116 Monitoring Threatened Species and Ecological Communities
(Burns et al. 2015). Experimentation and monitoring of interactions such as
competition, predation and pollination is rare, but can be key to understanding
and managing threatening processes. The data from these studies are maintained
in an open-access portal (http://www.ltern.org.au/knb/). Even in these cases,
however, sampling frequencies may vary ad hoc and plot locations may represent a
biased coverage of the TEC distribution. Nonetheless, the LTERN studies form a
vital core to monitoring the status of Australia’s threatened ecosystems and TECs.
The uncertain future that they face (Lindenmayer et al. 2017) needs to be resolved
urgently. The extent to which monitoring inf luences management of TECs is likely
to vary greatly between projects. Although coverage of systematic monitoring is
limited, some other projects involving TECs that are not discoverable in published
sources involve excessive complexity, onerous resource requirements, design
failures and vague response variables that limit reliable inferences about change
(Lindenmayer and Likens 2010).
Monitoring of TECs by citizen groups
This rapid review did not search for monitoring projects implemented by citizen
groups. A systematic search of these sources will likely reveal additional
monitoring activity on TECs. For example, Cumberland Bird Observers Club has
been monitoring changes in the avifauna of TECs on the Cumberland Plain
(Sydney) over an era of rapid urbanisation (Farrell et al. 2012). Monitoring of TECs
is also carried out by citizen groups as a reporting requirement for natural resource
management funding programs such as Landcare. However, the design, detail and
rigour of these projects varies widely, the data and outcomes from monitoring are
rarely published in discoverable sources (see Farrell et al. 2012 for an exception),
and there is no central, publicly accessible repository for retrieval of data. Hence,
the impact of citizen projects on management of TECs tends to be limited in
breadth and longevity.
Monitoring under development approvals
The other major source of monitoring activity for TECs occurs through
development approval processes under the EPBC Act and related state legislation.
This work is undertaken by environmental scientific staff or ecological consultants.
Development approvals may be subject to conditions that require TECs to be
monitored on or adjacent to development sites to demonstrate compliance with
approved levels of impact. In some cases, conditions accompanying development
approvals may stipulate conservation actions for TECs to offset development
impacts, along with requirements to monitor the outcomes of required actions.
Thus, monitoring of TECs may be required to evaluate impact or responses to
conservation actions or both. Table 8.4 summarises a sample of monitoring
conditions for TECs impacted by approved developments under the EPBC Act.
The level of detail and standards specified in approval conditions varies
between projects and through time (Table 8.4). Typically, there may be a hierarchy