38 Monitoring Threatened Species and Ecological Communities
programs for monitoring, and those investing in management should recognise an
obligation to report publicly on its outcomes. Second, there is a need to develop a
national repository for monitoring data, which can maintain, update, display,
coordinate and analyse diverse datasets relating to trends in biodiversity and the
factors inf luencing those trends. Third, we recommend the development of
(initially) one or several f lagship integrated national biodiversity monitoring
programs that have sufficient public appeal to inspire substantial investment and
that can provide meaningful evidence about national scale trends in the state of the
environment. One such example would be a coordinated program for monitoring
mammal abundance across the vast extent of arid and semi-arid Australia, based
on simple quantitative assessment of the occurrence of tracks of different mammal
species. Much of the sampling and design of such a continental-scale program
could be undertaken by Indigenous ranger groups, thereby helping to develop a
distinctive Australian monitoring approach that blends traditional knowledge and
scientific methodology.
Lessons learned
● (^) There is some monitoring activity for most of Australia’s terrestrial mammals
of conservation concern, but it is challenging to identify and access
information on that monitoring. Such a deficiency will not be redressed unless,
and until, there is a determined attempt to develop a systematised and
integrated national biodiversity monitoring program.
● (^) Most monitoring activity is suboptimal, with substantial scope for
enhancement in coverage, data availability and reporting, coordination, design
quality and links to management. Monitoring should be seen by researchers
and managers as an integral component of recovery and management efforts,
and to be vital for assessing, refining and reporting on that management.
● (^) The lack, or insufficiency, of monitoring for many Australian threatened
mammals will result in suboptimal conservation outcomes and increased risk
of extinctions.
● (^) Currently, there is little incentive for most researchers and agencies to report
on monitoring design, data or analyses. This should be redressed, and probably
can be readily with a monitoring-specific electronic journal or coordinated
national repository to store and allow access to data from ongoing monitoring
projects.
● (^) To some extent, conservation NGOs are helping to mitigate the shortcoming in
the accessibility of monitoring information, because they have a direct need to
report to donors and other supporters on the success of their management
programs, and monitoring data showing recovery of threatened species is
effective evidence of conservation success. Increasingly, government agencies
are doing likewise, with such demonstrated positive response providing