Cook University, Townsville.
Furnas M, Mitchell A (2001): Runoff of terrestrial sediment and nutrients into the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area. In: Wolanski E (ed.) Oceanographic processes of coral reefs: physical and biological links in the Great Barrier Reef. CRC Press, Boca Raton. pp 37-51.
Gordon I, Roth CH, Littleboy M, Kalma S, Rogers G (2000): Paddock scale guidelines for salinity management in the Balfes Creek catchment. Final Report QNR12. Land and Water Resource Research and Development Corporation Queensland. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Brisbane.
Gallant J (2001): Topographic scaling for the NLWRA sediment project CLW 12. Technical Reports 27. CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/technica l
Greene RSB, Kinnell PIA, Wood JT (1994): Role of plant cover and stock trampling on runoff and soil erosion from semi-arid
89
Gutteridge Haskins & Davey (2000a): Burdekin River Sediment Modelling. Report on Preliminary HEC-6 Model. GHD Report submitted to Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Townsville.
wooded rangeland. Australian Journal of Soil Research 32: 953–973. Gregory AC, Gregory FT (1884): Journals of Australian Explorations. James Beal, Government Printer, Brisbane.
Gutteridge Haskins & Davey (2000b): Burdekin River extraction and sediment management plan. Including environmental assessment. Report submitted to the Burdekin River Improvement Trust, Ayr.
Gregory CM (1969): Geological Series – Explanatory Notes, Ayr, Queensland. Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Canberra.
Gutteridge Haskins & Davey (2000c): Burdekin River sediment modeling. GHD Report submitted to Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Townsville.
Greiner R, Stoeckl N, Stokes C, Bachmaier J, Herr A, Lavery D, Rickert A (2002): Natural resource management in the Burdekin Dry Tropics: social and economic issues. CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Townsville.
Hannah D (2000): The response of some reptile and bird groups to tree clearing in central Queensland. Life Lines 6.
Grice AC (1996): Seed production, dispersal and germination in Cryptostegia grandiflora and Ziziphus mauritiana, two invasive shrubs in tropical woodlands of northern Australia: Australian Journal of Ecology 21: 324–331.
Hannah D, Thurgate NY (in press): The effects of tree clearing on wildlife in the eucalypt woodlands of the Northern Brigalow Belt and Southern Desert Uplands, central Queensland.
Grice AC (1998): Ecology in the management of invasive rangeland shrubs: a case study of Indian Jujube (Ziziphus mauritiana). Weed Science 46: 467–474.
Harrington GN (1979): The effects of feral goats and sheep on the shrub populations in a semi-arid woodland. Australian Rangeland Journal 1: 334–345.
Grice AC (2000): Weed management in Australian rangelands. In: Sindel BM (Eds). Australian Weed Management Systems. Richardson RG & FJ, Melbourne.
Harris G (2002): Simple rules underlie the complex and non-linear dynamics of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems: Implications for catchment biogeochemistry and modelling. CSIRO Land and Water Technical Report 11\02. CSIRO, Canberra. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/technica l
Grice AC, Radford IJ, Abbott BN (2000): Regional and landscape-scale patterns of shrub invasion in tropical savannas. Biological Invasions 2: 187-205. Griffith DJ, Faithful JW (1996): Effects of the sediment load of a tropical north Australian river on water column characteristics in the receiving impoundment. Arch. Hydrobiol. Suppl. 113 Large Rivers 10, 147-157.
Hodgins IW, Rogers RW (1997): Correlations of stocking with the cryptogamic soil crust of a semi-arid rangeland in southwest Queensland. Australian Journal of Ecology 22: 425–431.
Grundy M, Bryde NJ (1991): Land Resources of the Einasleigh – Atherton Dry Tropics. DPI Report QO89004. DPI, Brisbane.
Hodgkinson KC, Harrington GN (1985): The case for prescribed burning to control shrubs in eastern semi-arid woodlands. Australian Rangeland Journal 7: 64-74.
Gunn RH, Galloway RW, Pedley L, Fitzpatrick EA (1967): Lands of the NogoaBelyando area, Queensland. Land Research Series No. 18. CSIRO, Melbourne.
90
http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/technica l
Hogan A, Graham P, Vallance T (1997): Redesign of the Clare Weir Fishway: Identification of Fish Movement. Report to Dept of Natural Resources. 11pp.
Hunt RJ, Christiansen IH (2000): Understanding Dissolved Oxygen in StreamsInformation Kit. CRC Sugar Technical Publication ISBN 1 876679 13 1. CRC Sugar, Townsville.
Hogan AE, Vallance TD (2000): Burdekin catchment water infrastructure proposals: initial appraisal of fisheries aspects. DPI, Freshwater Fisheries and Aquaculture Centre, Walkamin. 55pp.
Hyder Consulting (1998): Collinsville Irrigation Soil Survey. Report submitted to Dept of Natural Resources, Townsville.
Holt JA (1987): Carbon mineralization in semi-arid northeastern Australia: the role of termites. Journal of Tropical Ecology 3: 255– 263.
Hyder Consulting (2000): Upper Burdekin River irrigation soil survey. Report submitted to Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Townsville.
Holt JA, Coventry RJ (1988): The effects of tree clearing and pasture establishment on a population of mound-building termites (Isoptera) in northern Queensland. Australian Journal of Ecology 13: 321–325.
Ingram GJ, Raven RJ (1991): An Atlas of Queensland’s Frogs, Reptiles, Birds and Mammals. Queensland Museum, Brisbane.
Holt JA, Coventry RJ (1991): Nutrient cycling in Australian savannas. In: Werner, PA (Ed.): Savanna ecology and management: Australian perspectives and intercontinental comparisons. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.
Isbell RF (1954): Survey of the NeboCollinsville Region. DPI, Brisbane. Isbell RF (1966): Soils of the East Bald Hill Area, Collinsville District, North Queensland. Soils and Land Use Series No. 48. CSIRO, Canberra.
Holt JA, Coventry RJ, Sinclair DF (1980): Some aspects of the biology and pedological significance of mound-building termites in a red and yellow earth landscape near Charters Towers, north Queensland. Australian Journal of Soil Research 18: 97-109.
Isbell RF (1996): The Australian Classification. CSIRO, Melbourne.
Soil
Isbell RF, Hubble GD (1967): Soils. Fitzroy Region, Queensland. Resources Series. Geographic Section, Department of National Development: Canberra.
Holt JA, Bristow KL, McIvor JG (1996): The effects of grazing pressure on soil animals and hydraulic properties of two soils in semi-arid tropical Queensland. Australian Journal of Soil Research 34: 69–79.
Isbell RF, Murtha GG (1972): BurdekinTownsville Region, Queensland. Resources Series, Vegetation. Geographic Section, Dept. of National Development, Canberra.
Hook R (Ed) (1998): Catchment management, water quality and nutrient flows and the Northern Australian Beef Industry. Occasional Publication No.3. Meat & Livestock Australia, Sydney.
Isdale PJ, Stewart BJ, Tickle KS Lough JM (1998): Palaeohydrological variation in a tropical river catchment: a reconstruction using fluorescent bands in corals of the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. The Holocene 8,1-8.
Hughes AO, Prosser IP, Stevenson J, Scott A, Lu H, Gallant J, Moran CJ (2001): Gully erosion mapping for the National Land and Water Resources Audit. CSIRO Land &Water Technical Reports 2001, 26/01. CSIRO Land & Water, Canberra.
Jackes, BR (1984): A guide to the plants of the Burra Range. James Cook University, Townsville.
91
Kutt AS, Skull S (1995): Future development of the Burdekin River Irrigation Area Right Bank: Environmental Considerations. Report No. 95/02. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Jackson J, Ash AJ (1998): Tree-grass relationships in open eucalypt woodlands of north-eastern Australia: influence of trees on pasture productivity, forage quality and species distribution. Agroforestry Systems 40: 159–176.
Kutt AS, Burnett SB (1997): PNGQueensland Gas Project: Vertebrate fauna and habitats study, Townsville to Gladstone. Report No. 97/16. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Jackson J, Ash AJ (2001): The role of trees in enhancing soil nutrient availability for native perennial grasses in open eucalypt woodlands of north-east Queensland. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 52: 377–386.
Kutt AS, Burrows DW, Cumming RC (1996): Pandora onshore gas pipeline Palmer River to Townsville: Flora and Fauna Studies. Report No. 96/35. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Kahn TP, Lawrie BC (1987): Vine thickets of the inland Townsville region. In: Australian Heritage Commission. (Ed) (1987): The Rainforest Legacy: Australian National Rainforest Study. 1: 159–19. Australian Government Publishing, Canberra.
Landsberg RG, Ash AJ, Shepherd RK, McKeon GM (1998): Learning from history to survive in the future: management evolution on Trafalgar Station, north-east Queensland. Rangeland Journal 20: 104-118.
Karfs R, Applegate R, Fisher R, Lynch D, Mullin D, Novelly P, Peel L, Richardson K, Thomas P, Wallace J (2000): Regional land condition and trend assessment in tropical savannas: The Audit, Rangeland Monitoring Implementation Project, Final Report. National Land & Water Resources Audit, Canberra.
Lavery HJ (1968): Mammals and birds of the Townsville district, north Queensland. 2. Birds. Queensland Journal of Agriculture and Animal Science. 25: 243-54. Lavery HJ, Johnson PM (1968): Mammals and birds of the Townsville district, north Queensland. 1. Introduction and mammals. Queensland Journal of Agriculture and Animal Science. 25: 29-37.
Kent DJ, Shields PG (1984): Land capability study of the Northern Burdekin Region. DPI, Brisbane. Kinhill Cameron McNamara (1996): Strategic plan for management and improvement of the lower Burdekin River. Report submitted to the Burdekin River Improvement Trust.
Lavery HJ, Johnson PM (1974): Mammals and birds of the lower Burdekin district, north Queensland. 1. Introduction and mammals. Queensland Journal of Agriculture and Animal Science. 31: 97-104.
Kinhill Cameron McNamara. (1996): Burdekin River Improvement Trust strategic plan for management and improvement of the Lower Burdekin River. Part 1 Planning Report.
Lavery HJ, Seton D (1974): Mammals and birds of the lower Burdekin district, north Queensland. 2. Birds. Queensland Journal of Agriculture and Animal Science. 31: 371-82.
Kutt A, Kemp J (1998): Flora and fauna survey of the Inkerman and Molongle Blocks, Burdekin River irrigation area right bank. Report No. 97/24. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Leichhardt L (1847): Journal of an overland expedition in Australia from Moreton Bay to Port Essington. Boone Publishers, London. Levingston, KR (1981): Geological evolution and economic geology of the Burdekin River region. Department of National Development, Canberra.
Kutt AS (in press): Ecology and Distribution of Vertebrates of the Desert Uplands Bioregion. PhD Thesis. James Cook University, 92
Conference of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, Stamford Plaza, Adelaide, 23 - 25 January.
Lorimer M (1998): Catchment Management in the Desert Uplands Part 2. A Land Resource Description and Evaluation. EPA, Townsville.
Maltby J, McShane T (1986): Quality of underground water and related effects on rice growth in the lower Burdekin area, north Queensland. Landscape soil and water salinity. Proceedings of the Burdekin Regional Salinity Workshop, Ayr, April 1986. Conference and workshop series QC86003: B3: 1-6. DPI, Qld.
Lough JM (1991): Rainfall variation in Queensland, Australia 1891-1986, International Journal of Climatology 11, 745-68. Lower Burdekin Initiative (2002): http://www.clw.csiro.au/lbi/ Lu H, Gallant J, Prosser I, Moran C, Priestley G (2001): Prediction of sheet and rill erosion over the Australian Continent, incorporating monthly soil loss distribution. CSIRO Land & Water Technical Reports 2001 13/01. CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/technica l Lukacs GP (1993): A review of the environmental effects of ponded pasture systems. Reports 92/11 and 93/09. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Marine & Water Division, Environment Australia (2003) Reef Water Quality Protection Plan: website http://www.ea.gov.au/coasts/pollution/reef/ Mc Callum BS (1998): An investigation of native tree incursion into native grassland at Moorrinya National Park, north Queensland. Honours Thesis. James Cook University, Townsville. McClelland L (1996): Soil and water chemistry and their relationship to land degradation in the Upper Burdekin Catchment, North Queensland. Post-Graduate Diploma in Science Thesis. University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Lukacs GP (1995): Wetlands of the lower Burdekin Region, North Queensland. In: Finlayson CM (Ed). : Wetland research in the wet-dry tropics of Australia: Workshop, Jabiru, NT, 22-24 March 1995, p 86-92. LWRRDC, Canberra
McClurg J (1997): Soils and irrigation suitability assessment of proposed Strathalbyn irrigation area, Burdekin River irrigation area, North Queensland. Dept of Natural Resources, Townsville.
Lukacs GP, Thomas MOWG (eds.) (1997): Proceedings of the 1995 Tropical Floodplain Development Workshop. ACTFR and Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation.
McClurg J, Ahern C, Donnollan T (1986): Characteristics of inherently saline and sodic soils of the lower Burdekin. Landscape, soil and water salinity. Proceedings of the Burdekin Regional Salinity Workshop, Ayr, April 1986. Conference and workshop series QC86003 B7: 1-12. DPI, Qld.
Lynch SM (1997): The prediction of soil moisture status using a digital terrain model: A case study within Balfe’s Creek, north Queensland. Unpublished Honours Thesis. James Cook University, Townsville. Mabin MCG, Lowry JBC (1996): Lower delta geology, river geomorphology and flooding frequency of the Burdekin River. Appendix B. In strategic plan for management and improvement of the lower Burdekin River. Burdekin River Improvement Trust.
McCulloch M, Fallon S (2001): Terrestrial runoff into the Great Barrier Reef: direct evidence from the coral record for major increases in anthropogenic fluxes. In: Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference on Aquatic Environments: Sustaining our aquatic environments- Implementing solutions. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Brisbane.
Mallawaarachchi T, Rayment G, Cook, F Grundy M (2001): Externalities in cane production and environmental best practice. Paper presented to AARES2001 45th Annual 93
McShane T (1986): A review of salinity in the Burdekin. Landscape soil and water salinity. Proceedings of the Burdekin Regional Salinity Workshop, Ayr, April 1986. Conference and workshop series QC86003: B1: 1-8. DPI, Qld.
McGill D (2001): Broken River Fish Fauna Survey. Report to Qld Parks and Wildlife Service. Queensland Fisheries Service, Mackay. McGowan R, Bore. Hydrograph database (a digital database) for the Burdekin Delta. Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Townsville.
Mitchell AW, Furnas MJ, (1996): Terrestrial inputs of nutrients and suspended sediments to the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon. In: The Great Barrier Reef: Science, Use and Management, Proceedings Volume 1, pp. 59-71.
McIvor JG (1981): Seasonal changes in the growth, dry matter distribution and herbage quality of three native grasses in northern Queensland. Australian Journal of Experiment-al Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 21: 600–609.
Morgan G (2000): The Desert Uplands. Draft Bioregional Conservation Strategy. EPA, Townsville. Mortiss P (1995): The environmental issues of the Upper Burdekin Catchment. DPI Report QO95017. DPI, Brisbane.
McIvor JG (1998): Pasture management in semi-arid tropical woodlands: Effects on species diversity. Australian Journal of Ecology 23: 349–364.
Murtha G (1982): Soils and land use on the northern & southern section of the Townsville Coastal Plain. CSIRO, Canberra.
McIvor JG, Gardener CJ (1991): A description of the ECOSSAT experimental site at Cardigan near Charters Towers, north Queensland. Technical Memorandum No. 68. CSIRO, Canberra.
Musso B, Rickert A , James D (2001): A Community Plan for Natural Resource Mangement in Townsville-Thuringowa. Compiled for Townsville-Thuringowa Landcare Association Inc.
McIvor JG, Orr DM (1991): Sustaining productive pastures in the tropics 2. Managing native grasslands. Tropical Grasslands 25: 91–97.
Narayan KA, Schleeberger C, Charlesworth P, Bristow KL (2002): Modeling saltwater intrusion in the lower Burdekin delta, north Queensland, Australia. The Geological Society of America Conference, 27-30 October, Denver, Colorado, USA.
McIvor JG, Gardener CJ (1995): Pasture management in semi-arid tropical woodlands: effects on herbage yields and botanical composition. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 35:705-15.
National Land and Water Resources Audit (2001): Australian Natural Resources Atlas http://audit.ea.gov.au/ANRA/atlas_home.cfm
McIvor JG, Gardener CJ, Spain AV (1991): A description of the ECOSSAT experimental site at Hillgrove near Charters Towers, north Queensland. Technical Memorandum No. 70. CSIRO Divisions of Soils, Canberra.
National Land & Water Resources Audit (2001): Nutrient Loads to Australian rivers and Estuaries. http://audit.ea.gov.au/ANRA/agriculture/docs/ national/Agriculture_nutrient_loads.html
McIvor JG, Williams J, Gardener CJ (1995): Pasture management influences runoff and soil movement in the semi-arid tropics. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 35: 55–65.
Neil DT, Yu B (1996): Fluvial sediment yield to the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon: spatial patterns and the effect of land use. In: Hunter HM, Eyles AG, Rayment GE (Eds.) (1996): Downstream Effects of Land Use. Pp.281-6. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
McIvor JG, Noble AD, Orr DM (1996): Review of stability and productivity of native pastures oversown with tropical legumes. NAP Occasional Publication No. 1. Meat Research Corporation, Sydney. 94
1: 121–122. VI International Rangeland Congress Incorporated, Townsville.
Neil DT, Orpin AR, Ridd PV, Bofu Y (2002): Sediment yield and impacts from river catchments to the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon. Marine Freshwater Research, 53:733-752.
Northup BK, Brown JR, Holt JA (1999): Grazing impacts on the spatial distribution of soil microbial biomass around tussock grasses in a tropical grassland. Applied Soil Ecology 13: 259–270.
Nelson P, Ham G (1998): Soil sodicity: its influence on cane yield in the Burdekin. Proceedings of the Conference of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists, pp. 248-250.
Olgers F (1970): Geological Series – Explanatory Notes, Buchanan, Queensland. Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Canberra.
Newman-Sutherland E (1995): Ecology of bottomland flora, Upper Burdekin River, North Queensland. Unpublished Thesis. University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Paine AGL, Smith J (1972): BurdekinTownsville Region: Geology and Minerals, Queensland. Resources Series. Department of National Development, Canberra.
Noble AD, Nelson PN (2001): Sustainablity of Stylosanthes based pasture systems in Northern Australia – managing soil acidity. Project NAP3.218 Final Report. Meat and Livestock Australia, Sydney.
Partridge I (1999): Managing grazing in Northern Australia – a grazier’s guide. DPI, Brisbane.
Noble AD, Orr DM, Middleton CH, Rogers LG (2000): Legumes in native pasture – asset or liability? A case history with stylo. Tropical Grasslands 34: 199–206.
Paton D (1991): Loss of wildlife to domestic cats. In: Potter C (Ed): The impact of cats on native wildlife. pp. 64 –69. Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service.
Noble AD, Middleton C, Nelson PN, Rogers LG (2002): Risk mapping of soil acidification under Stylosanthes in northern Australian rangelands. Australian Journal of Soil Research 40: 257–267.
PPK Environment and Infrastructure (2001): The proposed management strategy for the Burdekin Haughton Water Supply Scheme. Draft discussion paper submitted to Dept of Natural Resources & Mines, Townsville.
Noble JC (1997): The delicate and noxious scrub: CSIRO research into native tree and shrub proliferation in the semi-arid woodlands of Eastern Australia. CSIRO, Canberra.
Pringle AW (1983): Sand spit and bar development along the East Burdekin Delta coast, Queensland, Australia. Department of Geography, Monograph Series 12. James Cook University, Townsville.
Northup BK, Brown JR (1999a): Spatial distribution of soil carbon in grazed woodlands of dry tropical Australia: tussock and inter-tussock scales. In: Eldridge D, Freudenberger D (Eds.) (1999): Proceedings of the VI International Rangeland Congress. People and Rangelands Building the Future. 1: 120–121. VI International Rangeland Congress Incorporated, Townsville.
Pringle AW (1991): Fluvial sediment supply to the north-east Queensland coast, Australia. Australian Geographic Studies 29:114-138. Prosser IP, Moran CJ, Lu H, Scott A, Rustomji P, Stevenson J, Priestly G, Roth CH, Post D (2002): Regional Patterns of Erosion and Sediment Transport in the Burdekin River Catchment. Technical Reports 2002 5/02. CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/technica l2002/tr5-02.pdf
Northup BK, Brown JR (1999b): Spatial distribution of soil carbon in grazed woodlands of dry tropical Australia: mesopatch to community scales. In: Eldridge D, Freudenberger D (Eds.) (1999): Proceedings of the VI International Rangeland Congress. People and Rangelands Building the Future.
Prove BG, Hicks WS (1991): Soil and nutrient movements from rural lands of north 95
Queensland. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Queensland. In: Yellowlees D, (Ed.) (1991): Land use patterns and nutrient loading of the Great Barrier Reef region. Pp. 67-76. James Cook University, Townsville.
Rogers LG, Cannon MG, Barry EV (1999): Land resources of the Dalrymple Shire. Land Resources Bulletin, Q980090. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane.
Pusey B, Arthington AH (1996): Stream flow variability within the Burdekin River basin, Queensland: Implications for in-stream flow assessments. In: Water and the Environment. Proceedings of the 23rd Hydro- logy and Water Resources Symposium, pp 213-220. Australian Institution of Engineers, Barton.
Rogers LG, Barry EV, Henderson AE, Roth CH (1999): Land Resource Assessment of the Townsville Field Training Area. Technical Report 46/99 CSIRO, Canberra. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/technica l
Pusey B, Arthington AH, Read MG (1998): Freshwater fishes of the Burdekin River, Australia: biogeography, history and spatial variation in community structure. Environmental Biology of Fishes 53: 303-318.
Rolfe JC, Bennett JW, Blamey RK (2000): An economic evaluation of broadscale tree clearing in the Desert Uplands region of Queensland. Choice Modelling Research Report No 12. University of NSW, Canberra.
Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage (1991): Proposal for nomination of Bowling Green Bay, Queensland, Australia as a site for listing under the convention on wetlands of international importance especially as Waterfowl habitat. (RAMSAR Convention). DEH, Townsville.
Roth CH (in review): Relationships between land use, soil surface condition and sediment and nutrient mobilisation by overland flow in tropical savanna woodlands of north eastern Queensland. Earth Surface Processes and. Landforms. Submitted.
Queensland Department of Mines and Energy (1998): Queensland Minerals and Energy Review 1997-1998, DME, Brisbane.
Roth CH, Aldrick J, Ash A, Hook R, Novelly P, Orr D, Quirk M, Sallaway M (1999): Catchment management, water quality & nutrient flows as they relate to the northern beef industry. Scoping study to identify appropriate catchments for NAP3-funded research. NAP Occasional Publication No. 4. 182 pp. Meat & Livestock Australia, Sydney.
Queensland Fisheries Management Authority (1996): Fisheries resources between Bowen and Tully. QFMA, Brisbane. Queensland Government (1999): Vegetation Management Act, 1999.
Roth CH, Kemei J, Fanning D, Whiting M, (2000): Cattle grazing and military vehicle impacts on soil surface condition, runoff and sediment generation of tropical savanna woodland sites in Northern Queensland. In: Proceedings of NZSSS/ASSSI Soil 2000 Conference, Canterbury NZ, 3-8 Dec. 2000.
Queensland Government (2000): Water Act, 2000. Rickert A (2001): Burdekin Dry Tropics Regional Strategy for Community based Natural Resource Management. Compiled for the Burdekin Dry Tropics Regional Strategy Group. Rickert A, Herbert S (2000): Burdekin Rangelands sub-regional strategy for managing our Natural Resources. DPI, Charters Towers.
Roth CH, Prosser I, Post D, Gross J, Ksiksi T, (2001): Reducing sediment and nutrient export from grazed land in the Burdekin catchment for sustainable beef production. In: Proceedings Northern Australia Beef Industry Conference, Kununurra. 35-39.
Rogers LG, Musumeci JB (1997): Land resources of the Majors Creek area North
Sattler PS, Williams RD (1999): The conservation status of Queensland bioregional
96
ecosystems. Conservation Technical Report. DEH, Brisbane.
Issues, Crop Water Use and Economics Analysis and Legal issues. SKM.
Scanlan JC, Pressland AJ, Myles DJ (1996): Run-off and soil movement on mid-slopes in north-east Queensland grazed woodlands. Rangeland Journal 18: 33–46.
State of the Environment Advisory Council (Australia) (1996): Australia State of the Environment Report. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Australia.
Shaw R (1986): Predicted hydrology, salinity and sodicity changes under irrigation development in the lower Burdekin right bank. Landscape Soil and Water Salinity. Proceedings of the Burdekin Regional Salinity Workshop, Ayr, April 1986. Conference and workshop series QC86003: B8: 1-16, DPI, Qld.
Stenson M, Keys J, Lait R, Gordon I, Shepherd B, Bui E, Roth CH, Landsberg R (1998): Groundwater resources of the Balfes Creek Catchment. Final Report to LWRRDC. Dept of Natural Resources, Brisbane. Tait J (2000): Burdekin Bowen Floodplain community based Natural Resource Management Strategy. Compiled for the BurdekinBowen Integrated Floodplain Management Advisory Committee (BBIFMAC).
Shaw R (1989): Predicted deep drainage loss under dryland and irrigation managements for Burdekin soils. In: Rayment G and Eldershaw V (Eds): Soils of the Burdekin River Irrigation Area. Workshop proceedings Ayr. QC89003: 37-48, DPI, Qld.
Tait JP (1998): Design of borrow pit for functional wetland basin – BRIA Conservation Area. Report 99/09. ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Shaw R, Thorburn P, McShane T, Maltby J, Robson C (1983): The effectiveness of drainage in a region of variable aquifer hydraulic conductivity in the lower Burdekin region, north Queensland. In: Smith R and Rixon A (Eds): Proceedings of symposium, rural drainage in Northern Australia: 129-142. Darling Downs Institute of Advanced Education.
Thompson WP, Cannon MG, Shaw RJ, Clem RL (1982): Soils and special land use assessment of a mining lease area, Collinsville, North Queensland. Agricultural Chemistry Branch Technical Report No. 19. ISSN 0312-9926. DPI, Brisbane. Thorburn P, Rose C, Shaw R, Yule D (1990): Predictions of deep drainage below the root zone under irrigation from soil properties and a simple salt balance model. Proceedings, Management of Salinity in South-eastern Australia, Albury, September 1989. Australian Society of Soil Science Inc., Riverina Branch.
Shaw RL, Eldershaw V, Thompson W, Smith G (1984): Hydrology and salinity changes under irrigation - lower Burdekin right bank (Fort Site). Bulletin QB84004, DPI, Brisbane. Shields K (1984): Land capability of the Northern Burdekin Region. DPI, Brisbane.
Tongway D, Hindley N (1995): Manual for soil condition assessment of tropical grasslands. CSIRO, Canberra.
Sinclair Knight Merz (1993): Environmental Review of the Burdekin River Irrigation Area. SKM and ACTFR, James Cook University, Townsville.
Tothill JC, Gillies C (1992): The pasture lands of Northern Australia. Tropical Grassland Society of Australia. Occasional Publication No5. Meat Research Corporation, Sydney.
Sinclair Knight Merz (1997): North and South Burdekin Water Boards, Burdekin River Issues 1996. Technical Issues Volume 1 of 3.
Venz B (1968): Soils and land capability of the Bowen/Broken Rivers Region. Unpublished draft report and maps. DPI and Northern Division of the Department of National Development, Canberra.
Sinclair Knight Merz Consulting Engineers (1997): North and South Burdekin Water Boards – Burdekin River Issues - Technical
97
Vitelli JS (2000): Options for effective weed management. In: Pastures for Production and Protection. Working Papers, pp. 104–113. Tropical Grassland Conference, Emerald.
Williams PR, Cumming RJ (1999): The vegetation of Mt Fox, Lumholtz National Park, north Queensland. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Queensland 108: 107–115.
Wasson RJ (1997): Run-off from the land to the rivers and the sea. In: Proceedings of the Great Barrier Reef. Science, Use and Management. National Conference. 1: 23–41. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville.
Williams S (1993): The importance of riparian habitats to vertebrate assemblages in north Queensland woodlands. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 35: 248. Williams S, Pearson R, Burnett S (1993): Survey of the vertebrate fauna of the Dotswood area, north Queensland. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 33: 361-378.
Weier KL (1999): The quality of groundwater beneath Australian sugarcane fields. Australian Sugarcane 3(2): 26-27.
Woinarski JCZ, Ash AJ (2002): Responses of vertebrates to pastoralism, military land use and landscape position in a tropical savanna near Townsville, Australia. (in press).
Werner A. (1999) Report on the preliminary groundwater modelling study of the Leichhardt Downs dewatering project. Dept of Natural Resources, Queensland.
Woinarski JCZ, Andersen AN, Churchill T, Ash AJ (2002): Response of ant and terrestrial spider assemblages to pastoral and military land use, and to landscape position, in a tropical savanna woodland in northern Australia. Austral Ecology, 27: 324-333.
White DA (1962): Geological Series – Explanatory Notes, Clarke River. Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Canberra. White ME (1997): Listen our land is crying. Australia's Environment: Problems and Solutions. Kangaroo Press, Sydney.
Wolanski E (Ed.) (2001): Oceanographic processes of coral reefs. Physical and Biological links in the Great Barrier Reef. CRC Press, Boca Raton.
Williams DMcB, (2001): Review of Impacts of Terrestrial Run-off on the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area http://www.reef.crc.org.au/aboutreef/coastal/ waterqualityreview.html. CRC Reef Research Centre Ltd and Australian Institute of Marine Science.
Wolanski E, Jones M (1981): Physical properties of the Great Barrier Reef lagoon waters near Townsville I. Effects of Burdekin River floods. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 32:321-34 Wolanski E, Van Senden D (1983): Mixing of Burdekin River flood water in the Great Barrier Reef. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 34: 49-64
Williams DMcB et al (2002): The current level of scientific understanding on impacts of terrestrial run-off on the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area http://www.reef.crc.org.au/aboutreef/coastal/ waterquality_consensus.html
Wyatt DH (1968): Geological Series – Explanatory Notes, Townsville, Queensland. Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Canberra.
Williams J, Bui EN, Gardner EA, Littleboy M, Probert ME (1997): Tree clearing and dryland salinity hazard in the upper Burdekin catchment of north Queensland. Australian Journal of Soil Research 35, 785-801.
98
