Constructed Wetlands Suitability for Sugarcane Profitability, Freshwater Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.

Freshwater ecosystems, such as wetlands, are among the most impacted by agricultural expansion and intensification through extensive drainage and pollution. There is a pressing need to identify ways of managing agricultural landscapes to ensure food and water security without jeopardising biodiversity and other environmental benefits. Here we examine the potential fish biodiversity and landholder financial benefits arising from the integration of constructed lagoons to improve drainage, flow regulation and habitat connectivity within a sugarcane dominated catchment in north Queensland, Australia. A hybrid approach was used, combining the findings of both fish ecological surveys and a financial cost-benefit analysis. We found that the constructed lagoons supported at least 36 native freshwater fishes (over half of all native freshwater fishes in the region), owing to their depth, vegetated margins, moderate water quality and high connectivity to the Tully River. In addition to biodiversity benefits, we estimated that surrounding sugarcane farms would have financially benefited from reduced flooding of cropland and the elevation of low-lying cropland with deposited spoil excavated from lagoon construction. Improved drainage and flow regulation allowed for improvement in sugarcane yield and elevated land increased gross margins from extending the length of the cane production cycle or enabling a switch from cattle grazing to cane production. Restoring or creating wetlands to reduce flooding in flood-prone catchments is a globally applicable model that could improve both agricultural productivity and aquatic biodiversity, while potentially increasing farm income by attracting payments for provision of ecosystem services.

Challenges in modelling the sediment retention ecosystem service to inform an ecosystem account - Examples from the Mitchell catchment in northern Australia.

A systems analysis perspective related to soil science is necessary to achieve many of the sustainability targets articulated by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The System of Environmental-Economic Accounting - Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA-EA) framework is the international statistical standard for quantifying both the contributions that ecosystems make to the economy, and the impacts of economic activity on ecosystems. However, due to the difficulty of obtaining empirical data on ecosystem service flows, in many cases such quantification is informed by ecosystem service models. Previous research on the Mitchell catchment, Queensland Australia provided a novel opportunity to quantify the implications of using a model of hillslope erosion and sediment delivery in isolation (as represented in one of the most frequently used ecosystem service models - InVEST), by comparing such estimates against multiple lines of local empirical data, and a more comprehensive representation of locally important erosion and deposition processes through a sediment budget model. Estimates of the magnitude of hillslope erosion modelled using an approach similar to InVEST and the calibrated sediment budget differed by an order of magnitude. If an uncalibrated InVEST-type model was used to inform the relative distribution of erosion magnitude, findings suggest the incorrect erosion process would be identified as the dominant contributor to suspended sediment loads. However, the sediment budget model could only be calibrated using data on sediment sources and sinks that had been collected through sustained research effort in the catchment. A comparable level of research investment may not be available to inform ecosystem service assessments elsewhere. Findings for the Mitchell catchment demonstrate that practitioners should exercise caution when using model-derived estimates of the sediment retention ecosystem service, which have not been calibrated and validated against locally collected empirical data, to inform an ecosystem account and progress towards achieving the SDGs.

Consequences of hydrological alteration for beta diversity of fish assemblages at multiple spatial scales.

Effects of dam operation and extraction of water from rivers on spatial variation in hydrological regimes, and consequences for freshwater biodiversity, are widely predicted but seldom assessed empirically. Evidence of linkages between hydrology and beta diversity contributes to water-management decisions to support landscape-scale biodiversity and avoid inadvertently contributing to further biodiversity decline. Using six lowland rivers in Australia's Murray - Darling Basin that formed a gradient of hydrological alteration, we examined (1) spatial variation in hydrology under modelled scenarios of low water-resource development and flow modification by dams and extraction, (2) how beta diversity of fish among and within rivers was associated with spatial hydrological variation and whether patterns of overall beta diversity differed between native and non-native species, and (3) the associations of spatial and environmental variables and both recent and long-term hydrology with beta diversity. Spatial variation in hydrology among rivers was higher under the modified scenario than under the low-development scenario yet change in the magnitude of within-river (longitudinal) variation was inconsistent between rivers. Beta diversity among rivers was significantly associated with spatial variation in hydrology only in certain circumstances (native species assemblages in specific years). Within-river beta diversity varied among rivers yet was unrelated to longitudinal variation in modified hydrological regimes. Patterns of beta diversity did not differ appreciably if non-native species were included in or excluded from analyses. These findings contradict predictions adopted in ecohydrological science that water resource development homogenises hydrological regimes, in turn causing biotic homogenisation in lowland rivers.

Vegetation and longitudinal coarse sediment connectivity affect the ability of ecosystem restoration to reduce riverbank erosion and turbidity in drinking water.

It is a substantial challenge to quantify the benefits which ecosystems provide to water supply at scales large enough to support policy making. This study tested the hypothesis that vegetation could reduce riverbank erosion, and therefore contribute to reducing turbidity and the cost of water supply, during a large magnitude flood along a 62 km riparian corridor where land cover differed substantially from natural conditions. Several lines of evidence were used to establish the benefits that vegetation provided to reducing eleven riverbank erosion processes over 1688 observations. The data and analyses confirmed that vegetation significantly reduced the magnitude of the riverbank erosion process which was the largest contributor to total erosion volume. For this process, a 1% increase in canopy cover of trees higher than five metres reduced erosion magnitude by between 2 and 3%. Results also indicate that riverbank erosion was likely to be affected by direct changes to the riparian corridor which influenced longitudinal coarse sediment connectivity. When comparing the impact of these direct changes on a relative basis, sand and gravel extraction was likely to be the dominant contributor to changed erosion rates. The locations where erosion rates had substantially increased were of limited spatial extent and in general substantial change in river form had not occurred. This suggests that the trajectory of river condition and increasing turbidity are potentially reversible if the drivers of river degradation are addressed through an ecosystem restoration policy.