35 – Essential principles to guide monitoring of threatened biodiversity^429(or representativeness across the distribution); (2) programs not being fit-for-
purpose; (3) inadequate sampling periodicity; (4) short duration of programs; (5)
poor monitoring design; (6) limited collection of additional ecological and
demographic information necessary for insightful interpretation of the drivers of
population change; (7) lack of coordination between monitoring programs
conducted by different organisations; (8) difficulties in accessing monitoring data
and minimal reporting; and (9) inadequate or incomplete links between
monitoring and management. Ineffective monitoring is partly attributable to a lack
of funding, resources and effective frameworks to support action (Lindenmayer et
al. 2012; Environment and Communications References Committee 2013).
Conservation budgets are currently not enough to monitor and manage the almost
1900 species and 80 ecological communities on Australia’s national threatened
species list (Joseph et al. 2009). Moreover, what funding is available is often
allocated to short-term, novel activities with tangible outcomes rather than support
for ongoing long-term projects. Substantial budget increases, along with enhanced
communication of the value of monitoring (in particular long-term monitoring),
will be required if we are to monitor threatened species and ecological
communities effectively. In addition, the design, implementation, coordination and
communication of current and future monitoring programs will need to be
substantially improved.
How can we improve monitoring for threatened species and ecological
communities? Generic principles for monitoring biodiversity (e.g. Lindenmayer
and Likens 2010), although providing overarching guidance, will not always
adequately meet the particular needs of designing monitoring programs for
threatened biodiversity. For example, threatened species, by virtue of attributes
such as rarity, and/or low/variable detectability, present vexing design and logistic
issues (see Chapters 20–23). In addition, the effectiveness of a monitoring program
for threatened biodiversity depends heavily on a suite of additional, contextual
factors, such as the integration of monitoring into legal, management and policy
settings, and the degree of public engagement and support for the program; the
consequences of shortcomings in either of these areas are far more critical than the
monitoring of less threatened biota. This chapter proposes five principles that
should be used to achieve effective monitoring of threatened biodiversity.
Essential principles for making the monitoring of threatened
biodiversity count
The principles described here are the product of a 2-day workshop, facilitated by
the book editors, which involved 26 practitioners with considerable experience in
threatened species monitoring from government, non-government organisations,
consultancies and academic institutions. The focus of the workshop was threatened