Native Fish Strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin 2003–2013 · E-Mail: [email protected] Internet: ... NATIVE FISH STRATEGY FOR THE MURRAY-DARLING BASIN 2003–2013 This Native Fish

BRISBANE◆

QUEENSLAND

SYDNEY ◆

MELBOURNE ◆

ADELAIDE◆

VICTORIA

SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Lake Alexandrina

NEW SOUTHWALES

Native FishStrategy for theMurray-DarlingBasin2003–2013

PARTNERSHIP WITH THE COMMUNIT

Y

SIX

GOVERNMENTS WORKING IN

M A Y 2 0 0 3

M I N I S T E R I A L C O U N C I L

M U R R A Y - D A R L I N G B A S I N

MDBC 8576 Fish Strategy cover 5/6/04 4:17 PM Page 2

Our valuesWe agree to work together, and ensure that ourbehaviour reflects the following values.

Courage

• We will take a visionary approach, provide leadership and be prepared tomake difficult decisions.

Inclusiveness

• We will build relationships based on trustand sharing, considering the needs offuture generations, and working togetherin a true partnership.

• We will engage all partners, includingIndigenous communities, and ensurethat partners have the capacity to befully engaged.

Commitment

• We will act with passion and decisiveness,taking the long-term view and aiming forstability in decision-making.

• We will take a Basin perspective and anon-partisan approach to Basinmanagement.

Respect and honesty

• We will respect different views, respecteach other and acknowledge the realityof each other’s situation.

• We will act with integrity, openness andhonesty, be fair and credible, and shareknowledge and information.

• We will use resources equitably andrespect the environment.

Flexibility

• We will accept reform where it isneeded, be willing to change, andcontinuously improve our actionsthrough a learning approach.

Practicability

• We will choose practicable, long-termoutcomes and select viable solutions toachieve these outcomes.

Mutual obligation

• We will share responsibility andaccountability, and act responsibly,with fairness and justice.

• We will support each other throughnecessary change.

Our principlesWe agree, in a spirit of partnership, to use thefollowing principles to guide our actions.

Integration

• We will manage catchments holistically;that is, decisions on the use of land,water and other environmental resourcesare made by considering the effect of thatuse on all those resources and on allpeople within the catchment.

Accountability

• We will assign responsibilities andaccountabilities.

• We will manage resources wisely, beingaccountable and reporting to our partners.

Transparency

• We will clarify the outcomes sought.

• We will be open about how to achieveoutcomes and what is expected fromeach partner.

Effectiveness

• We will act to achieve agreed outcomes.

• We will learn from our successes andfailures and continuously improveour actions.

Efficiency

• We will maximise the benefits andminimise the costs of actions.

Full accounting

• We will take account of the full range ofcosts and benefits, including economic,environmental, social and off-site costsand benefits.

Informed decision-making

• We will make decisions at the mostappropriate scale.

• We will make decisions on the bestavailable information, and continuouslyimprove knowledge.

• We will support the involvement ofIndigenous people in decision-making,understanding the value of thisinvolvement, and respecting the livingknowledge of Indigenous people.

Learning approach

• We will learn from our failures and successes.

• We will learn from each other.

Integrated catchment management in the Murray-Darling BasinA process through which people can develop a vision, agree on shared values and behaviours, makeinformed decisions and act together to manage the natural resources of their catchment; theirdecisions on the use of land, water and other environmental resources are made by considering theeffect of that use on all those resources and on all people within the catchment.


N A T I V E F I S H S T R A T E G Y F O R T H E M U R R A Y - D A R L I N G B A S I N 2 0 0 3 – 2 0 1 3 i

Native FishStrategy for theMurray-DarlingBasin2003–2013

The overall goal of this Strategy is torehabilitate native fish communities inthe Murray-Darling Basin back to 60 per cent of their estimated pre-European settlement levels after 50 years of implementation.

M A Y 2 0 0 3

MDBC 8576 Fish Strategy inner 5/6/04 4:10 PM Page i

N A T I V E F I S H S T R A T E G Y F O R T H E M U R R A Y - D A R L I N G B A S I N 2 0 0 3 – 2 0 1 3ii

The Murray-Darling Basin

MDBC 8576 Fish Strategy inner 5/6/04 4:10 PM Page ii

N A T I V E F I S H S T R A T E G Y F O R T H E M U R R A Y - D A R L I N G B A S I N 2 0 0 3 – 2 0 1 3 iii

The Murray-Darling Basin covers more than amillion square kilometres, one-seventh ofAustralia. It is one of the largest catchments inthe world (the river system flows some 2500kilometres from its headwaters to the sea) andone of the driest. Nearly two million peopledepend on the Basin’s resources and the value ofits agricultural produce exceeds $10 billion eachyear.

The unique plants and animals of the Basin haveevolved to survive long periods of drought and tocapitalise on sudden floods. Different animalsand plants have different river flow needs. Someneed periods of flooding in order to breed andothers need low flows and still water. Forexample, spring floods join the rivers tobillabongs and wetlands when native fish likeMurray cod are breeding. The teeminginvertebrate life that the floods stimulate in thebillabongs is likely to provide the newly hatchedriver fish with ample food. The health of theBasin rivers’ fish populations is a primaryindicator of the health of the Basin’s rivers.

The Murray-Darling BasinInitiativeThe Murray-Darling Basin Initiative is acooperative arrangement between governmentand community, through the governments ofNew South Wales, Victoria, South Australia,Queensland, the Australian Capital Territory andthe Commonwealth, and a Community AdvisoryCommittee.

The Initiative seeks to achieve within the Basinthe internationally agreed goals of ecologicallysustainable development:

Using, conserving and enhancing the community’sresources so that ecological processes, on which lifedepends, are maintained, and the total quality oflife, now and in the future, can be increased.

The Initiative seeks to respond to issues that:

• require joint government action or commonaction by two or more parties; or

• require action by an individual State orTerritory but which could have implicationsfor integrated resource management acrossthe Basin.

Partners to the Initiative commit to workingtogether for the benefit of the Basin, knowingthat cooperation will achieve much more thanaction by any individual jurisdiction, and thatonly a true partnership between governmentsand the community can achieve the changesrequired for a secure future.

The main focus of the Initiative has been theshared water resources of the Basin. However,partners acknowledge that protecting theseshared resources requires a whole-of-catchmentapproach, one that takes account of therelationships between natural systems, includingland, water and other environmental resources.Any decision on the use and management ofnatural resources also affects economic and socialvalues of regional communities. Therefore,Initiative partners are committed to strengtheningIntegrated Catchment Management and thepartnership between governments and thecommunity over the next decade.

Lagoon near Condomine – Qld

© G

unth

er S

chm

ida

MDBC 8576 Fish Strategy inner 5/6/04 4:10 PM Page iii

N A T I V E F I S H S T R A T E G Y F O R T H E M U R R A Y - D A R L I N G B A S I N 2 0 0 3 – 2 0 1 3iv

Published by Murray-Darling Basin Commission

Postal Address: GPO Box 409, Canberra ACT 2601

Office location: Level 5, 15 Moore Street, Canberra City Australian Capital Territory

Telephone: (02) 6279 0100 international + 61 2 6279 0100

Facsimile: (02) 6248 8053 international + 61 2 6248 8053

E-Mail: [email protected]

Internet: http://www.mdbc.gov.au

For further information contact the Murray-Darling Basin Commission office on (02) 6279 0100

This report may be cited as:Native Fish Strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin 2003-2013

MDBC Publication No. 25/04

ISBN 1 876830 61 1

© Copyright Murray-Darling Basin Commission 2004

This work is copyright. Graphical and textual information in the work (with theexception of photographs and the MDBC logo) may be stored, retrieved andreproduced in whole or in part, provided the information is not sold or used forcommercial benefit and its source (Native Fish Strategy for the Murray-DarlingBasin 2003-2013) is acknowledged. Such reproduction includes fair dealing forthe purpose of private study, research, criticism or review as permitted underthe Copyright Act 1968. Reproduction for other purposes is prohibited withoutprior permission of the Murray-Darling Basin Commission or the individualphotographers and artists with whom copyright applies.

To the extent permitted by law, the copyright holders (including its employeesand consultants) exclude all liability to any person for any consequences,including but not limited to all losses, damages, costs, expenses and any othercompensation, arising directly or indirectly from using this report (in part or inwhole) and any information or material contained in it.

Design and typesetting: Ideas and Directions (I&D 8576)

Cover Images: John McKenzie (river scene) and Gunther Schmida (fauna)

Printing: Goanna Print

This publication is printed on Monza Satin, a 50% recycled and coated paper.

MDBC 8576 Fish Strategy inner 5/6/04 4:10 PM Page iv

N A T I V E F I S H S T R A T E G Y F O R T H E M U R R A Y - D A R L I N G B A S I N 2 0 0 3 – 2 0 1 3

This Native Fish Strategy seeks to increase nativefish population back to 60 per cent of theirestimated pre-European settlement levels over a50-year period. There is sufficient confidence thiscan be done through key actions ranging fromrestoring fish passage to environmental flowsand rehabilitation of river reaches. The strategyprovides direction for investment in on-groundmanagement activities and associated research.

Over the past 100 years, populations of nativefish species in Murray-Darling Basin havesuffered serious declines in both distribution andabundance.

Many factors have contributed to thedeterioration of fish habitat and native fishpopulations. These include significant changes towater flow, thermal pollution and theintroduction of alien fish species. Expertsestimate present levels of native fishcommunities in the Basin to be 10 per cent ofthe pre-European settlement level which is notsustainable in the long-term.

Implementation of the Strategy will involvegovernment agencies, regional catchmentorganisations and a wide range of communitygroups. Together we can take into account thevalues our Basin communities hold for nativefish and the riverine environment, and refineour actions as our knowledge of trends andresponses in fish populations gets better.

This Strategy has been developed and improvedthrough extensive consultation with agencies,interest groups and individuals, particularly inregional areas. Various Governmentorganisations, through their representatives onthe Murray-Darling Basin Commission'stechnical groups, have contributed valuableperspectives.

This document outlines the goal and objectives ofthe Native Fish Strategy, together withinformation on priority actions, responsibilitiesand targets. I commend it to you.

IAN SINCLAIR AC

President

Foreword

v

MDBC 8576 Fish Strategy inner 5/6/04 4:10 PM Page v

N A T I V E F I S H S T R A T E G Y F O R T H E M U R R A Y - D A R L I N G B A S I N 2 0 0 3 – 2 0 1 3vi

© G

unth

er S

chm

ida

The Murray cod, an icon species of the Murray-Darling Basin

MDBC 8576 Fish Strategy inner 5/6/04 4:10 PM Page vi


Contents

vii

Foreword v

Contents vii

Strategy summary 1

Part One: The need for action 5

Status of native fish populations 6

Strategic response 10

Part Two: A strategic approach to action 13

Strategy objectives 13

Guiding principles 15

Policy context 15

Implementation of the Strategy 16

Targets 17

Roles and responsibilities 18

Part Three: Implementation of driving actions 23

1. Rehabilitating fish habitat 23

2. Protecting fish habitat 26

3. Managing riverine structures 31

4. Controlling alien fish species 34

5. Protecting threatened native fish species 39

6. Managing fish translocation and stocking 40

Part Four: Monitoring, evaluation and review 45

Evaluation of progress 45

Auditing cumulative actions and their impacts on fish populations 45

Strategy review 45

Beyond this Strategy 46

Glossary 47

Glossary of acronyms 47

Conservation definitions 47

Bibliography 49

Supporting documents 49

Other relevant strategies and plans 49

Background information and further reading 49

Excerpts taken from submissions to the Native Fish Strategy (1 July–31 December, 2002) 49

MDBC 8576 Fish Strategy inner 5/6/04 4:10 PM Page vii

N A T I V E F I S H S T R A T E G Y F O R T H E M U R R A Y - D A R L I N G B A S I N 2 0 0 3 – 2 0 1 3viii

© P

eter

Sol

ness

/Net

wor

k Ph

otog

raph

ers

Native fish have been valued in the Murray-Darling Basin for generations – Indigenous fish traps,Macquarie River, New South Wales

MDBC 8576 Fish Strategy inner 5/6/04 4:10 PM Page viii

Strategy summary

N A T I V E F I S H S T R A T E G Y F O R T H E M U R R A Y - D A R L I N G B A S I N 2 0 0 3 – 2 0 1 3 1

This Strategy provides a response to the keythreats to native fish populations in the Murray-Darling Basin. These range from flow regulation,habitat degradation, lowered water quality, man-made barriers to fish movement, theintroduction of alien fish species, fisheriesexploitation, the spread of diseases andtranslocation and stocking of fish. Native fishpopulations in the Basin’s rivers have declinedunder these threats with experts estimating thatcurrent levels are about 10 per cent compared topre-European settlement.

The vision of this Strategy is to ensure that theBasin sustains viable fish populations andcommunities throughout its rivers. The goal ofthis Strategy is to rehabilitate native fishcommunities in the Basin back to 60 per cent oftheir estimated pre-European settlement levelsafter 50 years of implementation.

In the absence of targets that underpinaccountability arrangements, the best expertadvice recommends the following as examples ofindications of the level of implementationneeded by 2013:

• an overall increase of aquatic structuralhabitat values of 20 per cent; and

• functional processes and river floodplain linksre-established for 80 per cent of remainingwetland habitats through improved flowmanagement.

This Strategy has been developed and will beimplemented within the context of the Murray-Darling Basin Commission’s IntegratedCatchment Management Policy. This policyreflects a commitment by the community andgovernments to do all that needs to be done tomanage and use the resources of the Basin in anecologically sustainable manner. A substantialreallocation of funding will be needed bygovernments and the community to implementthis Strategy.

This partnership approach depends on thecommitment of individual landholders,Indigenous communities, Landcare groups,catchment management organisations, waterwaymanagers, urban and rural community groups,local, State and Australian Government agencies,as well as the Murray-Darling BasinCommission.

The Strategy will address its goal and targetsthrough strategic actions designed to achieve 13 objectives directed at improving the status ofnative fish populations in the Basin. Theseobjectives are to:

1. repair and protect key components of aquaticand riparian habitats;

2. rehabilitate and protect the naturalfunctioning of wetlands and floodplainhabitats;

3. improve key aspects of water quality thataffect native fish;

4. modify flow regulation practices;

5. provide adequate passage for native fish;

6. devise and implement recovery plans forthreatened native fish species;

7. create and implement management plans forother native fish species and communities;

8. control and manage alien fish species;

9. protect native fish from threats of disease andparasites;

10. manage fisheries in a sustainable manner;

11. protect native fish from the adverse effects oftranslocation and stocking;

12. ensure native fish populations are notthreatened from aquaculture; and

13. ensure community and partner ownershipand support for native fish management.

These 13 objectives will be achieved byimplementing six driving actions that includemanagement, research and investigation, andcommunity engagement interventions:

• rehabilitating fish habitat – helping to achieveobjectives 1–8;

• protecting fish habitat – helping to achieveobjectives 1–8;

• managing riverine structures – helping toachieve objectives 4–8;

• controlling alien fish species – helping toachieve objectives 6–9;

• protecting threatened native fish species –helping to achieve objectives 6 and 10; and

• managing fish translocation and stocking –helping to achieve objectives 9–12.

All of the driving actions include a communityengagement component designed to achieveobjective 13.

The establishment of effective fish passagesthrough major barriers and the implementationof engineering and operational solutions tothermal pollution are the core actions formanaging riverine structures. Alien fish specieswill be managed through integrated pestmanagement approaches that use a combination

MDBC 8576 Fish Strategy inner 5/6/04 4:10 PM Page 1


of actions to reduce populations and stop thespread of alien fish species. The Strategy urgesimmediate investment in the development andimplementation of species’ recovery plans forthreatened or endangered native fish species.The establishment of Habitat Management Areaswill help such recovery plans. A consistent,coordinated and firm Basin-wide approach isneeded for managing fish translocation andstocking.

The implementation of the driving actions willnot see an immediate return on investment.While the rehabilitation of fish habitat and themanagement of riverine structures should resultin changes within the next 10 to 15 years tonative fish communities, the other drivingactions are likely to take considerably longerbefore benefits become obvious. However, if thisinvestment is delayed it will prove more costly torehabilitate the Basin’s native fish communitiesin the future.

A key feature of the driving actions, especiallyfor rehabilitation of fish habitat, will be theestablishment of Riverine Management Zonesthat reflect the ecological functioning of theBasin’s rivers as well as management capabilities.Management plans will be developed for eachZone and will be prioritised for investmentaccording to both their feasibility andimportance. Plans will be integrated with otherplanning processes.

Within Riverine Management Zones there maybe demonstration reaches, varying from a fewkilometres in length to larger sections of about100 kilometres. The demonstration reaches willintegrate all land and water programs to formcomprehensive rehabilitation exercises onimportant and visible river reaches. The keypurpose of a demonstration reach is to show thecommunity the cumulative benefits of using anumber of actions for rehabilitating native fishpopulations and communities. RiverineManagement Zones may also include HabitatManagement Areas that aim to protect remnantareas of healthy fish habitat. The HabitatManagement Areas can range from those withlimited human access to multiple-use areas, suchas those which allow sustainable recreationalangling.

Experts have agreed that the actions such ashabitat restoration and improved environmentalflows detailed in the Strategy must be acted uponin an integrated way, if they are to be effective. Ifundertaken singly, the capacity of theseinterventions to recover the native fishpopulations of the Basin beyond 25 per cent oftheir pre-European level is questionable. Thetargeting of investment in the actions of

developing a system of Habitat ManagementAreas and managing other alien fish species willalso ensure a greater level of success with thisapproach.

This Strategy will be monitored againstaccountability indicators in conjunction with theSustainable Rivers Audit process. Its progress willbe reviewed annually, with major externalreviews of the Strategy conducted in the fifthand tenth year of its operation. In 2013,development of the 2013–23 Native Fish Strategywill ensure Basin-wide approaches to native fishmanagement into the foreseeable future.

The successful implementation of this Strategyrelies on knowledge generation and exchange.This will be achieved by research andinvestigation to fill gaps in our knowledge andunderstanding about fish and river ecology, andthrough a comprehensive communicationstrategy that focuses on partner consultation andengagement.

An agreed, fully funded Native Fish Strategywill provide benefits beyond just those fornative fish:

• There are obvious and significanteconomic advantages to the recreationalfishing and tourism industries throughhaving healthy fish populations andhealthy rivers;

• Healthy fish populations would signal areturn of cultural values and the notionof community ‘connectedness’ to theRiver;

• Indigenous people across the Basin havealways had a strong spiritual and physicalconnection to the environment, andhealthy fish populations and riversystems will ensure the continuation ofthis connection;

• The holistic and integrated approachpromoted in the Strategy will lead toenhanced biodiversity conservationgenerally, and highlight the contributionof improved native fish populations toriver ecosystems;

• The aesthetic value of an improved,functioning river system cannot beoverstated – for example, carp-freewetlands and intact riparian vegetation;

• Improved river health will enhance allrecreational activities, particularly forthose Australians who live in the vicinityof the Basin’s rivers and wetlands.



All available evidence indicates that on aBasin-wide scale, native fish populations andcommunities are not in good shape.However, we are not starting from scratch—there have been some success stories to date.There are a number of examples where thesort of ‘interventions’ mentioned in theStrategy have led to increased native fishpopulations. For example:

• Resnagging has been conducted at 14 sites on the River Murray with theaddition of over 300 large river red gumsnags. The resnagging was conducted ona scientific basis which allowed thetesting of different snag pile locations andconfigurations. Structured monitoringhas been undertaken which shows that arange of native fish species use the newsnags, in the same proportions as wouldhave been expected in natural snag piles.The snags were favoured by nativespecies such as Murray cod, trout codand golden perch, but were not heavilyused by carp. Different locations weremore successful than others, indicatingdesigns to maximise environmentalbenefit. Similarly, different locationswere used by different species. A costbenefit analysis of resnagging was alsoconducted.

• Torrumbarry was the first fishway builtin Australia that was directly based onexperiments on the swimming ability ofnative fish. In 1990 it was the highestfishway at the time, at 6.5 metres. Itopened up 350 km of river, toYarrawonga Weir upstream. From themoment it was opened, native fish used

it; in the first two years the fishwaypassed over 20 000 native fish fromseven species. Above the weir, numbersof silver perch increased and juvenilegolden perch were seen for the first timein decades. Tagged golden perch movedall the way to Yarrawonga Weir and alsoentered the Goulburn River. Short-headed lampreys, a very uncommonnative species, used the fishway—thesefish migrate from the sea and have swumover 1600 km to reach Torrumbarry.

• Before Googong Dam was constructed onthe Queanbeyan River in 1978, therewas a small population of the threatenedMacquarie perch in the river. After thedam was built, a fish monitoringprogram revealed that Macquarie perchwere present in the reservoir, but werenot breeding. It is believed that the fillingof the reservoir flooded all availableMacquarie perch spawning sites, and thepopulation was unable to access thespawning habitats in the river above thereservoir because of a natural barrierposed by a waterfall. Fifty-seven adultMacquarie perch were netted from thereservoir and transported upstream, pastthe waterfall, and released at two sites onthe Queanbeyan River. There is now athriving population of Macquarie perch,with regular breeding occurring.

• In the lower Murray, there are severallocal areas where anglers have reportedincreased catch rates for the largerspecies (such as Murray cod), while atthe same time carp populations seem tobe in decline.

© J

ohn

McK

enzie

Resnagging site below Yarrawonga Weir



© A

M P

hoto

grap

hy/A

rthur

Mos

tead

Wetland near Forbes NSW, infested with blue green algae growth

© A

M P

hoto

grap

hy/S

uzie

Mos

tead

Tourism can be impacted by poor river health


Part One: The need for action


The health of populations and communities ofnative fish species in the Murray-Darling Basin isan indicator of the overall health of the Basinand its rivers. If there is a decline in the nativefish communities, this provides a ‘canary in thecoal-mine’ warning that the natural ecologicalfunctioning of the rivers is at risk.

The ecological needs of the Basin’s plant andanimal communities for seasonal changes inwater flows, run counter to the needs ofagricultural systems for reliable and predictablewater supplies. Over the past century, riverregulation to provide water on demand throughdams, weirs and diversions has changed thenatural flooding and drying cycles of the riversystems. This has affected the health of riverhabitats and native fish populations. Across theBasin, changed river flows continue toexacerbate the problems of salinity, alien fishspecies and blue-green algal blooms as well asdeclining native fish populations.

The current state of fish habitats varies widelyalong the Basin’s rivers. Many habitats, such asbillabongs, wetlands and riverbanks, are nowdegraded. River snags (logs, branches, fallentrees) important for native fish breeding and

other behaviour have been removed. Murray-Darling Basin fish are generally ‘warm water’species and the release of cold water from damsaffects spawning, growth and survival. Somenative species rely on flooding for successfulbreeding and others have evolved to exploit thehigh food availability of the floodplains duringflooding. Changing the flow of water throughdams, weirs and other structures interferes withthese survival behaviours and has benefited carpand other alien species.

Many native fish need to move widely throughthe river systems of the Basin. Man-madebarriers and restricted flooding stops suchmovement. The adults of some species (e.g.golden perch) can migrate over thousands ofkilometres. Large numbers of some juvenile fish(e.g. silver perch) also move upstream. Other fish(e.g. short-headed lamprey, congolli/tupong)need to spend some time in salt water tocomplete their lifecycle. Dams and altered flowrates restrict the movement of fish larvae,affecting survival and distribution of native fishspecies in the Basin.

The eight key threats to native fish managementin the Basin are summarised in Table 1.

Threat Threatening process

Flow regulation Loss of water to other uses, critical low flows, loss of flow variation, loss of flow seasonality, loss of low to medium floods, permanent flooding and high water, increased periods of no flow

Habitat degradation Damage to riparian zones, removal of in-stream habitats, sedimentation

Lowered water quality Increased nutrients, turbidity, sedimentation, salinity, artificial changes in water temperature, pesticides, and other contaminants

Barriers Impediments to fish passage resulting from the construction and operation of dams, weirs, levees, culverts, etc., and non-physical barriers such as increased velocities, reduced habitats, water quality and thermal pollution (changes in water temperature)

Alien species Competition with and/or predation by carp, gambusia, oriental weatherloach, redfin perch and trout

Exploitation Recreational and commercial fishing pressure on depleted stocks, illegal fishing

Diseases Outbreak and spread of EHNV (Epizootic Haematopoietic Necrosis Virus) and other viruses, diseases and parasites

Translocation and stocking The loss of genetic integrity and fitness caused by inappropriate translocation and stocking of native species

Table 1: Key threats to native fish management in the Basin

The most effective

means of

rehabilitating the

Basin’s native fish

populations will be

through an

integrated

management

approach and

remediation of the

threats that are

impacting on them.



Status of native fish populationsNative fish populations are currently estimated tobe about 10 per cent of their pre-Europeansettlement levels. This estimate has been basedon scientific research, fishing records, Indigenoushistory and anecdotal evidence (see Developingthe aspirational goal of the Native Fish Strategy onpage 12) and takes into account the naturallyvariable nature of fish populations (see Figure 1).

That the status of native fish populations in theMurray-Darling Basin is poor can bedemonstrated by many indicators, including:

• localised extinction of some native fishspecies (for example, trout cod, Murray codand Macquarie perch have become locallyextinct in the Mitta Mitta River for 100 kilometres downstream of DartmouthDam);

• threats to other species: 8 of the 35 nativefish species in the Basin are nationally‘threatened’ (as listed by the AustralianSociety of Fish Biology) and at least two are‘critically endangered’; 16 species are listed asthreatened under State jurisdictions (seeTable 2);

• rapid decline in the conservation status of‘flagship’ species such as silver perch,freshwater catfish and Murray cod across theBasin;

• presence of 11 alien species of fish that nowmake up a quarter of the Basin’s total fishspecies (carp, gambusia, orientalweatherloach, roach, tench, goldfish, redfinperch, brown trout, brook char, rainbowtrout, Atlantic salmon). Carp now make upan estimated 60 to 90 per cent of the totalfish biomass at many sites, with densities ashigh as one carp per square metre of riversurface area;

• presence of two native fish species that arenot native to the Basin rivers (broad-finnedgalaxias, spotted galaxias);

• loss of most commercial fisheries (see Figure 1); and

• observed declines in recreational anglingsuccess—native fish species make up just 4.4 per cent of the total catch in the RiverMurray region.

The magnitude of the decline of native fishpopulations has been most significant in the past100 years, with the greatest declines in the past50 years. For example, following theconstruction of the Dartmouth Dam in 1980,trout cod, Macquarie perch and Murray codwere lost from the Mitta Mitta River. This was atleast partly due to the cold water releases thatinhibited spawning and favoured the cold wateralien brown trout.

Although native fish populations are very lowBasin-wide, some anglers are reporting improvedcatches in some river reaches. Fish numbers arecertainly highly variable, both over time as wellas among reaches, valleys and rivers due tofactors such as environmental conditions andrecruitment success. Good numbers of fish insome reaches can be a reflection of successfullocal stocking programs. While reports ofimproved adult fish populations for some speciesin some areas are encouraging, this does notnecessarily mean that the overall fish communityis healthy. There may not be suitable conditionsfor fish spawning or larval survival, spawningsites might be absent or degraded, fish may beunable to access them because of barriers such asweirs or levee banks or the environmental cuesto stimulate spawning may be absent. Inaddition, the presence of certain large anglingspecies such as Murray cod or golden perchdoesn’t necessarily indicate that the entire fishcommunity is doing well. Many of the smallerfish species such as gudgeons, galaxiids andhardyheads are declining at alarming rates, butthis would not be reflected by recreational catches.

Trout cod are

critically

endangered. The

natural range of this

species is now

restricted to about

120 kilometres of the

River Murray,

immediately

downstream of Lake

Mulwala on the

NSW–Victoria

border.

© G

unth

er S

chm

ida

Trout cod



0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

47/4

851

/52

55/5

659

/60

63/6

467

/68

71/7

275

/76

79/8

083

/84

87/8

891

/92

95/9

6

Date

Cat

ch (

ton

nes

)

Silver perch

FreshwatercatfishMurray cod

Figure 1: Declines in catch of Murray cod, silver perch and freshwatercatfish in NSW between 1947 and 1996 Note that while the figure shows a long-term decline in fish catch, there is a great deal ofvariability in catch from year to year.

(Source: Reid D.D., Harris J.H. & Chapman D.J. (1997), ‘NSW inland commercial fishery data analysis’,Fisheries Research and Development Corporation Project No. 94/027 Report)

Common name Status and distribution State and Commonwealth listings

Short-headed lamprey Lower Murray-Darling Basin Qld – Extinct in the wild

Pouched lamprey Lower Murray-Darling Basin, rare

Short-finned eel Lower Murray-Darling Basin, rare

Long-finned eel Condamine drainage, Qld

River blackfish Lower Murray-Darling Basin and SA – Protected (endangered)cooler regions, declining

Two-spined blackfish Upland species, southern Murray- ACT – VulnerableDarling Basin

Common galaxias Lower River Murray only

Climbing galaxias Recently introduced into Murray-Darling Basin

Spotted galaxias Recently introduced into Murray-Darling Basin

Flat-headed galaxias Threatened species, lowland and lower Basin

Table 2: Status of native fish in the Basin

Eight of the thirty-

five native fish

species in the Basin

are nationally

threatened, with

three listed as

‘endangered’ under

the Commonwealth

Environment

Protection and

Biodiversity

Conservation Act

(EPBC).




Mountain galaxias Upland areas and slopes

Barred galaxias Threatened species, upland, Vic. – Critically endangered, lower Murray-Darling Basin listed under Flora and Fauna

Guarantee ActCommonwealth – Endangered species listed under EPBC Act

Tupong/congolli Restricted to lower River Murray, declining

Murray cod Fragmented and in low Vic. – Vulnerable, listed under abundance Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act

Commonwealth–Vulnerablespecies listed under EPBC Act

Trout cod (bluenose cod) Threatened species, two known ACT – Endangeredpopulations, one of which is a Vic. – Critically endangered, translocated population listed under Flora and Fauna

Guarantee ActNSW – Endangered and a protected speciesSA – ProtectedCommonwealth – Endangered species listed under EPBC Act

Golden perch Widespread and common

Macquarie perch Threatened species, restricted ACT – Endangereddistribution Vic. – Endangered, listed under

Flora and Fauna Guarantee ActNSW – Vulnerable and a protectedspeciesSA – ProtectedCommonwealth – Endangered species listed under EPBC Act

Estuary perch Uncommon, lower River Murray only

Silver perch Threatened species, declining ACT – EndangeredVic. – Critically endangered, listed under Flora and Fauna Guarantee ActNSW – Vulnerable, protected fromcommercial catch

Southern pygmy perch Southern Murray-Darling Basin, NSW – Vulnerablethreatened SA – Protected

Yarra pygmy perch Highly restricted to lower Murray SA – ProtectedCommonwealth – Vulnerable species listed under EPBC Act

Australian smelt Widespread

Freshwater catfish Declining, was widespread Vic. – Vulnerable, listed under Flora and Fauna Guarantee ActNSW – Protected from commercialcatchSA – Protected

Bony herring Widespread in mid-reaches

Table 2 continued: Status of native fish in the Basin




Hyrtl’s tandan Northern Murray-Darling Basin

Rendahl’s tandan Condamine drainage only

Southern purple- Threatened species, once Vic. – Critically endangered,spotted gudgeon widespread listed under Flora and Fauna

Guarantee ActSA – ProtectedNSW – Endangered species

Western carp gudgeon Widespread

Midgeley’s carp Taxonomy is complex and gudgeon unresolved, with several forms

and hybrids

Murray-Darling carp gudgeon

Lake’s carp gudgeon

Spangled perch Common, mid to upper Murray-Darling Basin

Flat-headed gudgeon Widespread, common Vic. – Listed under Flora and FaunaGuarantee Act

Dwarf flat-headed Lower Murray-Darling Basin and gudgeon Murrumbidgee and Murray Rivers

Murray-Darling Widespread Vic. – Listed under Flora and Faunarainbowfish Guarantee Act

Darling River Threatened species, restricted hardyhead distribution

Fly-specked hardyhead Widespread, declining(southern form)

Murray hardyhead Threatened species, restricted Vic. – Endangered, listed under distribution Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act

NSW – Endangered speciesCommonwealth – Vulnerable species listed under EPBC Act

Olive perchlet Threatened species, extinct in SA – ProtectedSouth Australia Vic. – listed under Flora and Fauna

Guarantee ActNSW – Endangered species

NB: The aquatic ecological community in the natural drainage system of the lower River Murraycatchment is listed as an endangered community in New South Wales.

Table 2 continued: Status of native fish in the Basin

Some anglers are

reporting improved

catches in some river

reaches, which may

reflect good

environmental

conditions or

sustained stocking

programs.



Strategic responseThe improved status of native fish populations inthe Murray-Darling Basin will be the keycriterion by which the public will judge thesuccess of this Strategy.

If the Basin is to be rehabilitated and ensureviable populations of native fish species in itsrivers, urgent action is needed. This action mustbe coordinated and consistent across Stateboundaries. It needs to build upon theknowledge gained through past research as wellas current and often local efforts being carriedout to rehabilitate fish habitats and protectexisting viable populations.

In 1991, the Murray-Darling Basin Commission(MDBC) developed and implemented a FishManagement Plan for the Murray River. Theprinciples of this original Plan are incorporatedinto this Native Fish Strategy that has beenextended to cover the whole Basin. This is one ofthe first strategies, along with the Basin SalinityManagement Strategy, to be developed under theMDBC’s Integrated Catchment ManagementPolicy Statement. This Strategy builds onresearch into native fish management carried outover the past decade. However, native fishpopulations continue to decline, so emphasisneeds to be placed on rehabilitation rather thanmaintaining the status quo, as this will inevitablyresult in continuing declines and loss of species.As these declines have taken place over manyyears, so must rehabilitation be undertaken overa similar timeframe: 50 or more years. The levelof rehabilitation required to reverse declines willvary with species, communities and areas, andshould be assessed over the medium and longerterms.

The overall goal of this Strategy is to rehabilitatenative fish communities in the Murray-DarlingBasin back to 60 per cent or better of theirestimated pre-European settlement levels after50 years of implementation. This goal includesall fish species across the entire Murray-DarlingBasin, and encompasses measures of fishabundance (numbers and biomass) for all fishspecies (not just the larger, recreationallyimportant ones), as well as fish distribution, andwill vary from site to site and year to year (asdoes the fish community). For example, if after50 years, Macquarie perch were returned to 60%of their distribution and abundance across theBasin, the Native Fish Strategy would have beensuccessful. The goal of 60% does not relate tofish diversity, i.e. if at the end of 50 years ofmanagement action there is only 60% of pre-European fish species remaining in the Basin, thegoal will not have been met! The goal for fish

diversity is implicitly 100%, that is no speciesshould become extinct in the Basin.

Native fish populations are currently estimated tobe about 10 per cent of their pre-Europeansettlement levels. Without any intervention thisis likely to fall to 5 per cent over the next 40 to50 years. Experts have agreed that interventionsmust be undertaken in an integrated way if theyare to be effective. If undertaken singly, thecapacity of interventions to recover the nativefish populations of the Basin beyond 25 per centof their pre-European level is questionable. If anumber of interventions (such as allocation ofenvironmental flows, habitat rehabilitation,abatement of cold water pollution, improvedland-use management practices, provision of fishpassage, creation of a Habitat Management Areasystem, and control of alien fish) areimplemented in an integrated way, then expertsbelieve the goal of this Strategy is achievable.

It should be noted that actions vary considerablyin the timing it takes to establish them. Forexample, with sufficient funding, abatement ofcold water pollution could be achieved within 5 to 10 years, benefiting native fish populationsrelatively soon. However, the benefits of habitatrehabilitation may take a lot longer to achieve.An Expert Panel has developed a conceptualmodel for the cumulative impact of interventionson native fish populations (Figure 2).

Figure 2 models expert advice regarding theresponse of native fish communities to strategicrehabilitative interventions. The figure showsthat while single interventions, such asenvironmental flow and habitat restorations willimprove fish communities, the most significantpositive impact will occur through a combinationof interventions which address a range ofproblems. It is important to note that the figuredoes not prioritise interventions. Some reacheshave very specific problems which must beaddressed, such as cold water pollution.

The implementation of this Strategy requires abalanced investment plan that will see financingof some short-term quick return actions, such asproviding fish passage and mitigating cold waterpollution. This will ensure that existing nativefish populations do not decline any further, andwill begin to recover for later actions to buildupon, particularly habitat restoration andenvironmental flows.

Implementation will necessarily involve all Basinpartners: Commonwealth and State agencies,industry, catchment management organisations,Landcare groups, the Indigenous community andthe general public. Strategic actions can only be



implemented throughout the Basin by dealingwith the threats on a local catchment-by-catchment basis. Catchment managementorganisations have a central role to play inhabitat rehabilitation, and a clear agreement onpriorities and the targeting of investment will beneeded within their accredited catchmentmanagement plans. Within these plans, therewill be significant opportunity for localcommunity actions.

State governments and the MDBC areresponsible for environmental flow policies andplans, in consultation with community advisorybodies. While not detailed in this Strategy,environmental flow regimes that return rivers toa healthy, working condition are integral toachieving the Strategy’s outcomes and theStrategy will work very closely with the MDBC’sThe Living Murray initiative.

Habita

t res

tora

tion

only

Enviro

nmen

tal fl

ows o

nly

Enviro

nmen

tal fl

ows w

ith

habit

at re

stora

tion

Enviro

nmen

tal fl

ows w

ith h

abita

t

resto

ratio

n an

d ca

rp m

anag

emen

t

Plus fis

hway

s

Plus a

bate

men

t of c

old w

ater

poll

ution

Plus h

abita

t man

agem

ent a

reas

Plus m

anag

emen

t of o

ther

intro

duce

d fis

h

20

10

30

40

50

60TARGET

Per

cen

tag

e o

f P

re-E

uro

pea

n le

vel (

%)

Figure 2: Rehabilitation of native fish communities – cumulative impact ofall interventions

An Expert Panel

concluded that in

general terms of

abundance and

diversity, native fish

across the whole

Basin are currently

at a level of about

10% of their status

200 years ago.



During 2001/02 the Commission found thatinsufficient information was available torank the values of potential riverrehabilitation programs in the Basin and topredict their outcomes, in terms ofimproving native fish populations. Whatwould be the relative environmental benefitsof programs on carp control, control of otherpest fish, environmental flows, resnagging,abatement of cold water pollution andfishway construction? To help understandthe issues better, an Expert Panel wasassembled, comprising six people, twoeminent in each of the fields of riverecology, fish ecology andmacroinvertebrate/vertebrate pest ecology.The Panel used all available data and theircombined experience of the Basin’s rivers toproduce a conceptual model. The modelprovides estimates of the current status ofnative fish relative to predictions of the‘natural’ situation prevailing about 200 yearsago. Given the limited amount of direct datafrom those times and the need to makeretrospective assumptions based on morerecent information, the model and estimatesmust be treated as general guides, ratherthan being definitive. The types of recentinformation that the Panel could draw uponto produce the model include:

• the 93% decline between 1940 and 1990in the numbers of silver perch passingthrough Euston Weir;

• the fact that 16 of the Basin’s 35 nativefish species are now listed as threatened;

• the decline in the commercial catch ofMurray cod in NSW from approximately74 tonnes/year in the late 1940s to 9.5 tonnes/year in the early 1990s;

• 80–90% of fish biomass at many sites inthe Murray and Murrumbidgee Riversnow consists of alien species.

With the proviso that the model is not exact,the Expert Panel concluded that, in generalterms of abundance and diversity, native fishare currently at a level only about 10% oftheir status 200 years ago, and still declining.This is an assessment of the status of allspecies across the whole Basin. Withoutappropriate interventions, this level willdecline further. Furthermore, in view of theongoing need for human exploitation of theBasin’s rivers for water resources, it wouldnot be possible to return rivers and nativefish to their natural condition. At best, withall feasible rehabilitation options, there couldbe a return to about 60% of natural levels.The rehabilitation level of 60% is seen as animportant aspirational goal that is achievableover a 50-year timeframe. It is also indicativeof the commitment to a defined outcomefrom the implementation of this Strategy.

Graphical representation of the modeldemonstrates two key points: the responseto various kinds of rehabilitation iscumulative, and they will take time. It isclear that addressing only a few of theproblem areas will produce only modestresults. For the 60% goal to be realistic, eachof the major contributing problems need tobe dealt with concurrently in an integratedway. Widespread responses from native fishpopulations will not occur overnight, asmany of the recovery processes will taketime, in some instances even decades.

The Expert Panel therefore stronglyrecommended that the Commission shoulduse an integrated program, incorporating allthe major rehabilitation issues for nativefish. While they cautioned that in some casesresults would be slow at first, and a verysubstantial, long-term program is needed,they agreed that fish populations canpotentially be restored to much improvedconditions.

Developing the aspirational goal of the Native Fish Strategy


Part Two: A strategic approach to action


The vision of this Native Fish Strategy is thatthe Murray-Darling Basin sustains viable fishpopulations and communities throughout itsrivers.

This means rehabilitating aquatic habitatsand ecological processes in the Murray-Darling Basin through management actionsdesigned to restore healthy native fishcommunities.

This Strategy targets the causes as well as thesymptoms of declining native fish species, andfocuses on long-term rehabilitation rather thanrestoration. As part of the Integrated CatchmentManagement Policy Statement for the Basin, thisStrategy provides a framework for improvedmanagement of native fish in the Basin, ratherthan prescribing specific management practices.The framework outlined in this Strategy willevolve with better knowledge and new researchoutcomes. Inter-State cooperation andcoordination of actions and policies is anessential ingredient of the Strategy’s framework.While the Strategy provides a 10-yearframework, a sustained commitment needs to bemaintained for the next 50 years.

Through a Basin-wide approach to fishmanagement, this Strategy seeks to achieve thefollowing outcomes:

• wild, self-sustaining native fish populationsand fish communities rehabilitated to 60 percent of their estimated pre-Europeansettlement levels after 50 years;

• river rehabilitation actions integrated withother strategies and management initiatives,including environmental flows that restoreand protect aquatic habitats;

• consistent and integrated Basin-widemanagement activities that positively affectnative fish populations and communities; and

• ownership of the Strategy by the communityand other partners.

This Strategy provides direction for investment inon-ground fish management activities andassociated research and investigations.

Strategy objectivesTo achieve the Strategy’s vision, 13 objectiveshave been identified, as described below.

1. To repair and protect key components ofaquatic and riparian habitats importantfor sustaining native fish populations

Suitable habitat is essential for the survival of allnative fish species. Key components of habitatinclude home sites, spawning sites, provision ofshade, shelter from certain water velocities andpredators, and a variety of feeding sites andwater depths. A diversity of habitats is needed fora diversity of species and life stages. In-streamand riparian habitats within the Basin have beenseverely degraded by factors such as river de-snagging, loss of wetland, floodplain and riverconnectivity, bank erosion and sedimentation.

2. To rehabilitate and protect the naturalfunctioning of wetlands and floodplainhabitats for native fish; and revive thelinks between terrestrial ecosystems,wetlands and rivers

Floodplains and wetlands play a significant rolein the ecological functioning of riverine systems.They provide important habitats for fish andother plants and animals, including those onwhich fish are dependent for food. They areimportant for carbon-cycling, uptake of excessnutrients and sediment stabilisation. Substantialareas of floodplain have become degraded in theBasin and cut off from the river system.

3. To improve key aspects of water qualitythat affect native fish

The Basin’s native fish are facing a number ofwater quality problems including changedtemperatures, increased salinities, pesticides,heavy metals, sedimentation and turbidity. Forexample, reduced water temperatures ordissolved oxygen levels can prevent fishspawning, reduce metabolic rates and cause fishkills. Poor water quality is generally associatedwith poor management practices.

4. To modify flow regulation practices tofacilitate native fish rehabilitation

Regulation of river flows through storages andoff-stream extraction has vastly changed thenatural flows of water in the Basin’s rivers,causing widespread degradation. Restoring morenatural flows to the Basin’s rivers will reducesuch degradation and help rehabilitate fishpopulations. A range of processes is already inplace, attempting to address the issues of flowson many rivers. The objectives of this Strategyneed to be incorporated into these processes.

5. To provide adequate passage for nativefish throughout the Basin

Barriers such as dams, weirs, levees, causeways,culverts and road crossings can stop the naturalmigration patterns of many native fish species

This Strategy works

within the Integrated

Catchment

Management

framework to target

the causes as well as

the symptoms of

declining fish species.



within the Basin. Such barriers prevent manynative fish from completing key components oftheir lifecycle. State agencies have recognisedmore than 3600 barriers in the Basin, and only asmall number have implemented engineeringworks or operating procedures to mitigate theirimpacts on fish movements.

6. To devise and implement recovery plansfor threatened native fish species andcommunities

A number of the Basin’s native fish are listed onvarious national/State lists as being endangered,and there is potential for the extinction of somespecies in the future. Risk-managementstrategies and implementation of recovery plansare needed to reverse this trend ofendangerment, for both individual species andfish communities. A comprehensive, adequateand representative network of HabitatManagement Areas for fish needs to beestablished.

7. To create and implement managementplans for all non-threatened native fishspecies and communities

Substantial declines have occurred inpopulations of many native non-threatenedspecies. Such declines may be rapid or masked byother factors. The cost and effort of maintaininghealthy populations are far outweighed by theresources necessary to reverse the conservationstatus of threatened species. Appropriatemanagement arrangements for all fish need to beimplemented.

8. To control and manage carp and otheralien fish species effectively

The Basin already contains at least 11 alien fishspecies in the wild, some in pest proportions, andfurther introductions are inevitable over time.Both the abundance and attributes of some alienfish, including carp, continue to cause damage tohabitats and populations of native species.Management actions are needed to minimise therisk of future introductions and seek to tackle theproblems of existing introductions.

9. To increase understanding of fish diseasesand parasites, and to protect native fishfrom such threats

Disease outbreaks have potentially devastatingeffects on native fish populations. However, ourknowledge of fish diseases and parasites is farfrom complete. The potential sources and risks ofdisease outbreak need to be determined.Attention also needs to be paid to the

mechanisms that transfer diseases and parasitesacross the Basin.

10. To manage fisheries in a sustainablemanner

The exploitation of fish by both the recreationaland commercial sectors, together with illegalactivities, has made substantial impacts on theviability of native fisheries in some regions of theBasin. Fish populations need to be returned to aviable, sustainable status to provide forecologically sustainable fisheries in the future.

11. To protect the natural speciescomposition, population structure,genetic integrity and diversity of nativefish communities from the adverseeffects of human interventions intonative fish movements and restocking

The composition of native fish populations canbe threatened by the liberation of fish fromoutside their natural range or from hatcheries.While carefully managed stocking can play asignificant role in species recovery programs, theimpact of fish from hatcheries can haveenormous impacts on the genetic viability andevolutionary potential of native fish populations.Appropriate guidelines to minimise such risks arerequired.

12. To ensure native fish populations arenot threatened from aquaculture

Apart from releases of alien fish, naturalpopulations of native fish are threatened by thepotential release of genetically restricted materialfrom native fish aquaculture operations usinglimited brood stock. The release of such materialhas potential to reduce the genetic fitness andhence viability of fish populations.

13. To ensure community and partnerownership and support for andunderstanding of the Native Fish Strategy

As fish are hidden under water, the generalcommunity understanding of issues relating tonative fish is often less than that for more visibleand identifiable terrestrial animals. There is aclear need for the community to be made moreaware, participate in programs, and provide localexpertise and skills in relation to native fish, theirstatus, importance and threats to them.Indigenous people in particular, have a great dealof knowledge and understanding of thelandscape and the environment which will beinvaluable for furthering our understanding ofnative fish communities.

This Strategy has

thirteen objectives

designed to achieve

its vision for a Basin

that sustains viable

fish populations and

communities

throughout its rivers.



Guiding principlesThis Strategy applies the following principles:

• a holistic approach is necessary for rivermanagement and rehabilitation;

• a precautionary approach is to be appliedwhere knowledge or understanding islimited;

• biodiversity conservation is central toecologically sustainable development;

• conservation is best undertaken within aspecies natural habitat;

• the existing natural assets in the Basin’swaterways must be protected;

• conservation depends on knowledge andunderstanding of species, populations andecosystems; and

• it is more cost-effective to conserve existingwild fish populations and aquaticcommunities now, than to rehabilitate themlater.

Policy contextThe MDBC has developed a standard for thedevelopment of all natural resource managementstrategies within the Basin under its IntegratedCatchment Management (ICM) Policy. The ICMPolicy is a commitment by governments and thecommunity of the Murray-Darling Basin to do allthat needs to be done to manage and use theresources of the Basin in a way that isecologically sustainable.

The ICM Policy is based on setting targets forcatchment health and building the capacities ofgovernments and the Basin community toachieve these targets. The approach will takeanother 10 years to build. It will requiresubstantial government, community andindustry leadership and commitment, and willsignificantly test the capacities of everyone tomanage the natural resource base for the benefitof present and future generations. The areas fortarget-setting under the ICM Policy are waterquality, water sharing, riverine ecosystem healthand terrestrial biodiversity.

This Strategy will be closely linked with the ICMPolicy as well as the MDBC’s Sustainable RiversAudit (SRA) and The Living Murray initiative.The SRA is intended to provide information onthe health of the Basin’s rivers to inform target-setting for riverine ecosystem health. The healthof the Basin’s native fish populations will formpart of the SRA. The Living Murray initiative hasthe goal of creating a healthy working RiverMurray system which will benefit native fishpopulations.

The Sustainable Rivers Audit (SRA) is beingdeveloped to monitor the environmentalhealth of the Basin’s rivers and provide moreinformation to resource managers and thecommunity on the location and extent ofdegradation. The SRA is seen as a logicalextension of the Cap on Diversions and ameans of providing a stronger scientific basefor debate in relation to ecological,environmental and social considerationsassociated with water management in theBasin. The SRA will regularly measure andreport on river health, with those reportsbeing independently audited. The health offish populations will be used as one of theoutcome-based indicators of river health,with measures of current fish populationscompared to a baseline reference conditionto give a general assessment of fish health.Over time, the SRA reports will reflect theimpact of management initiatives (such asthe Native Fish Strategy) on the direction andrate of change in the health of fishpopulations.

As many actions will be undertaken throughother initiatives, it is important that effectivelinks are developed and maintained with suchinitiatives to ensure appropriate priorities areselected.

The implementation of this Strategy will alsoinfluence the progress and outcomes of otherprojects being conducted within the Basin. Afterconsultation with relevant MDBC technicalgroups, this Strategy also incorporates relevantexisting government policies and programs (forexample, National Management Strategy for CarpControl 2000–2005).

Strategic management can only be undertakenafter assessment of available options and thecareful formulation of plans.

Through The Living Murray initiative, theMurray-Darling Basin Ministerial Council islooking at the best ways to restore the healthof the River Murray system. The Council'sstrong desire is to manage the resources ofthe River Murray system to improve itsenvironment and maintain the social andeconomic benefits of water use. The returnof some water to the River Murray isthought to be necessary to create a healthyworking river—one that assures us ofcontinued prosperity, clean water and aflourishing environment.



The Living Murray initiative includes:

• a comprehensive study of the costs andbenefits to the environment and thecommunity of returning variousamounts of water to the environment.This work includes scientific analysis ofthe ecological benefits of recoveringwater as well as an assessment of thesocial and economic impacts;

• a $150 million program of structural andoperational measures, includingmodifications to dams, weirs and locks,to make the best use of the watercurrently available to the environment;and

• a community engagement process aimedat ensuring that the full range ofcommunity values, issues and aspirationsare considered in the decision-makingprocess.

The Living Murray initiative is beingdeveloped in close association with theNative Fish Strategy, as activities to achieve ahealthy working river will also contribute tothe Strategy’s objectives. For example, nativefish will benefit from actions beingconsidered under The Living Murrayinitiative such as increased environmentalflows, the construction of fishways,restoration of habitat and carp control.

Implementation of the StrategyThe Native Fish Strategy is a work-in-progress, andwill address the following actions through acosted investment plan.

The investment plan has been formulated toguide activities over the first decade of the 50-year rehabilitation program, across the wholeBasin. It provides direction for investment in on-ground management activities and associatedresearch. Achieving the Strategy’s objectivesrequires the development of strong linkages withother aquatic initiatives and programs, and theinitiation of a series of high-profile on-groundworks to showcase the results of integratedrehabilitation efforts. While it will be theresponsibility of all key stakeholders tocontribute to the implementation of theinvestment plan, the jurisdictions will have themajor role, and will provide a significant share ofthe resources.

The investment plan will be guided by the ICMPolicy principles related to investment:

• the economic, environmental and socialbenefits of the investment must be greaterthan the costs;

• government investment will be used tostimulate private investment, and to preventunacceptable levels of resource degradation;

• alternative investments will be consideredand evaluated;

• joint-venture partnerships with thecommunity will be the preferred governmentinvestment approach; and

• on-ground investment will be supported bystrong institutional arrangements,knowledge, sound planning and adequatemonitoring, evaluation and reportingsystems.

Implementing the driving actions of this Strategywill require a targeted and sustained effort acrossgovernments, catchment managementorganisations and communities. It is imperativeto define the actions and associatedresponsibilities required within each catchment.This will need to be done in collaboration withgovernment agencies and catchment groups inthose catchments.

The prime responsibility for managing rivers fallsto State governments. Many of the in-streaminterventions needed to improve conditions forfish in rivers will require funding from theStates. This will also be the case for anyinterventions on State-owned land. However,the Commonwealth through its fundingprograms may supplement State funds for theseactions. Where interventions are required onprivate land, such as stream banks, States mayuse a number of mechanisms to encouragechanges to the way land managers use andmanage their land and water resources. Thesemechanisms range from financial incentivesthrough to regulation.

In the case of the Murray and lower Darling, theMDBC has specific responsibilities (e.g.management and operation of structures forwater supply, etc.). In this sense, the Commissioncan provide direct resources (human andfinancial) to achieve resource managementoutcomes, as well as recommending policies tobe adopted for the wise management of thoserivers by all relevant jurisdictions.

It is recommended that a new inter-Statemanagement and science committee beestablished by the MDBC, to draw all partnersand managers together to achieve the Strategy’sinvestment plan.

Responding to

declining native fish

populations in the

Murray-Darling

Basin is not the

responsibility of any

one State or agency.

The responsibility for

rehabilitation

belongs to all.



A partner representative group has been formedfrom catchment organisations and specialinterest groups. Implementation of partneractions will occur through incorporation of fishmanagement actions into local and regionalplans, operation and maintenance of riverrehabilitation works and assistance inmonitoring, education, research and reporting.

Priorities for each year of activity will bedetermined in consultation with thejurisdictions, as represented through the inter-State management and science committee andthe MDBC. The determination of priority actionsfor fish and fish habitat management will allowthe jurisdictions to make a relative assessment ofpriorities according to their own trade-offprocesses, in the context of the Basin-wideframework provided by this Strategy. Reportingof progress towards targets will be the annualresponsibility of the inter-State management andscience committee.

TargetsThe use of targets is a way to measure progresstowards achieving the Strategy outcomes.Partners to the Murray-Darling Basin Initiativeuse targets to ensure their own accountability forimplementing the Strategy and to give thecommunity confidence that the outcomes of the

Strategy will be achieved. Targets will guaranteethat all partners can agree on how healthy thenative fish populations should be, how tomeasure trends in native population status andknowing the full costs associated with achievingthis. Targets ensure the Strategy remains ontrack in reaching its long-term objectives for 50 years and beyond.

Targets are not the outcomes sought by theStrategy; they are merely a way to bringaccountability to achieving outcomes. Targetsneed to be audited to ensure actions areprogressively achieving the environmental,economic and social outcomes of this Strategy.Targets will be reviewed throughout the life ofthe Strategy to assess their success and currentrelative priority. This review process will beconducted in the context of the relative risk ofundertaking or not undertaking actions, andwithin a framework of adaptive management.The achievement and assessment of these targetsmust be underpinned by adequate monitoringand evaluation, knowledge and properly setobjectives.

The targets for this Strategy will be formulated sothey are consistent with the Sustainable RiversAudit (SRA), the Integrated Catchment ManagementPolicy Statement, and The Living Murray initiative.Targets for river health and fish populations will

© M

atth

ew J

ones

Electrofishing below the gulf regulator, Barmah Forest



be coordinated with monitoring, which will beundertaken for the SRA.

The wide-ranging scope and complexity of theNative Fish Strategy means that targets must be seton a range of scales, including whole-of-Basin,major catchments, within jurisdiction, riverprocess zones or on a priority-setting basis. Forsome objectives, each jurisdiction will need todevelop their own set of targets that arecompatible and consistent with the Strategy.

In the absence of targets that underpinaccountability arrangements, the best expertadvice recommends the following as indicationsof the level of implementation needed by 2013:

• aquatic structural habitat values increased by20 per cent;

• functional processes and river floodplain linksre-established for 80 per cent of remainingwetland habitats through improved flowmanagement;

• water quality that meets 90 per cent of allbiological requirements;

• elements of the natural flow regime andconnectivity important to sustain fishpopulations reinstated;

• 50 per cent of migratory pathways and 50 percent of habitat for all native species currentlyaffected by structural barriers reinstated;

• population declines stabilised in allthreatened species and communities;

• no additions to threatened or declining fishconservation listings by Commonwealth orState government agencies, professionalbodies or non-government organisations;

• the distribution and abundance of all exoticspecies reduced by 30 per cent;

• no introductions or outbreaks of damagingnative fish diseases or parasites;

• native fish populations that are able tosupport a selective harvest of 10 per centwithout negative impacts on them;

• threats to native fish populations by thetranslocation or stocking of native or alienspecies minimised by active management;

• 90 per cent of identified key partners activelyengaged in the Native Fish Strategy; and

• 50 per cent of the general community awareand supportive of the Native Fish Strategy.

These are indications of what is required to meetthe objectives of this Strategy, but they have notyet been assessed in terms of their possibleeconomic and social impacts. Any final targetswill need to take account of these impacts andthe trade-offs required for them to be acceptable.

The overall goal of this Strategy is torehabilitate native fish communities in theMurray-Darling Basin to 60 per cent of theirestimated pre-European settlement levelsafter 50 years of implementation.

Achieving this goal will require:

1. the distribution of native fish across the Basinto expand toward their estimated pre-European settlement status; and

2. the abundance of established native fishpopulations to return towards their estimatedpre-European settlement status.

The development of targets for accountabilitypurposes in this Strategy will be the basis onwhich we can estimate and audit changes indistribution and abundance on a regular basis.

It is important to note that while some actionshave more immediate impacts (5 to 10 years),others will require a long lead time (50 to 60years) before their impacts will be reflected inthe native fish population distribution andabundance.

Over the next 10 years, the Strategy willmeasure progress toward achieving theoverall goal, by measuring indicators ofchanges in fish population, distribution andabundance. For example, by 2013 the troutcod population in the River Murray mayhave expanded by 50 kilometresdownstream as well as 50 kilometresupstream into Lake Mulwala and both theMurray and Ovens Rivers. Three additionalself-sustaining populations could beestablished through a concerted,scientifically designed stocking regime.

Roles and responsibilitiesImplementation of the Native Fish Strategyrequires a partnership between governments andthe wider Basin community. Important roles inthe implementation of the Strategy will be heldby individual landholders, Indigenouscommunities, Landcare groups, catchmentmanagement organisations, waterway managers,urban and rural community groups, local, Stateand Australian Government agencies and theMDBC.

Governments are responsible for establishingpolicies and institutional arrangements, and forproviding technical and financial support. Stateand local governments have direct responsibilityfor the management of land and water resources.Through the Basin-wide structure of the MDBC,the rehabilitation of fish populations is to be



sought on a whole river-system basis. TheCommonwealth and State governments willimplement agreed action through their specificprograms, and report against the achievement ofagreed targets.

Community and individual roles

Individuals and communities, includingIndigenous communities, are the foundation ofintegrated catchment management. They havean important role in native fish management.Ways in which individuals and communities canassist in the rehabilitation of native fishpopulations in the river system include:

• helping to develop and implement localaction plans to solve specific local river fishhabitat problems;

• supporting the implementation of nationaland State initiatives for their area;

• becoming aware of key threatening processesrelating to fish populations, and reducingthem in accordance with catchment plans bysuch actions as: (1) ensuring landmanagement practices conform with bestpossible techniques; (2) revegetating erodedstream banks and floodplains to stabilise soiland nutrient movement and to provide afilter for overland flows; and (3) restoringnatural wetland, floodplain and riverconnectivity where practical;

• assuming ownership and involvement in themanagement of native fish populations; and

• playing a major role in increasing educationand awareness.

The recreational and commercial fishingindustries, as major beneficiaries, must play amajor role in rehabilitating fish populations andcan help by participating in developingmanagement plans and regulations as well asremoving alien fish species.

Non-government organisation roles

Catchment management organisations(established under State statute), rivermanagement committees, environment groups,research groups, commercial and recreationalfishing organisations, fish stocking groups,farming groups, Landcare groups, conservationgroups and other non-government organisationsall undertake actions that have the potential tosupport the implementation of the Strategy.

Their on-ground activities in land and watermanagement, in line with catchmentmanagement strategies, will help to protect therivers and fish habitat. Their involvement shouldbe encouraged through a variety of links at

various levels of government and throughvarious agencies. Cooperative Research Centres,universities and government research centres allplay major roles in undertaking research andinforming river management activities.

Local government roles

Local governments control most land useplanning. For example, recreationalmanagement and usage zones, links betweenwater quality and land management and effluentdisposal are all important river managementactions that can impact on native fishpopulations and their environments. Theparticipation and commitment of localgovernments (including water authorities andboards) and their agencies, occurs through localaction and regional management plans that canalso incorporate local biodiversity strategies.Local governments can also play a key role inraising community awareness and participatingin relevant educational activities.

State government roles

The State governments will contribute torehabilitating fish populations in the Murray-Darling Basin by:

• managing recreational, commercial andIndigenous fishing and fish habitats in anecologically sustainable manner;

• establishing and maintaining existing controlsover fishing, aquaculture and manycatchment practices;

• developing and implementing relevantlegislation, policies, guidelines and codes ofpractice;

• providing resources and funding for relevantprojects;

• participating in and providing resources andtechnical advice to catchment managementorganisations that are developing strategies;

• providing extension services to thecommunity on ways of improving waterwaymanagement activities, to enhance fishpopulations;

• participating in the development of nationaland regional fish management;

• protecting species or communities listedunder State threatened species legislation;

• taking the requirements of native fish intoaccount as part of water resourcemanagement and exploitation;

• undertaking research, monitoring and stockassessment;

The implementation

of this Strategy

requires a

coordinated

partnership

approach between

governments at all

levels and the Basin

communities.



• implementing weir policies, wetland policies,floodplain and catchment management plans,and water reform strategies;

• ensuring environment protection andpollution control;

• controlling aquaculture development; and

• undertaking agricultural, forestry and othernatural resource management.

MDBC roles

The MDBC provides direction, policy andstrategic advice, and plays a coordinating role inthe holistic management of rivers and their fishhabitats. It plays a crucial role in ensuringconsistency across State boundaries in theimplementation of this Strategy. The MDBCplays a role in information exchange and publicawareness activities. Actions by the Commissionthat aim to rehabilitate fish populations in theBasin include:

• funding knowledge generation projects in theBasin;

• developing policies and strategies andproviding policy advice about significantnatural resource management issues inriverine environments;

• on-ground actions, including general watermanagement/operational activities, fishwayconstruction, and support and advice topartner governments on fish-related projects;and

• ensuring effective cooperation betweendepartments and adequate involvement andownership of issues.

The MDBC also has a direct role in rivermanagement through its responsibility for theoperation and management of the River Murrayand Lower Darling. The MDBC is thereforeresponsible for the operation of structures, theallocation of environment flows andarrangements for fish passages on these rivers.

Australian Government roles

The Australian Government contributes to therehabilitation of fish populations in the Murray-Darling Basin by:

• providing national policy leadership throughinter-governmental forums, such as theCouncil of Australian Governments (COAG),aimed at improved planning andmanagement of land and water;

• providing funding support to joint ventureprograms such as the Natural Heritage Trust;

• providing impetus for whole-catchmentapproaches to water and land resource

management, through projects and relatedstructural measures implemented jointly withthe community, local and State governmentsand with assistance through the NaturalHeritage Trust and the National Action Plan forSalinity and Water Quality;

• facilitating and encouraging research anddevelopment activities which will enhancesustainable use, productivity andconservation of Australia’s land, water andrelated vegetation resources, particularlythrough organisations such as the CSIRO,Land & Water Australia and CooperativeResearch Centres;

• protection of species or communities listedunder Commonwealth legislation;

• the National Strategy for the Conservation ofAustralia’s Biodiversity and the EnvironmentProtection and Biodiversity Conservation Act;

• the promotion of ecologically sustainable useand the National Strategy for EcologicallySustainable Development;

• promotion of the National Water QualityManagement Strategy;

• applying national principles for the provisionof water for ecosystems; and

• promoting COAG water reforms.

Driving actions have been developed inaccordance with the principles of the IntegratedCatchment Management Policy. They givemomentum to improved management of nativefish in the Basin, leaving specific managementactions to the responsible and knowledgeablebodies, within a proposed monitoring, reportingand auditing framework. The following sixdriving actions seek to achieve the 13 objectivesof this Strategy through management, researchand investigation, and community engagementinterventions:

• rehabilitating fish habitat – helping to achieveobjectives 1–8;

• protecting fish habitat – helping to achieveobjectives 1–8;

• managing riverine structures – helping toachieve objectives 4–8;

• controlling alien fish species – helping toachieve objectives 6–9;

• protecting threatened native fish species –helping to achieve objectives 6 and 10; and

• managing fish translocation and stocking –helping to achieve objectives 9–12.

All driving actions meet objective 13, ensuringthat there is community and partner ownershipand support for native fish management.



© G

unth

er S

chm

ida

Flat-headed gudgeon



© A

M P

hoto

grap

hy/A

rthur

Mos

tead

Barmah-Millewa Forest, Wetlands


Part Three: Implementation of driving actions


1. Rehabilitating fish habitatHabitat degradation has been identified as amajor cause of loss of diversity and decline inpopulations of freshwater fish in Australia. Thereis now an urgent need for a long-termcomprehensive river rehabilitation effort to beundertaken to repair this degradation.Specifically, rehabilitation must be undertaken toprovide acceptable habitats and functioningecosystem processes for fish populations.

Physical habitat for fish includes flow conditions,in-stream structures (snags, undercut banks, rootmasses), substratum (silt, sand, pebble,boulders), aquatic vegetation, wetlands and thefloodplain during periods of flooding. A highdiversity of habitats provides the requiredenvironments for a range of fish species tocomplete their different lifecycle stages.

Water quality is also important for thesustainability of native fish populations. Changesin temperatures, increased salinities, pesticides,heavy metals, eutrophication and turbidity, allhave major implications for the health of thenative fish populations in the Basin.

Poor river water quality can directly interruptthe lifecycle of native fish species (e.g. changedtemperature inhibiting spawning) or have

indirect effects (e.g. increased salinity decreasesfish egg viability).

Regulated flow procedures now cause segmentsof the Basin to experience:

• severe reductions in available water due todamming, storage or extraction;

• sustained unseasonal flows in rivers, whichin some cases have reversed the normalseasonal pattern;

• periods of unnaturally constant flow;

• reduction in occurrence or loss of small tomedium sized floods (this is also evident inunregulated rivers due to off-allocation waterextractions);

• reduction in occurrence of flood events andsubstantial reduction in size, rate of rise andduration of remaining flood events;

• reduction in occurrence or loss of low flowsdue to unseasonal irrigation releases;

• the conversion of open-flowing riverineenvironments to a sequence of pools becauseof the construction of weirs; and

• parts of wetlands and floodplains continuallysaturated (waterlogging) rather thanexperiencing a wetting and drying period.

1. Repair and protect key components of aquaticand riparian habitats

2. Rehabilitate the natural functioning ofwetlands and floodplain habitats

3. Improve key aspects of water quality thataffect native fish

4. Modify flow regulation practices

5. Provide adequate passage for native fish

6. Devise and implement recovery plans forthreatened native fish species

7. Create and implement management plans forother native fish species and communities

8. Control and manage alien fish species

9. Protect native fish from threats of disease andparasites

10. Manage fisheries in a sustainable manner

11. Protect native fish from the adverse effects oftranslocation and stocking

12. Ensure native fish populations benefit fromaquaculture

13. Ensure community and partner ownership andsupport for native fish management

Rehabilitating fish habitat

Driving actions Objectives

Protecting fish habitat

Managing riverinestructures

Controlling alien fishspecies

Protecting threatenednative fish species

Managing fishtranslocation andstocking

Six driving actions

seek to achieve this

Strategy’s thirteen

objectives through

management,

research and

investigation, and

community

engagement

interventions.



These conditions affect water quality and changethe flow-related triggers for fish movement,recolonisation and spawning. Flows necessary forfish breeding, recruitment and occupancy havebeen reduced, and habitat diversity has been lost.It has been shown that native fish speciesdiversity and abundance has decreased along theRiver Murray as a result of flow regulation.

An environmental flow is any managedchange in a river flow pattern intended tomaintain or improve river health.Environmental flows help ensure moderatefloods across floodplains to stimulate nativefish breeding, an increase in the diversity offish habitat and maintenance of waterquality.

Rehabilitating habitat in the Basin will be acritical step in the return to sustainability of ournative fish populations. Further research andinvestigation are needed, but this should notdelay the commencement of rehabilitationactivities. Habitat rehabilitation includes actionssuch as resnagging, the rehabilitation orprotection of riparian margins, rehabilitation offloodplain wetlands, restoration of connectivitybetween rivers, floodplains and wetlands and thereduction of catchment-wide erosion andassociated sedimentation. The provision ofenvironmental flows that mimic natural flows isalso important for fish habitat rehabilitation.

In providing environmental flows it isimportant to look at ways in which benefitscan be maximised by ensuring that anyenvironmental flow:

• is timed to occur in the right season totrigger breeding of native fish species;

• occurs often enough and lasts longenough to allow breeding to succeed;

• is large enough to link the river to itsfloodplains, wetlands, billabongs,anabranches and/or the sea; and

• provides varying water levels to providewetland and river banks with wet-and-dry cycles which reflect naturalconditions.

Actions

Management

1.1 Establish a system of distinct RiverineManagement Zones with accompanyingmanagement plans

Although rivers need to be managed as anoverall unit, they are often too large to

effectively do so at a practical level. Each rivershould have a management plan that indicateswhy and how the river is going to be managed.However, the river needs to be split into smallermanagement units to achieve river managementoutcomes practically. This is most easily achievedby establishing a system of distinct RiverineManagement Zones (RMZs). The plan for eachRMZ becomes a subset of the overall river plan.The RMZ plans should detail the actions requiredto restore native fish population, and include andrevise where necessary, existing operationalprocedures. Logically (at least initially), thesemay largely be based on existing operationalzones (e.g. Dartmouth Dam to Lake Hume).There are ecological and geomorphic processesoperating both within and across thesemanagement zones that also need to beincorporated into management planning. Theseprocesses influence the distribution, abundanceand structure of fish populations. Often theseprocesses are too large to manage in theirentirety. They need to be determined and thenincorporated into the RMZ plans. The process ofestablishing and prioritising RMZs needs to befurther developed as one of the first steps inimplementing this Strategy.

The process of establishing RMZs and developingplans will identify specific issues which need tobe addressed in that zone, priority actions forinvestment and actions that may apply acrossmore than one RMZ. Identification of theseactions will also determine the scope of theaction and the responsible authority (e.g. wateragency, MDBC, Catchment ManagementAuthority/Board). This may necessitatelinks/partnerships between different agencies toensure an integrated approach.

1.2 Prioritise RMZs for action according to ecologicalfunction and management capability, consistentwith other Basin initiatives

Priorities for action need to be set both betweenand within each RMZ. This can only be achievedafter a determination of the priority of threats ineach RMZ. The importance of these threats atboth the RMZ and whole-of-river/neighbouringRMZ scale will be necessary. Such priorities willthen be the keys for targeting investment.

Criteria for prioritising RMZs for action need toconsider: the importance of the river reach, thedegree of degradation, downstream effects andbenefits, expected response times, connections toother waterways, sequence and timing ofrestoration actions, and cost benefit analysis. Thesame criteria need to be applied whenprioritising actions within RMZs, although the



weightings of each criterion may alter. Keythreats and key ecological issues need to beconsidered and an assessment made as towhether such threats may be being managed oraffected by some larger scale process.

Management plans that focus on rehabilitationof native fish populations will be developed forpriority RMZs. These plans will form part of anoverall river plan and will prescribe integratedapproaches to rehabilitating fish habitat, with theMDBC acting as an overall coordinating bodyand broker of information. Two importantactions from RMZ management planning may bethe establishment of Habitat Management Areasand demonstration reaches.

1.3 Establish demonstration reaches

Demonstration reaches will integrate land andwater programs within comprehensiverehabilitation exercises on substantial (importantand visible) river reaches. This could includeprovision of environmental flows and greaterresnagging along these reaches to provide agrowing habitat from which native fish canrecolonise their surrounding environment. It willalso include rehabilitation or protection ofriparian margins and the rehabilitation offloodplain wetlands.

Demonstration reach: a river reachestablished for the purpose of demonstratingto the community the cumulative benefits ofapplying a number of interventions (e.g.provision of fish passage, resnagging, alienspecies management) for rehabilitation ofnative fish habitat and populations.Refer to Figure 3.

Research and investigation

1.4 Provide information on the location and statusof key native fish habitats in the Basin’s rivers,streams, wetlands and floodplain channel

The information required for the establishmentof demonstration reaches is exhaustive and isfundamental to the success of any rehabilitationactions. Biological and ecological information isessential, and effort should be made to acquirethe data from the chosen site, as opposed toreliance on the literature, which may relatestrongly to the site from which those data werecollected. Similarly, data should be as current aspossible given the expansion of threateningprocesses. The value of historical data, whetherscientific, Indigenous or anecdotal, should not beforgotten as a valuable source of informationrelating to dynamics of fish populations, ‘natural’river form and flow regimes and human impacts.

Whole-of-River Plan

River Management Zone(capture ecological and geomorphic functional units of the river)

Habitat Management Area(areas of high conservation requiring extra protection)

Demonstration Reach(rehabilitation works are trialed and evaluated)

Figure 3: Schematic diagram of the River Management Zone concept



1.5 Develop and review best management practicesand options for rehabilitating, managing andprotecting priority fish habitats along significantreaches of rivers within each State

This will require knowledge of the habitatrequirements of native fish, including knowledgeof environmental flows.

1.6 Identify effective measurement techniques fordetermining the responses of native fishpopulations to comprehensive rehabilitation ofsubstantial reaches of the rivers (demonstrationreaches)

The measurement techniques and indicatorsused will be determined by the restoration actionwhich is undertaken and the objective which hasbeen set. Objectives need to be set which aresuitable, measurable, attainable, reliable andtargeted, and which can provide feedback underan adaptive management framework.Measurement of results can only occur through ascientific design and necessitates the allocation ofappropriate resources for monitoring. Examplesof measurement techniques may include fishcollections to determine changes in distribution,abundance or recruitment.

Community engagement

1.7 Support involvement of catchment andcommunity groups in local rehabilitationprograms

The management actions described above are not‘quick-fix’ options and require considerablecapital outlay and government leadership. Theyare reliant to a large extent on strong catchment-based and community-supported programs at thelocal level.

It will be important to use visible demonstrationreaches to engage community confidence andsupport, ownership and involvement as theywitness the benefits of rehabilitation works.

1.8 Involve the community in adaptivemanagement of native fish habitats

Involving the community in management andmonitoring of native fish habitats, and in thesetting of environmental flows, is important.Monitoring of progress in habitat rehabilitationwill provide feedback for regional adaptivemanagement of river reaches.

Costs and benefits

Considerable investments in fish habitatrehabilitation have been established throughvarious State/Territory and Commonwealthprograms. Increases in funding need to be

carefully directed if there are to be immediateand direct benefits for native fish populations.Rehabilitating environmental flows and fishhabitats in demonstration reaches are the beststrategies for providing long-term return oninvestment. They are critical steps for returningsustainability to our native fish populations.Scientific advice suggests that the combinedbenefits of habitat rehabilitation andenvironmental flow allocations could see nativefish communities returning to levels approaching60 per cent of what they were estimated to be atpre-European settlement. However, priorities forinvestments in rehabilitating very degraded areasneed to be balanced against the need to protecthealthy riverine habitats.

Targeted use of environmental flows can yieldshort-term results that also support other actions,including those designed to manage carp andprotect threatened native fish species orcommunities.

Accountability indicator

• Major rehabilitation demonstration reachesimplemented in relevant RiverineManagement Zones

There is an urgent need for long-term comprehensiveriver rehabilitation to provide acceptable habitats fornative fish populations.

The establishment of distinctive Riverine ManagementZones with accompanying management plans willpractically assist this Strategy to achieve its objectives.

Demonstration reaches need to be established toshowcase to the community the comprehensive riverrehabilitation actions along substantial and visibleriver reaches.

2. Protecting fish habitatSome areas in the Murray-Darling Basin are stillin relatively good condition and support healthyaquatic ecosystems, including viable fishpopulations. These specific areas which are ingood condition should be managed carefully sothat the requirements of native fish species,including all of their lifecycle needs, are met. It isacknowledged throughout the world that it issignificantly easier and more cost effective tocarefully manage healthy habitats rather thanrehabilitate them when their condition hasdeteriorated.

Proposed ‘Habitat Management Areas’ are areasthat would require additional managementattention or recognition to ensure that theircondition is maintained or enhanced. A systemof Habitat Management Areas that encompasses



a ‘multiple-use management’ framework wouldbe particularly relevant to the Basin. ‘Multiple-use management’ in Habitat Management Areaswould not normally exclude popular recreationalpursuits such as fishing and camping, which areimportant to many local communities along theBasin’s inland waterways. State fisheries andcatchment management legislation alreadycontain provisions for closed seasons, closedareas and protection of critical habitats. A systemof Habitat Management Areas may simplyformalise and coordinate the protective measuresalready in place, and identify areas whereadditional measures will enhance and secure theviability of native fish and freshwaterecosystems.

The use of Habitat Management Areas forrecreational or commercial pursuits should beappropriate to the individual site and follow ahierarchical structure such as that adopted by theInternational Union for the Conservation ofNature (IUCN). IUCN sites are categorised andrange from areas of almost complete publicexclusion to those that afford a ‘sustainable flowof natural products and services to meetcommunity needs’ (IUCN 1994). Thoughstrongly dependent on size, resource use mayalso vary within a management area, so that insome areas certain activities may be excludedwhile in others there may be multiple-use ofresources.

A Habitat Management Area might be a habitatwhich supports a unique fish community, or ahabitat in pristine condition which supports ahealthy community. It might be a location whereexisting management practices have alreadycontributed to the enhanced values of the area.There are many examples of similarmanagement systems already within the Basin.Many water supply catchments are importanthabitats and operate under differentmanagement regimes to ensure that thecatchments and the water they produce remainin good condition. The Barmah Forest andGunbower Forest are special places and are listedas wetlands of international importance underthe ‘Convention on Wetlands of InternationalImportance’ (Ramsar Convention). There arealso a number of rivers in Victoria which havebeen recognised under the Heritage Riversclassification.

A network of Habitat Management Areasthroughout the Basin will certainly help protectthe habitat which supports native fish listed asthreatened or endangered. However, substantialdeclines have also occurred in many native fishpopulations not currently listed as threatened

and the designation of Habitat ManagementAreas will help protect the habitat of all theBasin’s native fish.

Valuable remnant fish habitats and populationswill be particularly targeted by the HabitatManagement Areas. Such a system will yield

Pilby Creek wetland– an example of community group

involvement in rehabilitation activities

Pilby Creek wetland, near Lock 6 on theRiver Murray near Renmark in SouthAustralia, is an old billabong of about 17 hectares. Carp moved into the PilbyCreek from nearby rivers during floods andwere thought to decrease the aquaticvegetation and water quality of the wetland.This contributed to a decline in native birdand fish species. There was concern in thelocal community about loss of aestheticvalues, poor water quality and reducedopportunities for duck shooting.

In 1989, the Murray-Darling Association andthe Renmark Berri Branch of the SouthAustralian Field and Game Associationinitiated a project of restoration. The projectaimed to improve the ecological quality ofthe wetland through restoring the naturalwetting and drying cycle, getting rid of carpand preventing their return, and restoringthe aquatic vegetation.

It became a cooperative effort with theinvolvement of the Murray-DarlingAssociation, SA Field and Game Association,the Riverland Fishermen's Association, thethen Department of Environment, Heritageand Aboriginal Affairs, and SA Water.

Since 1993, a team involving severalstakeholder groups has drained and refilledthe wetland several times to remove carp.They also installed screens to prevent therecolonisation of carp. The reduction of carpover the years has resulted in a vastimprovement in water quality and somesignificant changes to the flora and fauna ofthe wetland, including the return of somebird, insect and plant species not seen sincethe invasion of carp.

With the management of carp, the focus inPilby Creek is now on establishing morenatural filling and drying cycles to encourageand enhance the breeding of native fish. Thiswork is being coordinated by a community-based group under the auspices of SA Parksand Wildlife.

Multiple-use

management in

Habitat

Management Areas

would not normally

exclude popular

recreational pursuits

such as fishing and

camping, which are

important to many

local communities

along the Basin’s

inland waterways.



significant benefits for biodiversity conservation,including some native fish communities, as wellas contributing to the overall health of theBasin’s rivers and floodplains.

Developing a system of Habitat ManagementAreas will mean that threatening processes suchas the impacts of reduced water quality can bemore closely managed in these areas. Therehabilitation of viable populations of threatenednative fish species is also more likely under sucha system. The establishment of a system ofHabitat Management Areas in the Murray-Darling Basin would add to Australia’s currentcommitment to biodiversity conservation, whichincludes a network of terrestrial and marineprotected areas.

A system of Habitat Management Areas for fishcannot succeed without broad communitysupport and assistance. The local communityadjacent to a Habitat Management Area can playa vital role in identifying the area andestablishing its values, designing suitablemanagement objectives, assisting with on-ground works, and ensuring that messages aboutthe importance of the area are understood andembraced by the wider community. The NativeFish Strategy makes a commitment to activepartnership between local communities andmanagement agencies in the establishment andongoing operation of Habitat ManagementAreas.

© P

eter

Sol

ness

/Net

wor

k Ph

otog

raph

ers

Macquarie Marshes – central west New South Wales



Comparing demonstration reaches andHabitat Management Areas

A core function of a demonstration reach isto create public awareness and ownershipand to promote knowledge transfer toconvey the benefits of rehabilitating nativefish populations. Demonstration reaches aretemporary, but lasting at least 10 years. Incontrast, a Habitat Management Area is amore permanent area, protected bylegislative power with a focus on conservinghabitat and fish populations over the long-term through integrated management plans.In some instances, where a new ‘type’ ofhabitat is proposed for conservation, thedemonstration area may become eligible fordeclaration as a Habitat Management Areaafter the given period of rehabilitation and ifthe community and legislative frameworkare supportive.

Actions

Management

2.1 Develop a framework of principles andguidelines for the establishment of HabitatManagement Areas throughout the Basin

Habitat Management Areas are areas of highconservation value requiring extra care. Aframework is needed to establish HabitatManagement Areas which will guide not onlythe process of selection of sites, but also thedesign of each specific management area.Implicit in this process will be negotiation withthe local community as Habitat ManagementAreas can only be successful through communityinvolvement and support.

2.2 Examine the due process for implementing theHabitat Management Area concept

Once suitable Habitat Management Areas havebeen selected and the framework forimplementation determined, the due process forestablishment of each area will need to beundertaken. The process will need to be relevantto the jurisdiction in which it lies for thepurposes of establishment, conservation,management and enforcement.

Most jurisdictions have existing managementstrategies that are similar to the proposed HabitatManagement Areas and these processes couldassist in implementing the management areas.Heritage Rivers in Victoria, the MurrumbidgeeRiver Corridor in the Australian Capital Territoryand Fish Habitat Areas in Queensland areexamples of similar management strategies that

already exist. Processes will need to benegotiated where sites encompass more than onejurisdictional boundary, such as many areas ofthe River Murray that flow along theNSW–Victorian border.

2.3 Establish a series of scientific reference sites thatprovide a representative system of recognisedhabitat types

A series of scientific reference sites is needed toprovide baseline data and information about thespecies to be restored and the associated riverineecosystem, as well as provide for an integratedmonitoring system. These areas may coincidewith other Habitat Management Areas ordemonstration reaches in some circumstances.Criteria for selecting these areas should include:

• biological integrity;

• completeness of ecological processes;

• areas of substantial previousresearch/knowledge; and

• ability to provide baseline data.

2.4 Implement environmental flow strategies where needed

River flows through Habitat Management Areasand reference sites need to mimic natural flowsas closely as possible. For example, during dryperiods it may be important to protect low flowsdownstream of impoundments to conserve fishrefuges. Environmental flow strategies will needto be coordinated through existing jurisdictionalprocesses, such as Water Resource Plans(Queensland), Water Sharing Plans (New SouthWales), South Australian River MurrayEnvironmental Flows Strategy (South Australia),Environmental Flow Guidelines (Australian CapitalTerritory) and Streamflow Management Plans(Victoria).


2.5 Investigate the benefits of a system of HabitatManagement Areas to protect and enhance fishhabitats and populations

Research is needed to identify those habitats thatrepresent a healthy environment for native fishspecies. Such habitats will need to be conservedthrough a system of Habitat Management Areasor through the implementation of localcatchment management plans. Once theseHabitat Management Areas are instituted, ascientifically based and adequately resourcedmonitoring regime should be undertaken so thebenefits can be meaningfully demonstrated.Investigation is also required to establish themost effective mechanism that encompasses the

Habitat

Management Areas

can only be

successful through

community

involvement and

support.



‘wise-use’ or ‘multiple-use’ philosophy forinstituting a system of Habitat ManagementAreas.


2.6 Consult relevant communities aboutestablishing Habitat Management Areas andscientific reference sites

The establishment of Habitat Management Areasand reference sites throughout the Basin’s riverswill need to be negotiated through communityinvolvement and support. The maintenance ofsuch areas in a sustainable condition will alsodepend on the plans and actions of localcommunities, including Indigenouscommunities, catchment organisations andlandholders.

Costs and benefits

In conjunction with enhanced environmentalflows, habitat rehabilitation and control of alien

fish species, the establishment of a system ofHabitat Management Areas is an importantstrategic intervention for conserving threatenedspecies and maintaining populations of non-threatened native fish. The establishment ofHabitat Management Areas and reference sitesmay require buy-back options for importantconservation areas.

In the short-term, new Habitat ManagementAreas may be warranted in an effort to secureimportant habitat for threatened species orcommunities, or remaining importantpopulations. In the medium and longer terms,Habitat Management Areas provide:

• havens or refuges for threatened species orcommunities;

• protection for important habitats orpopulations; and

• fish stocks for recolonising rehabilitatedhabitat areas.

© P

eter

Sol

ness

/Net

wor

k Ph

otog

raph

ers

Burrendong Dam on the Macquarie River, central west New South Wales




• A system of representative HabitatManagement Areas for fish implementedBasin-wide.

3. Managing riverine structuresNative fish species move along rivers forbreeding, recruitment, attaining critical habitat,protection from threats, recolonisation and/orthe establishment of new territories. Artificial in-stream barriers such as dams, weirs, floodbarriers, stream gauging weirs, causeways,culverts and road crossings can affect fishmovements. Other barriers to natural fishmovement include poor water quality andtemperature, siltation, habitat loss, reduced flowand alienation from other waterways, floodplainsor wetlands by levee banks, flow regulators etc.

An expert group of ecologists and engineersassist the MDBC to plan at a broad strategic levelas well as at specific sites. This group helps toensure that the most effective fishway designsare used at particular sites under a Basin-widefish passage program for priority structures. Inthe case of some obsolete weirs, removal is themost effective form of restoring fish passage,especially where the diminished economicreturns are clearly outweighed by theenvironmental advantages of removing thestructure.

Water releases from dams and other structurescan also affect fish populations. Temperaturechanges can cause ‘thermal pollution’, wherewater temperatures do not meet the criticaltemperatures required for sustainable growthand maintenance of native fish populations. Forexample, water tends to stratify in storages, withwarm water occurring in the surface layers andvery cold water occurring in the bottom layers.Low-level outlets from storages release this verycold water into the rivers below, with largevolumes released during summer when naturalwater temperatures are high. Such suddentemperature changes can cause large-scaledisruption to fish migration and can interruptspawning and kill eggs, larvae and possiblyjuvenile fish.

During autumn, the cessation of seasonalirrigation flows coincides with the onset of cold,frosty weather. If releases are small or absent,violent daily swings in water temperature canoccur in the shallower water. This has causedwidespread fish-kills below dams at moderatealtitudes. Another impact of thermal pollution isto provide alien fish species with ideal habitats

for hundreds of kilometres below major storages.In the southern parts of the Basin (south of theLachlan River), in particular, thermal pollution isa far greater problem than in the northern partsand needs to be considered a priority.

The MDBC is investigating the thermaleffects associated with the Hume Dam. Inconsidering the effects, the compoundingproblem of multiple impacts on the RiverMurray downstream of Hume Dam willneed to be considered. These include:

• altered flow seasonality from high flowsin winter and early spring, to havinghigh flows in late spring, summer, andearly autumn;

• reduction in flood frequency andduration;

• altered riparian vegetation;

• alienated floodplain and wetlands andsignificantly altered floodplain ecosystemwith agriculture replacing the floodplainred gum forest;

• loss of shallow backwaters below largeimpoundments;

• the significant de-snagging actionhappening up until about 20 years ago;and

• the thermal effects of the Hume Dam.

Another issue related to riverine structures isthat about 80 per cent of the flow in the Basin’srivers is diverted. Native fish are unable tomaintain their position in the riverine systems asthere are no mechanisms associated with thesediversions to prevent fish from leaving the rivers.An estimated two-thirds of the native fish arelost from the Basin’s rivers onto farmland andfarm dams.

Farm dams

The most practical place for a farm dam isoften on a waterway. However, these damshave a greater ecological impact than thosesituated off waterways. It can be verydifficult to ensure that stream flows aremaintained, particularly during summer,and this can significantly affect fishmigrations and spawning. High watertemperatures and lowered oxygen levels thatoccur during periods of low flow can killmany native fish. Low stream flows can alsohave serious effects on macroinvertebratepopulations. Other environmental concernsinclude:

Very cold water

released from the

bottom layers of deep

dams during

summer can prevent

spawning, slow

growth and even

kill fish.



• the role of dams in acting as barriers tofish migrations and to the localisedmovement of fish;

• increases in silt entering the waterwayfrom the construction of dams; and

• flushes that freshen streams, which canaffect deeper pools that provide asanctuary for fish and other aquatic lifeduring dry periods.

Developers need to be discouraged frombuilding dams on waterways as these havehigh environmental values. Dams shouldonly be constructed on a waterway if thereare no suitable off-waterway sites. Theymust be built to ensure that downstreamusers are not adversely affected and that theecological needs of the waterway are maintained, including:

• the aquatic, riparian, floodplain andwetland ecosystems;

• water quality;

• the flow of water within the waterway;and

• the condition of the land that forms thewaterway or its surrounds.

Licences are required to construct, alter,operate, remove or abandon dam works on awaterway and to construct a dam off awaterway if the dam is likely to behazardous to life, property or to theenvironment.

(Source: DRAFT Victorian Farm Dams ReviewCommittee Report, December 2000)

Actions

Management

3.1 Implement the Murray-Darling Basin fishpassage program

A high priority and immediate action is toimplement the Murray-Darling Basin fishpassage program to:

• agree on shared criteria for prioritisingfishways;

• complete the database of existing fishbarriers;

• design whole-catchment fish migrationstrategies;

• establish Basin-wide priorities for fish passageworks;

• pursue technological advances in fishpassage; and

• commit to monitoring the use of fishways byboth native and alien species.

Such a program aims to rehabilitate allineffective fishways (e.g. at Boggabilla in NSW,Loddon in Victoria and Lake Mulwala in NSW)and construct and monitor new fishways inpriority areas. It also reviews, and whennecessary, revises operating procedures on Basinstructures to optimise fish passage—for example,reinstating procedures for increasing periods ofopen river. In some cases, barriers to fish passagewill be removed where they are no longeruseful.

3.2 Provide fish passage on the River Murray fromLake Hume to the sea

As a priority over the next five years (2003–08),provision of fish passage from Lake Hume to thesea is being implemented. This includesproviding appropriate fishways at the barragesnear the mouth of the Murray, and assessing thesuccess of structural changes. Other MDBCstructures connected to the River Murray, suchas Mildura Weir and Lake Victoria, will alsoreceive fish ladders so as to be in harmony withthe River Murray fish passage program.

3.3 Implement fish passage on 18 priority barriers(not associated with the River Murray)

The MDBC has identified 18 barriers of priorityimportance for fish passage (see Table 3), andwill work to coordinate a Basin-wide passageprogram with its State partners. An expert groupof ecologists and engineers has used a number ofcriteria to prioritise remedial works for thethousands of instream barriers to fish migrationpresent within the Basin. Criteria include thequality and extent of habitat available, the fishspecies present and their requirements, and theeconomic and social costs of any works.

3.4 Develop built-in thermal mitigation measuresfor all future water infrastructure ormanagement decisions in relation to riverscurrently unaffected by thermal pollution

The past problems of thermal pollution must beavoided in currently unaffected rivers. Outletstructures and procedures should ensure thatEPA water quality requirements and thebiological requirements for all native species canbe met by all releases.

3.5 Pursue improved operational approaches todam management where thermal pollution isalready a problem

Approaches allowing gains to be achievedwithout unduly compromising irrigationsupplies, flood control or water quality standards

Riverine structures

such as dams and

weirs form barriers

to natural fish

movements along the

river and affect fish

habitats by altering

flow and

temperature.



are a priority. This may include modification torates of change of releases, releases fromdifferent levels in the water column or alteredtiming of releases.

3.6 Design and construct structures suitable formitigating thermal pollution on all storageswhere they are required

One of several structural options is theinstallation of variable level outlets which allowwater to be released from any level from thewater storage. The level with the appropriatetemperature for local native fish communitiescan then be chosen.

3.7 Review of all jurisdictional legislation andpolicies dealing with thermal pollution

This involves identifying institutional andlicensing arrangements and resourcing that willincrease the effectiveness of these policies andlegislation. It is important to focus moreattention on thermal pollution and pursue a

more coordinated approach. This can beachieved by listing thermal pollution as athreatening process under all relevant legislation.

3.8 Ensure the National Guidelines for fish-friendlycrossings are taken up by road and railauthorities and private landholders

It is important to recognise that many of thebarriers to fish movements are roads, culvertsand rail tracks that cut across waterways. It isimportant that actions documented in theNational Guidelines for fish-friendly crossings arepromoted to and adopted by local governmentsto reduce the blockage of fish passage.

3.9 Develop a Basin-wide program which supportsthe removal of weirs and other barriers to fishpassage

Many barriers to fish passage are no longerrequired by their original owners and a programto remove obsolete structures should beformulated.

Barrier name River State

Steven's Weir Edwards River NSW

Menindee Lakes Main Weir Darling River NSW

Caseys Weir Broken River Vic.

Boomi Weir Macintyre River Qld

Cunnamulla Weir Warrego River Qld

Gogelderie Weir Murrumbidgee River NSW

Redbank Weir Murrumbidgee River NSW

Kerang Weir Loddon River Vic.

Brewarrina Weir Barwon River NSW

Gowangardie Weir Broken River Vic.

Gulf Regulator Smith Creek–Barmah Lakes Vic.

Loudoun Weir Condamine River Qld

Mullaroo control structure Lindsay River–Mullaroo Ck Vic.

Tea Garden Creek Weir Ovens River Vic.

Bourke Weir Darling River NSW

Walgett Weir Barwon River NSW

Neil Turner Weir Maranoa River Qld

Eulo Weir Paroo River Qld

Table 3: Priority barriers in the Murray-Darling Basin needing newfishways or modifications to existing fishways (listed in priority order)NB: The Lake Hume to River Murray mouth fishways program being implemented by the MDBCcovers fishways within South Australia.




3.10 Develop and monitor cost-effective fish passagetechnology suitable to native fish migration inthe Basin’s rivers

This includes building experimental fishways forvarious structures and assessing theirperformance using the most effective fishcounting and monitoring techniques available.

3.11 Improve knowledge on the effects of barriers ondownstream movements of juvenile and adultpopulations of fish

3.12 Investigate the removal of unwanted alienspecies, especially carp, at every fishway

Developmental work is already underway topursue methods to either physically orelectronically separate unwanted (usually carp)and wanted (i.e. native) fish species as they passthrough fishways. This work should besupported by further research, including humaneand efficient methods of disposal.

3.13 Document the scale, distribution and severity ofthermal pollution

Such information is important so thatappropriate mitigation measures or structurescan be designed. This is a priority for guidingfuture actions.

3.14 Undertake scientifically-based pilot studies to demonstrate the benefits of mitigatingthermal pollution, and to monitor the recoveryof native fish

Management actions for mitigating thermalpollution need to be preceded by a riskmanagement analysis of the social, economic andenvironmental costs and benefits.


3.15 Liaise with partners, including the community,about the Basin-wide fish passage program

While the MDBC manages and operates most ofthe River Murray structures, State or otherpartners own other Basin structures. It isimportant that the MDBC plays an overallcoordinating role in implementing a Basin-widefish passage program. This will includeconsulting with the general community,including Indigenous communities, about theproblems of regulated structures and solutionsthat benefit fish populations. This includes thenotion that restocking of areas with fish is not along-term solution. Strategies for overcoming theproblems of fish passage and thermal pollutionneed to form part of established and proposedinitiatives directed at integrated catchment

management, natural resource management andriver rehabilitation.

3.16 Set up an inter-agency working group that also includes community and scientificrepresentatives for coordinating responses tothermal pollution

Costs and benefits

The MDB Ministerial Council has alreadycommitted $25 million over the next five yearsto provide fish passage from Lake Hume to thesea. The estimated cost of the other 18 priorityfishways (see Table 3) is about $15 million. Fishcounters, important for monitoring theeffectiveness of fishways, can range in cost from$25 000 to $100 000 each, depending on theiraccuracy and the size of fish they can detect. Thecosts and benefits of mitigating thermal pollutionneed further and immediate investigation.However, it appears to be a clearly definable,tangible, cost-effective intervention that can becompleted for the major storages in the Basinwithin ten years, through a combination ofengineering and operating changes.

The abatement of cold water pollution and theprovision of fish passage are importantcomplementary actions. Investing in thisintervention will have long-term benefits for thewhole Basin, and is an ideal early target that atthe very least will help stop further degradationuntil other strategies take effect.

Accountability indicators

• Effective fishways implemented to assist fishmigration and movements.

• Improved flow management for fish habitatdiversity, fish lifecycle movements, andreduction of thermal pollution.

4. Controlling alien fish speciesThe Basin already contains at least 11 alien fishspecies in the wild, some in pest proportions, andfurther introductions are inevitable over time.Both the abundance and attributes of some alienfish continue to cause damage to habitats andpopulations of native species. Most attention hasbeen given to carp and trout because they arethe largest and visibly most abundant, but thereare many other species that can have impactsthrough predation, competition and disease. Therisk of further introductions into the Basin—especially from aquariums and nearby riversoutside the Basin—also needs to be considered.Precautionary approaches, to minimise the riskof future introductions, and pest managementprinciples, to address existing introductions,should be applied across the Basin.



Redfin perch carry disease to native fish

Redfin perch were first introduced toVictoria in 1868 and are now widelydistributed throughout the temperateportion of the Murray-Darling Basin. Theyare absent from the colder headwaters andthe hotter reaches of the upper part of theBasin. Their distribution is largely explainedby their temperature tolerance—they cansurvive in water temperatures up to about31 ºC. They are a predatory species withadults eating crustaceans and small fish,including western carp gudgeon.

Redfin perch are the main host for a virus,EHNV. This virus, unique to Australia, wasfirst isolated in 1985 on redfin perch. It ischaracterised by sudden high mortalities offish displaying breakdown of renal tissue,liver, spleen and pancreas. The virus alsoaffects trout species, which can act as vectorsto spread the disease. Experimental workhas demonstrated that a number of nativefish species (including Macquarie perch,silver perch and mountain galaxias) areextremely susceptible to the disease. Once

EHNV has been recorded in a water body itis considered impossible to eradicate.

After their establishment in the ACT in1983, redfin perch rapidly increased innumbers in the urban lakes. By 1989 theyformed 58 per cent of the total catch in LakeBurley Griffin. Their numbers in Lake BurleyGriffin, Lake Ginninderra and GoogongReservoir all declined dramatically after theoutbreak of EHNV in these water bodies inthe early to mid-1990s. Redfin nowcomprise around 10 to 15 per cent of thecatch in Lake Burley Griffin.

Carp prefer slower running waters and riverpools, and are most prevalent in the more highlyregulated rivers of the Basin, such as the RiverMurray and Murrumbidgee River. Experts haverated them the near perfect ‘invader’, as they area highly adaptable and tolerant species.

Carp are fast-breeding and can achieve largepopulation numbers in a relatively short periodof time, recording densities of up to one fish persquare metre of water surface area.

In some river reaches of the Murray-DarlingBasin it is estimated carp now represent more

© J

ohn

Bake

r

Vertical slot fishway

The Basin contains

at least eleven alien

fish species that may

affect native fish

populations through

predation,

competition, disease

or degradation of

habitat.



than 90 per cent of the total fish biomass, andacross the Basin the estimate is that carpconstitute 80 per cent of the biomass.

Carp are now the dominant fish of the Murray-Darling Basin. If this continues they willout-compete more and more native fish andother riverine species. Carp are also partlyresponsible for the increasing turbidity of thewater within the Basin, and their feeding habitsuproot aquatic vegetation.

Carp control

The MDBC has published the NationalManagement Strategy for Carp Control2000–2005. It aims ‘to provide direction, andfocus for the coordinated national approachto the control of carp’. Its goals are to:

• prevent the spread of carp;

• reduce the impacts of carp to acceptablelevels;

• promote environmentally and sociallyacceptable application of carp eradicationand control programs;

• improve community understanding of theimpacts of carp and the managementstrategies to counteract those impacts; and

• promote the cost-efficient use of publicresources in carp eradication and controlprograms.

The focus of all management of alien fish speciesshould be on reducing the impacts of such fishon native species, rather than on completeeradication of numbers. The best approach toreducing such impacts is an integrated one thatcombines a range of techniques. For example,with carp, appropriate techniques could includerehabilitating the wetting and drying cycles forfloodplain wetlands, commercial exploitation,and the installation of screens and fish traps toprevent adult fish migrations. There is unlikely tobe one ‘silver bullet’ that can solve any singlealien species problem. Control of alien speciesneeds to be part of an overall river rehabilitationprocess.

Control of tilapia(Oreochromis mossambicus) in the

northern part of the Murray-Darling Basin

Tilapia is an alien species now found in somecatchments of south-east Queensland.Without proper management there is a riskof its introduction into the Murray-DarlingBasin. They are a hardy fish species that cantolerate a wider range of water qualityconditions, including salinity, both highacidity and alkaline water, and low levels ofdissolved oxygen. This makes tilapia adifficult species to control with the range oftechniques currently available. Like carp,there is little sound information about the

© Iv

or S

tuar

t

Processing carp on the River Murray



damage they cause. They could be asymptom of degraded water rather than thecause. However, remnant native fishpopulations are likely to be further stressedby the presence of tilapia as a competitor forspace and food.

Actions

Management

4.1 Support the implementation of the goals andstrategies of the National Management Strategyfor Carp Control, including the development ofregional carp management plans

The MDBC has produced a document titledRanking Areas for Action: A Guide for CarpManagement Groups. The first section describes amethod for identifying and prioritising areas forcarp management, while the second outlines afour-step process to help develop and implementan effective carp management plan for suchareas. This Strategy supports the ongoingimplementation of this guide by regional groups.In prioritising areas for action, it will beimportant to:

• determine management units for aquaticsystems and assess and rank theirconservation and water quality status;

• assess and rank the threat of carp in each ofthe units; and

• assess the likelihood that an effectiveprogram to manage carp damage can beimplemented.

Ultimately, other factors such as urgency foraction, ease of implementation and level ofcooperation, may mean that lower-ranked areasare treated in preference to higher-ranked areas.Nevertheless, the method is a systematic andtransparent process that involves partners ateach step. The aim is to provide a structuredprocess to assist decision-making. It can bemodified to suit the particular needs of themanagement group. It is usually necessary toimplement management across a wide area andwork to boundaries, such as weirs, waterfalls andother boundaries to carp movement.

It is essential that regional carp managementplans are integrated with other localmanagement plans, such as IntegratedCatchment Management (ICM) plans, to ensurethat the carp management plan is consistent withthe objectives of these other plans and initiatives.In such plans, an integrated package of carpcontrol techniques needs to be considered.Progress towards meeting objectives needs to besystematically monitored and evaluated, andresults reported to the relevant local authority.

4.2 Ensure a consistent legal status and approach toall alien species management across the Basin

There is a need to resolve the numerousinconsistencies in both legislation and policy,between and within States, in such areas asimport, sale, release, use as live bait andenforcement.

4.3 Develop a rapid response system for new alienspecies in the Basin

The development of a rapid identification andresponse system is needed to ensure that astandard plan is put into place as soon as there isa report of a new alien species occurring withinor near the Basin—this process will ensure thatthe likelihood of successfully eradicating a newlyintroduced species is maximised. A rapidresponse system would also include contingencyplans and outbreak control strategies for anyanticipated alien species.

4.4 Encourage an integrated pest managementapproach to the control of alien fish species inthe Basin

Successful alien species management involvesusing a combination of techniques (such asbiological control, chemical control, commercialfishing, environmental manipulation andenvironmental rehabilitation) with a focus onreducing impacts, not numbers. Thesetechniques need to be effectively integrated withother river rehabilitation measures.


4.5 Identify regions, recruitment areas and dispersalpatterns for all alien fish species

Successful recruitment and colonisation by alienspecies allow for future spread and risk to nativefish populations. The identification of keypopulation and recruitment areas for targetedmanagement actions is important for control ofalien species. Similarly, patterns and mechanismsof dispersal need to be addressed to restrictfuture spread. Whilst many of these attributesare already known, they need documentation orinvestigation.

4.6 Identify areas that are currently free of alienspecies so that they can be protected from futureinvasions

The spread of alien species which are alreadypresent in Australia, represent a threat to fishpopulations they may invade. Areas which arefree of these alien species, but susceptible toinvasion need to be identified and protected. Insome cases, the identification will requiresurveys, but in most cases, mapping of existingdistributions may be all that is needed.

This Strategy urges

an integrated pest

management

approach to the

control of alien fish

species where a

combination of

techniques is used to

reduce their impacts.



4.7 Identify any potential new alien species andassess the likely ecological impacts of such species

New alien fish species are almost inevitable andthere is a need to be ready and proactive towardspreventing their invasion and successfulcolonisation. Identification of potential threatsand the risks posed can be determined byundertaking an Ecological Risk Assessment ofpotential new alien species that may becomeestablished in the Basin.

4.8 Carry out priority research projects to fill gaps inknowledge about carp and other alien species

The MDBC has produced a document titledFuture Directions for Research Into Carp, which wasapproved by three Ministerial Councils. Thisdocument outlines a number of knowledge gapsthat need to be filled about:

• carp biology and ecology;

• distribution and stock structure of carp;

• the impact of carp;

• the control of carp;

• commercial use of carp;

• environmental rehabilitation of degradedareas;

• social issues related to the control of carp;

• the need for decision support system/s;

• evaluation and monitoring procedures; and

• the impacts of carp control on native species.

Gaps in the knowledge of other alien speciessuch as gambusia, oriental weatherloach andredfin perch should also be identified andappropriate research carried out.

4.9 Investigate the value, potential risks andapplication of biotechnology to control alien fishspecies

The use of biotechnology to control alien fishspecies has long-term potential. The‘daughterless’ fish technology, developed byCSIRO Marine Research, involves controlling anenzyme in the fish, so that they only producemale eggs. If populations of such fish are built upin ponds and then released into sections of theBasin’s rivers, over successive generations theirpopulations could decrease and progressivelyfewer female fish would be available forreproduction. Due to the long-term, multi-dimensional and community sensitive nature ofthis work, a Business Plan has been prepared toreflect a strategic approach to develop, manageand evaluate the project. However, suchtechnology is just one tool in a whole suiteneeded to control alien fish species.


4.10 Encourage and build on the actions alreadybeing undertaken by communities forcontrolling alien fish species

A number of community organisations in SouthAustralia have installed carp exclusion grids infloodplain wetlands with dramatic impact.Aquatic vegetation has begun to return, waterquality has improved and the overall health ofthese wetlands is on the mend. In the northernparts of the Murray-Darling Basin, communitygroups are also acting to reduce local alien fishpopulations.

Control of alien fish species inQueensland

A Strategy for controlling alien fish wasreleased in 2001 by the QueenslandFisheries Service in consultation with acommunity consultative committee. TheStrategy recognises that broad-scaleeradication of ‘exotic pest fish species’ is notpossible, so it prioritises activities directed atcontrolling the spread of alien species. TheStrategy is based on the principles ofintegrated pest management within anadaptive management framework. TheStrategy aims to:

• prevent the further spread of exotic pestfish species already established inQueensland waters and prevent theestablishment of additional species in thewild;

• reduce the impacts of wild populations ofexotic pest fishes to acceptable levels anderadicate where possible;

• ensure the environmentally and sociallyacceptable application of exotic pest fisheradication and control programs;

• establish community understanding ofthe impacts of exotic pest fishes andmanagement strategies to counteractthese impacts;

• ensure that exotic pest fishesmanagement is undertaken inaccordance with best practicemanagement and is underpinned byscience and evaluation; and

• coordinate State management of exoticpest fishes with national managementstrategies.

(Source: Control of Exotic Pest Fishes – Anoperational strategy for Queensland freshwaters)



Costs and benefits

If direct carp management is conducted inconjunction with the allocation of suitableenvironmental flows and habitat rehabilitation,then its impact on helping to rehabilitate nativefish populations is likely to be very high. Otherstrategies listed in this document, such asabatement of cold water pollution and theprovision of fish passage, are also importantcomplementary actions.

Carp management can be considered a mediumto long-term investment, especially when this istaken to include the ‘daughterless’ carptechnology, which is expected to take at least 7 years to refine and another 20 to 30 years totake effect.

The threats posed by other alien fish speciesvary, as do the measures required to reduce theirimpacts. The most important species to considerare redfin perch, the salmonids, gambusia,goldfish and oriental weatherloach. In the short-term, abatement of cold water pollution, habitatrestoration and allocation of environmentalflows will help to manage the populations ofsuch species, while at the same time advantagingnative fish. In the longer term, some specifictargeted actions may be needed on a case-by-case basis.

The risk of alien species such as tilapia spreadingfurther throughout the Basin or of new alien fishspecies being introduced into the Basin alsoneeds to be managed.


• Assessment of threats posed by all alienspecies completed

• Control measures for all alien pest speciesimplemented across the Basin

5. Protecting threatened nativefish species

Many native fish species within the Murray-Darling Basin have declined dramatically indistribution and abundance. Declines in thepopulation of fish species often occur suddenly.There is potential for the extinction of somespecies in the future. Risk management strategiesare needed to reverse this trend ofendangerment, for both individual species andfish communities as a whole. Recovery planningand urgent implementation of new and existingplans is required for all species and communitiesunder threat in the Murray-Darling Basin.Critical habitat and threatening processes need tobe identified and remedial actions implemented.Areas of high conservation value need to be

determined and appropriate managementdeveloped to maintain this value.

Forecasting of future fish population trends andthe implementation of actions to reverse trendstowards endangerment are required. While it isimportant that specific legislative requirementsare provided to manage species under threat, it isalso important to recognise that appropriatemanagement arrangements for all fish need to beimplemented. Further, it is easier and moreeconomical to maintain healthy populations thanit is to restore depleted populations.

In the past, commercial fishing of native fishspecies has been an important activity in theBasin. South Australia is now the only State withan ongoing commercial fishery for native species.Commercial fishers in South Australia, throughtheir monthly catch and effort statistics, providea valuable and inexpensive view of native speciesstock assessment and river conditions.

In addition, recreational fishing is still a popularactivity throughout the Basin.

It is important that both recreational andcommercial fishing for native species is managedeffectively, and that such fishing does notthreaten the long-term sustainability of nativespecies.

Actions

Management

The MDBC will work in harmony with State andCommonwealth partners to coordinate theestablishment of Riverine Management Zones(RMZs) and Habitat Management Areas, asstated previously in this Strategy. Such areas willbecome havens or refuges for threatened nativespecies.

5.1 Prepare and implement species recovery/threatabatement plans for threatened species andcommunities

Recovery plans should include all fishcommunities at risk, rather than a single species,and they should include conservation ofcurrently non-threatened native fish species.Any threatening processes should be identifiedunder relevant legislation. The recovery ofthreatened species requires an ongoing andconsistent effort. There are currently a numberof management plans in place (e.g. MDBC’srecovery plans for silver perch and catfish).However, there needs to be an immediatecommitment to implementation of these existingplans, and to the development of recovery plansfor other threatened species/communities withinthe Basin.



5.2 Develop management plans with clear objectivesfor other native fish species

These plans do not necessarily have to beextensive documents, but should outline the keyobjectives for the management of the particularspecies. Where native fish are exploitedcommercially or for recreational uses, fisheriesmanagement objectives need to be included inmanagement plans.


5.3 Produce a template for developing genericrecovery plans for each threatened species ofnative fish or ecological community

5.4 Identify major threatening processes,particularly those affecting multiple native fishspecies, and create an inventory of criticalhabitat areas for threatened species andcommunities

5.5 Support the writing of nominations for listingthreatened species, communities and threateningprocesses under all relevant legislation

5.6 Establish facilities, techniques and proceduresfor monitoring the abundance, distribution andpopulation structure of all fish species in theBasin

Such monitoring data can then be used to predictthe future trends of all fish species usingpopulation modelling.


5.7 Raise community awareness about the status ofthe Basin’s native fish

Greater partner awareness will lead to improvedsupport and involvement in actions designed torehabilitate and protect populations of nativefish. In many cases, such actions will be part ofoverall catchment management plans.

Community and special interest groups arealready active in spreading the word aboutnative fish, with groups like the AustralianCapital Territory branch of the Australia NewGuinea Fishes Association holding displays ofnative fish at regional visitor centres andproducing a poster of the Upper MurrumbidgeeCatchment native fish. Native Fish Australia isalso active, working with State branches toproduce information and displays on native fish,as well as initiating breeding programs forthreatened species such as trout cod andMacquarie perch.

Costs and benefits

There needs to be a significant immediateinvestment to ensure consistent and coordinated

efforts in implementing fish recovery plans. Anexample of short-term investment for habitatrestoration is the need to resnag high-priorityreaches to support recovery of native fishpopulations, including threatened species.Havens and refuges for threatened species orcommunities offer a medium to longer-terminvestment in rehabilitating fish populations.Fishways are important for threatened fish,especially in the uplands. The costs ofimplementing such actions are likely to beexpensive and time-consuming, and obviousrecovery of fish populations is not likely to beobserved in the short-term.

Silver Perch Recovery Plan costings

The Silver Perch Recovery Plan includes 51 actions that should be undertaken torestore populations of silver perch. Theseactions consist of 21 high priority actions, 21 medium priority actions and 9 lowerpriority actions. As many of the actionsrecommended form part of other actionsthat are being undertaken on widermanagement issues (e.g. environmentalflows), not all have been costed. Six majorhigh-priority initiatives to generate newknowledge have been costed at $1.4 million,with a further 24 medium-priority actionscosted at an additional $2.9 million.


• Recovery programs funded and implementedfor all threatened fish populations andcommunities in the Basin.

6. Managing fish translocationand stocking

The composition and evolution of native fishpopulations can be threatened by the liberationof fish outside their natural range or fromhatcheries. This is true for both native and alienfish species. Appropriate guidelines and codes ofpractice to minimise this risk are required.However, while some States do have guidelinesin place, it is very difficult to verify whetherthese guidelines are being followed.

Apart from releases of alien fish or restocking ofnative fish, natural populations of native fish arethreatened by the potential release of geneticallyrestricted material from native fish aquacultureoperations using limited brood stock. The releaseof such material has potential to reduce thegenetic fitness and hence viability of fishpopulations. NSW is developing a qualityassurance program that aims to produce acomprehensive accreditation scheme forhatcheries.

Urgent development

and implementation

of recovery plans is

needed for

threatened native

fish populations and

communities.



Aquaculture is a rapidly developing industrythroughout the Murray-Darling Basin. Measuresto protect native fish from adverse impacts needto keep pace with this development.

Inadvertent translocations of geneticallyrestricted or diseased native fish are possible andcould have enormous impacts on native fishpopulations. There is a need for consistent andappropriate guidelines/codes of practice for theindustry across the Basin.

The risk of disease and parasites to native fishpopulations is another problem that can emergefrom fish stocking or aquaculture enterprises.Both exotic and endemic disease outbreaks havepotentially devastating effects on native fishpopulations. Our knowledge of fish diseases andparasites is far from complete. Control of diseaseoutbreaks is extremely difficult. A precautionaryapproach needs to be applied and the potentialsources and risk of disease outbreak determined.Attention also needs to be paid to themechanisms that transfer diseases and parasitesthroughout the Basin.

Actions

Management

6.1 Ensure a consistent, coordinated and firmBasin-wide approach to the issue of fishtranslocation and stocking

All States and Territories have adopted theNational Policy for the Translocation of Live AquaticOrganisms and are either implementingconsistent State-based policies or have adoptedthe national policy framework. There is a need tomonitor and evaluate the implementation of theNational Policy, ensuring that any Basin-widestocking policies, procedures and guidelines arecomplementary.

6.2 Develop protocols that monitor the efficiency andbenefits of conservation stocking programs

Demonstration reaches that have beenrehabilitated may need to be restocked withnative fish as a last resort for improving thestatus of fish populations. The effectiveness ofsuch restocking needs to be carefully assessed.

6.3 Implement a comprehensive scheme for hatcheryaccreditation across the Basin

NSW is developing a quality assurance programthat may be appropriate for other jurisdictionswithin the Basin. Once the NSW project iscompleted, the MDBC will consult with otherState jurisdictions as a basis for developing aBasin-wide program. This should includequality-control procedures for hatcheries toprevent disease, adverse genetic effects andinadvertent translocations. Guidelines need to bedeveloped as part of an inter-State agreement toregulate the use of non-native species foraquaculture in the Basin.

© G

unth

er S

chm

ida

Macquarie perch




6.4 Complete current research designed to improveknowledge about the risks associated with fishstocking, aquaculture and disease

The following research projects are already beingundertaken:

• cataloguing the releases of native and otherfish by private and public sectors in theMurray-Darling Basin, and investigating theefficiency and benefits of such releases(Cooperative Research Centre for FreshwaterEcology);

• evaluating the population genetics of eachspecies of Murray-Darling native fish innatural wild populations, stocked populationsand hatcheries (Arthur Rylah Institute,Victoria); and

• developing a Model Hatchery QualityAssurance Program in NSW to provide asuitable accreditation system for the sale offingerlings to various markets, includingstock enhancement that could be taken up byother States (NSW Fisheries).

6.5 Review the impact of translocation and stockingon all native fish populations

6.6 Investigate all endemic and threatening diseasesand parasites of all fish species in the Basin


6.7 Involve the community in any decisions aboutfish translocation and stocking in the Basin

There is relatively strong support for fish stockingin some parts of the Basin. The communityneeds to be involved in developing Basin-widepolicies, procedures, guidelines and accreditationsystems.

6.8 Bring together State agencies, industry and thecommunity to ensure a coordinated andconsistent approach across the Basin to fishtranslocation and stocking

Costs and benefits

The actions under this driving action largelyrepresent second-order interventions that are oflesser importance to the other actions listed inthis Strategy, such as restoring environmentalflows and native fish habitat. However, for thelong-term viability of the Basin’s native fishpopulations, it is still important that they areconsidered. The actions listed above need to beimplemented and resourced by the relevant Stateagencies, with the MDBC taking a coordinatingrole.


• Rigorous procedures for managing fishtranslocation and stocking implemented ineach jurisdiction

• All native fish hatcheries accredited andfollowing sound production and distributionpractices

• Basin-wide risk management proceduresimplemented for preventing and managingoutbreaks of disease or parasites affectingnative fish populations

The implementation of the driving actions willnot see an immediate return on investment.While the rehabilitation of fish habitat and themanagement of riverine structures should resultin changes within the next 10 to 15 years tonative fish communities, the other drivingactions are likely to take considerably longerbefore benefits become obvious. However, if thisinvestment is delayed it will prove more costly torehabilitate the Basin’s native fish communities.It is also important to provide additionalknowledge to support the ongoing needs of theStrategy.

A consistent,

coordinated and firm

Basin-wide

approach is needed

to manage fish

translocation and

stocking.



© A

rthur

Mos

tead

Fish farming on ‘Dunoon’, Paul and Joan Trevethan have diversified into aquaculture, farming silver perch for table fish,Howlong, NSW.

© M

atth

ew J

ones

Crane lifting prototype carp separation cage at Torrumbarry Weir



© C

raig

Sch

iller

Trialing carp bait at Bulgari Lagoon, near Narrandera


Part Four: Monitoring, evaluation and review


About 10 per cent of the total budget allocated toimplementing this Strategy will be used formonitoring, evaluation and review. This willseek to:

• report annually against accountabilityindicators in conjunction with the SustainableRivers Audit processes;

• evaluate at any time the progress inachieving the Strategy’s 13 objectives againstprocess and implementation indicators;

• audit cumulative actions every five yearsagainst the overall goals of rehabilitating theabundance and distribution of native fishpopulations to 60 per cent of their estimatedpre-European settlement levels; and

• conduct an overall Strategy review after fiveand ten years.

Evaluation of progressProcess indicators review and assess theStrategy’s management structures andimplementation procedures through the:

• involvement of relevant MDBC technicalcommittees in an annual review of progressthat is undertaken against agreed targets; and

• involvement of the advisory groups inreceiving reports, providing policy advice andensuring integration with related strategies.

Implementation indicators measure the extent towhich appropriate managers in governmentagencies and communities have actually usedand understood the information, resources andopportunities for actions, and include:

• workshops to synthesise findings anddisseminate outcomes to managers;

• presentation of findings to the widercommunity; and

• the development and use of existing and newbenchmark examples that provide bestpractice measures of progress andachievement.

Evaluation will ensure the implementation of theStrategy occurs through an adaptive managementprocess, and will ensure that money allocated tothe driving actions has been well spent. Anevaluation group will be established to reviewexisting work and develop further options forbetter coordination across the Basin.

Auditing cumulative actions andtheir impacts on fish populationsAssessment and monitoring are essential todetermine the status of native fish populationsand provide knowledge for the development andevaluation of indicators. There is a need to:

• collate existing baseline data and new datafor the establishment of long-term datasets;

• develop a database/library that can cataloguedata/results/outputs from projects;

• develop a Basin-wide fish distributiondatabase;

• undertake oral history projects, similar toListening to the Lachlan, focusing on fish andfish habitats in an attempt to gain a historicalperspective not available from other datasources;

• assess ongoing condition of fish populations,which may take a form similar to the NSWRivers Survey;

• standardise the collection of data so thatcomparisons can be made both across theBasin and over time;

• collect scientifically valid data and providescientific interpretation;

• consider the timing and cost effectiveness ofdata collection (for example, it may be betterto collect data only annually rather thanseasonally, depending on the reason forcollection);

• use data collected by recreational andcommercial fishers to assess and monitor fishpopulations; and

• ensure data and information are shared withall stakeholders.

Strategy reviewThis will involve using resource conditionindicators that demonstrate improvement in thesustainability of native fish populations,including:

• major reviews of progress to be undertakenby external referees after five and ten years(specifically, the Strategy should beexternally audited in 2007 and 2012); and

• evaluation of the science, objectives andmilestones, to provide a better Strategy.

The central question is: Has the Strategyprovided a strategic platform for therehabilitation of native fish populations inthe Basin?

In 2013, it will be important to finalisedevelopment of the 2014–24 Native Fish Strategy toensure a Basin-wide approach to native fishmanagement into the foreseeable future.

It is imperative that the key skills, resources andcapacity to undertake monitoring and associatedresearch are identified, developed andmaintained across all partners, includingthe community.

Approximately 10%

of the total budget

allocated to

implementing this

Strategy will be used

for monitoring,

education and

review.



Beyond this StrategyThe life of this Strategy extends to 2013.However, native fish management is a long-termchallenge that will extend well beyond that date.As this Strategy is implemented, considerationwill be given to the most appropriate frameworkfor native fish management beyond 2013. TheCommission and Council will ensure that aseamless transition occurs from this Strategy tothe subsequent framework.

Knowledge generation and exchange

As fish are hidden under water, the generalpublic awareness and understanding of issuesrelating to them is often less than for morevisible and identifiable terrestrial animals. Thereis a clear need for the community to be educatedabout native fish, their status, importance andthreats to them. A communication strategy willbe developed and implemented for this Strategy,focusing on community awareness, consultationand engagement. The use of demonstrationreaches and associated actions can be used toillustrate the value of restorative actions.Prominent and substantial demonstrationreaches are useful for integrating all relevantland and water programs into a comprehensiverehabilitation plan that uses the principles ofadaptive management. They provide an excellentmechanism for improving public awareness,understanding and support for habitatrehabilitation and the protection of native fishspecies.

Importance of consulting with partners

In designing and implementing bothdemonstration reaches and HabitatManagement Areas, it is vital to liaise withkey partner groups. This is important both asa means of identifying partner issues andconcerns and in fostering support for futurerehabilitation works and HabitatManagement Area proposals. The followingpartner groups, in no order of importance,should be considered for consultation:

• State governments;

• State agencies (such as fisheriesdepartments, water departments);

• local governments;

• catchment management organisations;

• conservation groups;

• landholders;

• recreational and commercial anglers;

• urban water users;

• Indigenous groups;

• local industry;

• tourism and recreational groups; and

• the scientific community.

There is a lack of biological knowledge for manyspecies. There are also gaps in understandingabout fish and river ecology. Lowland riverecology is a relatively new area of study inAustralia and there is always the need for newknowledge to ensure better managementdecisions. This requires an ongoing researchprogram that can provide answers to targetedquestions and information for priorityknowledge gaps.

Assessment of the success (or failure) ofmanagement actions is essential and can only beundertaken by dedicated evaluation. Regularmonitoring can provide knowledge on trendsand progress towards a target.

This Strategy seeks to:

• engage the community and stakeholdersthrough a comprehensive communicationstrategy;

• initiate relevant scientific research that willprovide new knowledge to supportmanagement actions in an adaptive context;

• ensure that the Strategy’s actions aremonitored and evaluated to measure itssuccess and provide a basis for adaptivemanagement; and

• demonstrate recovery of native fish throughcomprehensive rehabilitation of the keyfactors degrading demonstration riverreaches.


Glossary


Glossary of acronymsCAC – Community Advisory Committee

COAG – Council of Australian Governments

CSIRO – Commonwealth Scientific andIndustrial Research Organisation

ICM – Integrated Catchment Management

IUCN – International Union for the Conservationof Nature

MDB – Murray-Darling Basin

MDBC – Murray-Darling Basin Commission

RMZs – Regional Management Zones

Conservation definitionsConservation definitions from the InternationalUnion for the Conservation of Nature (alsoadopted by the Australian Society for FishBiology, ASFB)

ExtinctA species is Extinct when there is no reasonabledoubt that the last individual has died.

Extinct In The WildA species is Extinct In The Wild when it isknown only to survive in cultivation, in captivityor as a naturalised population (or populations)well outside the past range.

Critically EndangeredA species is Critically Endangered when it isfacing an extremely high risk of extinction in thewild in the immediate future.

EndangeredA species is Endangered when it is not CriticallyEndangered but is facing a very high risk ofextinction in the wild in the near future.

VulnerableA species is Vulnerable when it is not CriticallyEndangered or Endangered but is facing a highrisk of extinction in the wild in the medium-term future.

ThreatenedA species is Threatened when it is close to beinglisted as Vulnerable.



© P

eter

Sol

ness

/Net

wor

k Ph

otog

raph

ers

River Murray – Renmark, South Australia


Bibliography


Supporting documentsConceptual Model to Guide Investments for Improvingthe Status of Native Fish Populations in the Murray-Darling Basin, Report of the Expert Panelconvened by the Murray-Darling BasinCommission December 2001, Murray-DarlingBasin Commission.

Native Fish Strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin2003–2013: Communication Plan, Murray-DarlingBasin Commission.

Native Fish Strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin2003–2013: Investment Plan 2003–2006, Murray-Darling Basin Commission.

Native Fish Strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin2003–2013: Recommended Actions, Murray-DarlingBasin Commission.

Report on Community Submissions, Native FishStrategy Public Comment: 1 July–31 December2002, Murray-Darling Basin Commission.

If you would like copies of any of the supportingdocuments, please contact the office of theMurray-Darling Basin Commission on (02) 6279 0100. Alternatively, you candownload the supporting documents fromwww.mdbc.gov.au

Other relevant strategies and plansThe following strategies and plans are closelyaligned with the Native Fish Strategy. All worksand actions undertaken for the Native FishStrategy will therefore consider potential linksand collaboration with these strategies and plans,to optimise productivity and maximise outcomes.

Sustainable Rivers Audit, Murray-Darling BasinCommission

The Living Murray initiative, Murray-DarlingBasin Commission

Background information andfurther readingBraysher, M. and Barrett, J. 2000. Ranking areasfor Action–A Guide for Carp Management. Murray-Darling Basin Commission.

Blanch, S. (ed.) 2001. The Way Forward on Weirs.Inland Rivers Network, Sydney.

Georges A., Cottingham P. 2002. Biodiversity inInland Waters – Priorities for its Protection andManagement: Recommendations from the 2001 FennerConference on the Environment. CRC FreshwaterEcology, Canberra ACT.

Harris J.H., Gherke P.C. (eds.) 1997. Fish andRivers in Stress: the New South Wales Rivers Survey.NSW Fisheries and CRC Freshwater Ecology,Cronulla NSW.

McDowall, R.M. (ed.) 1996. Freshwater Fishes ofSouth-eastern Australia. Second edition. ReedBooks, Australia.

Crabb, P. 1997. Murray-Darling Basin Resources.Murray-Darling Basin Commission, CanberraACT.

Morris, S.A., Pollard, D.A., Gehrke, P.C. andPogonoski, J.J. 2001. Threatened and potentiallythreatened freshwater fishes of coastal New SouthWales and the Murray-Darling Basin. Report toFisheries Action Program and World Wide Fundfor Nature, NSW Fisheries, NSW.

Norris R.H. 2001. Snapshot of the Murray-DarlingBasin River Condition. Murray-Darling BasinCommission, Canberra ACT.

Phillips B. (ed.) 2001. Thermal Pollution of theMurray-Darling Basin Waterways: workshop held atLake Hume 18–19 June 2001. Inland RiversNetwork and World Wide Fund For Nature,Sydney NSW.

Phillips B. (ed.) 2002. Managing Fish Translocationand Stocking in the Murray-Darling Basin: workshopheld in Canberra 25–26 September 2002. WorldwideFund for Nature, Sydney.

Sinclair P.G. 2001. The Murray: A River and ItsPeople. Melbourne University Press, CarltonSouth Vic.

Young W.J. (ed.) 2001. Rivers as Ecological Systems:the Murray-Darling Basin. Murray-Darling BasinCommission, Canberra ACT.

Excerpts taken from submissionsto the Native Fish Strategy(1 July –31 December, 2002)‘… the comprehensive strategy should lead tosignificantly improved sustainable returns forrecreational angling while at the same timeensuring the recovery of all the presentlyendangered fish species’. Patrick Washington,VRFish Chairman.

‘The draft strategy has enormous potential tobring about healthier native fish populations andhealthy rivers’. NSW Irrigators’ Council.

‘Enhanced native fish numbers and habitat willimprove tourism, recreational and communitydevelopment opportunities as well as help to linkLocal Government to good natural resourcemanagement outcomes’. Adrian Wells, Murray-Darling Association.



‘We would like to express our total support ofthe proposed strategy and look forward to beingable to be involved in some way to ensure itsadoption, implementation and ultimate success’.Warwick District Recreational Fish StockingAssociation Inc.

‘Great to see a strategy being formed to helprehabilitate declining native fish numbers ...Please advise me as to what further I can do orwe as “Fly Fish Bathurst” can do and we will tothe best of our ability’. Ken Smith, Kelso NSW.

‘We would like to congratulate you on both theinitiative and the high quality of the currentdraft document, and to lend our support to thisstrategy’. World Wide Fund For Nature.






© Q

ED P

ty L

td©

Alla

n M

atne

ll (S

AW

ater

)

Vertical-slot fishway under construction at Lock 8, River Murray


M I N I S T E R I A L C O U N C I L

M U R R A Y - D A R L I N G B A S I N


Documents

Native Fish Strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin 2003–2013 · E-Mail: [email protected] Internet: ... NATIVE FISH STRATEGY FOR THE MURRAY-DARLING BASIN 2003–2013 This Native Fish