shoRebiRd - Home | BirdLife · In other parts of the East Asian–Australasian Flyway, including...

by Jo oldland, danny RogeRs, Rob Clemens, lainie beRRy, gRainne maguiRe and Ken gosbellBirds Australia Conservation Statement, no. 14, 2009

s h o R e b i R dConseRvat ion i n aus t R a l i a

by Jo oldland, danny RogeRs, Rob Clemens, lainie beRRy, gRainne maguiRe and Ken gosbellBirds Australia Conservation Statement, no. 14, 2009

2 Shorebird Conservation in Australia

Seventeen shorebird species spend their entire lives within Australia and are known as “residents”, although they may make substantial movements within Australia. Another species–the Australian Pratincole–breeds in Australia but is known to migrate to islands north of Australia. A further 36 species make regular international movements to Australia from their breeding grounds. Thirty-five of these migrants travel thousands of kilometres each year from their northern hemisphere breeding grounds, whereas Double-banded Plovers migrate in modest numbers from New Zealand in winter. A further 24 species have only been recorded in Australia as irregular rarities and are classified as ‘vagrants’ (see table, p. 3).

Migratory shorebirdsMigration dominates the lifestyle of many shorebird species, which spend several months each year preparing for and carrying out the longest journeys known in the natural world. Our longest-distance migrants travel around 25,000 km each year as they move between the southernmost wetlands of the southern hemisphere to breeding grounds on the coasts and islands of the high Arctic. Northward migration to the breeding grounds typically takes place from March to early June, whilst the return migration to non-breeding areas occurs from July to October. During their migration,

Few birds inspire birdwatchers more than the shorebirds: a diverse group of elegant, active, predominantly wetland-dwelling species which carry out some of the most amazing

migrations in the natural world. However, despite legislative protection and special international conservation agreements, many of our shorebirds are now declining. Causes include habitat destruction overseas, loss of Australian wetlands to drought or agriculture, and development and disturbance on ocean beaches. In this conservation statement we provide an introduction to Australia’s shorebirds and their lifestyles, summarise the threats that they face, and explain how we can contribute to their continued survival.

From the taxonomic order Charadriiformes, shorebirds, also known as ‘waders’, include the sandpipers, snipe, jacanas, painted snipe, the Plains-wanderer, pratincoles, plovers, avocets, stilts, oystercatchers and stone-curlews. They range from tiny species like the Red-necked Stint, which is only 13–16 cm long and weighs just 30 g, to the Eastern Curlew, which can be over 60 cm long and weigh up to 1.3 kg. Shorebirds have a variety of bill shapes and sizes adapted to the different prey they feed on, and all have relatively long legs. Gulls and terns are not generally regarded as shorebirds and they are not discussed here.

Clockwise from this page:

Shorebird flock gathering on Roebuck Bay near Broome WA, including Bar-tailed Godwit, Black-tailed

Godwit, Terek Sandpiper, Great Knot, Red Knot, Red-necked Stint, Red-capped Plover and Greater

Sand Plover. Photo by Rohan Clarke

The Bush Stone-curlew is a resident of open woodlands throughout Australia. Its numbers have

been reduced dramatically by habitat loss and introduced predators. Photo by Ashley Herrod

The Red-necked Stint is about this size of a House Sparrow, yet completes an astonishing 23,000 km

round trip to and from its breeding grounds in Siberia and Alaska each year. Photo by Dean Ingwersen

The Double-banded Plover breeds in New Zealand and migrates to Australia from February to

September. It is found mainly on the mainland east coast and Tasmania. Photo by Chris Tzaros

Shorebird Conservation in Australia 3

ResidentsBush Stone-curlewBeach Stone-curlew Australian Pied OystercatcherSooty OystercatcherBlack-winged StiltRed-necked AvocetBanded Stilt Red-capped PloverInland DotterelBlack-fronted DotterelHooded PloverRed-kneed Dotterel Banded LapwingMasked LapwingPlains-wandererComb-crested JacanaAustralian Painted Snipe

Regular MigrantsPacific Golden Plover Grey PloverDouble-banded PloverLesser Sand PloverGreater Sand PloverOriental PloverLatham’s SnipePin-tailed Snipe*Swinhoe’s SnipeBlack-tailed GodwitBar-tailed GodwitLittle CurlewWhimbrelEastern CurlewTerek SandpiperCommon SandpiperGrey-tailed TattlerWandering TattlerCommon GreenshankMarsh SandpiperCommon RedshankWood SandpiperRuddy TurnstoneAsian DowitcherGreat KnotRed KnotSanderlingRed-necked StintLong-toed StintPectoral SandpiperSharp-tailed SandpiperCurlew SandpiperBroad-billed SandpiperRuffRed-necked PhalaropeOriental PratincoleAustralian Pratincole**

VagrantsSouth Island Pied OystercatcherAmerican Golden PloverRinged PloverLittle Ringed Plover*Kentish PloverCaspian PloverGrey-headed LapwingPheasant-tailed JacanaHudsonian GodwitEurasian CurlewUpland SandpiperGreen SandpiperSpotted RedshankNordmann’s GreenshankLesser YellowlegsShort-billed DowitcherLittle Stint*White-rumped SandpiperBaird’s SandpiperDunlinStilt SandpiperBuff-breasted SandpiperWilson’s PhalaropeGrey Phalarope

shorebirds stop off in special areas, typically rich tidal flats, called ‘staging sites’, where they feed intensively to build up stores of fat and protein to fuel the next leg of their flight.

The migration routes birds travel along are called flyways. There are eight waterbird flyways around the world. The East Asian–Australasian Flyway (EAAF or the ‘Flyway’) is the route used by most Australian migrants. It stretches from Siberia, northern China and Alaska southwards to Australia and New Zealand where the birds spend the southern summer (see Flyway map, p. 14). It encompasses 23 countries, nearly half the world’s human population and is used by 55 migratory species comprising over 5 million birds.

Resident shorebirdsResident shorebirds of Australia occupy and breed in a wide variety of different habitats and wetland types. Some species–such as the Beach Stone-curlew and the eastern population of the Hooded Plover–nest exclusively on beaches, while the Sooty Oystercatcher prefers rocky coasts. The Australian Painted Snipe breeds on ephemeral freshwater wetlands, while the Banded Stilt breeds on hypersaline lakes. Some resident species have even moved beyond wetlands–the Plains-wanderer nests in grasslands, the Bush Stone-curlew in open woodland and the Masked Lapwing commonly breeds in agricultural and urban landscapes.

Shorebirds of Australia: residents, regular migrants and vagrants

*Status as regular or vagrant not agreed among sources.**Some Australian Pratincoles migrate to islands north of Australia during the non-breeding season, while some remain year round.

feature of many tidal flat systems around Australia is that over 90 per cent of the birds that occur there are migrants from breeding grounds far away in the northern hemisphere.

Some tidal flats support more invertebrate life than others and can hold thousands of shorebirds. In Australia, 14 regularly occurring shorebird species, including 13 migrants, are tidal flat specialists, and during the non-breeding period they cannot forage in any other habitat. These include such iconic species as the Bar-tailed Godwit, Great Knot, Red Knot and Eastern Curlew. A further 12 species regularly forage on tidal flats but also forage in other habitats.

Loss of tidal flats Tidal flats are vital to the conservation of many shorebird species, and they also play an important role as a carbon sink, sucking up and storing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. However, they are highly vulnerable habitats, and some tidal flats in Australia have been damaged by or lost to reclamation, altered water regimes, pollution, sea-level rise and weed invasion. In other parts of the East Asian–Australasian Flyway, including the east and south China coasts, Korea, and Japan, enormous tidal flat areas have been lost to “reclamation” projects, where natural tidal flats have been converted to land for use by agriculture, aquaculture or industry. This is of particular concern in the Yellow Sea, as it is of such importance to migrating shorebirds. It is used as a staging

Whilst there are many different species of shorebirds all with different preferences, there are some nearly universal themes. Almost all shorebirds live in open habitats and do not like tall things. Most species are associated with wetlands, and take most of their prey from wet ground or from water that is shallow enough to wade in. Some of the most important shorebird habitats are discussed below, along with the main threats affecting (or potentially affecting) each habitat type or impacting shorebirds overall.

Tidal FlatsA few special regions of the world have the combination of sediments, suitable currents, low relief and large tidal ranges required to produce very large tidal flats. The northern Australian coast is one such region, with hundreds of kilometres of coast along which huge tides–up to 10 m in north-western Australia–rise and retreat each day to expose tidal flats several kilometres wide. Elsewhere in Australia, tidal flats are much smaller, generally confined to estuary systems and other sheltered bays.

Although they may appear featureless and bleak to the casual observer, the sand flats and mudflats along Australia’s coastlines are home to an abundant and diverse fauna of small burrowing animals, such as bristleworms, clams and crabs. Such animals are quite difficult to find and catch, but shorebirds are skilled at making a living in tidal flats. A remarkable


shoRebiRd habitats and thReats

Clockwise from this page:

Mixed flock of shorebirds on tidal flats at Eighty Mile Beach, north-western Australia.

Photo by Jan van de Kam

Competing pressures on the tidal flats of South Korea. Photo by Ken Gosbell

Lake Martin, Victoria. Housing develoments like these are encroaching into shorebird habitat

and increasing levels of disturbance. Photo by Rob Clemens

A levee bank on private land in the Macquarie Marshes which prevents water from reaching

the nature reserve wetlands downstream. Photo by Chris Hodendyk


area by at least 2 million birds, or about 40 per cent of all birds using the Flyway, during their northward migration alone. For some species, the region carries almost the whole Flyway population at this time. Almost 50 per cent of intertidal areas in China and Korea have been destroyed, mostly over the last three decades, and extensive reclamation continues. The loss of Yellow Sea tidal flats is considered by many shorebird biologists to be the single greatest threat to the migratory shorebirds of Australia.

Ocean BeachesMuch of Australia’s coastline is beach–predominantly sandy shores of varying steepness and width. Beaches tend to occur on high energy shorelines, and they have fewer burrowing invertebrates than tidal flats. Nevertheless, they do provide a diversity of prey for a few shorebird species specialised

to forage in these habitats. Sanderlings are adept at running after receding waves on surf beaches, and picking up small dislodged invertebrates from the wash zone before running away from the next wave. Other species such as the Ruddy Turnstone pick invertebrates from the wrack of decomposing seaweed that occurs on some beaches. True ocean beach specialists, which forage and even nest on ocean beaches, have rather small world populations. As a result, a beach with only a few pairs of a beach-nesting specialist such as the Hooded Plover may be of consid-erable conservation importance to the species.

In general shorebirds occur in low densities in these challenging habitats, but high tide roosts can provide a striking exception, with massive shorebird flocks congregating on some ocean beaches at high tide. Usually such large flocks consist of birds which actually forage on nearby tidal flats, but find beaches a conveniently cool and open site for roosting when the tide is too high for foraging.

Coastal development and disturbanceBeaches are cultural icons of Australia, and they see intensive recreational use from people. Some coastal parks record millions of human visits each year. However, few Australians think of beaches as important wildlife habitat. As a result, the impacts of coastal development, exploitation, modification and recreation on shorebirds in beach habitats are often overlooked. If this continues the shorebird habitat provided by Australian beaches could be lost.

Many resident shorebirds breed between September and March; some nesting in the open on beaches and along bays, laying their eggs in simple scrapes on the sand or amongst shell grit. Crushing of nests and chicks by humans, horses, stock and vehicles can have devastating effects on the breeding success and survival of beach-nesting birds. This is particularly the case in states where beach driving is permitted and beach closures/restrictions are not in place during the breeding season. In the Coorong, South Australia, 81 per cent of experimentally placed nests on beaches were crushed by four-wheel drives within a typical one month incubation period.

Disturbance of nests and chicks by people sitting too close or frequently passing by, especially with their dogs off the lead, can lead to eggs literally baking on the hot sand, being buried in strong winds, and to chicks starving or dehydrating. The eggs and chicks are also more

vulnerable to predators if the adults are spending their time trying to distract people and dogs from the area. In addition to the threats they face from coastal development and disturbance from human recreational activities, they are also threatened by introduced predators such as foxes, rats, dogs and cats, and increased numbers of native predators such as gulls and ravens.

Migratory shorebirds spending the non-breeding season on our shores spend a lot of time feeding in order to refuel for the return journey to their breeding grounds. During high tide they rest nearby at suitable roosting sites, such as on ocean beaches or in salt marshes bordering coastal wetlands. Excessive disturbance from recreational activities can reduce the birds’ feeding and resting time, affecting their ability to put on enough body mass in order to migrate, and may lead to the eventual abandonment of a site, forcing birds into less suitable habitat. In addition, high levels of coastal development reduce the available habitat and increase levels of disturbance to shorebirds. The combined effects of development on the landward side with sea level rises on the seaward side will lead to “coastal squeeze” in some areas, where there is a lack of suitable shorebird habitat and shorebirds will eventually disappear from the area.

Rocky shoresRocky shores generally do not support high numbers of shorebirds, but a few species are specialized to feed in these habitats. These include the Wandering Tattler, a migrant from Alaska; and the Sooty Oystercatcher, a resident species.

Inland wetlandsAustralia is renowned for its aridity, yet it has a rich abundance of inland wetlands. Many of these escape the public eye, as they are temporary wetlands which only fill after intense rainfall. Some of these fill and dry out in a predictable fashion, such as lakes and claypans of the wet–dry tropics; others fill up less frequently, including the massive inland salt lakes of the Lake Eyre Basin.

The temporary water regimes of inland Australian wetlands are the key to their importance for shorebirds. As they dry out, nutrients in these wetlands mineralize. When the next flood comes (sometimes years later), all these nutrients are released simultaneously into a water body that is initially devoid of predators. This stimulates an enormous boom of productivity, and for a short period

shoRebiRd habitats and thReats


inland wetlands can become one of the richest habitats imaginable, with densities of breeding birds that have to be seen to be believed. Many Australian birds have evolved to capitalise on these brief booms of productivity, and they have a remarkable ability to find isolated wetlands when they are flooded, even if they are hundreds of kilometres away.

Around 15 of our most common migratory shorebird species use inland wetlands—some do so opportunistically, and others such as the Wood Sandpiper do not occur in any other habitat type in Australia. In addition, about 10 resident shorebird species occur mainly on inland wetlands. At least two of these species breed only in temporary wetlands: the Banded Stilt and Australian Painted Snipe. The Banded Stilt only nests in those rare years when heavy rains flood one of the huge salt lakes of the interior. At such times almost the entire Banded Stilt population may congregate in one massive breeding colony,

many hundreds of kilometres from the species’ non-breeding refuges.

Loss of inland wetlandsInland wetland habitat in Australia is being lost due to a) altered rainfall patterns as a result of climate change; and b) over-extraction of water for agriculture and domestic use. This is particularly the case in inland wetlands of south-eastern Australia, where areas that supported tens of thousands of shorebirds in the 1980s have been dry for a number of years. The Australian Painted Snipe, a species which only nests in temporary wetlands, is now declining through loss of breeding habitat and is classified nationally as Vulnerable (see ‘Conserving the Australian Painted Snipe’, p.19). Many of the wetlands of its stronghold in the Murray–Darling Basin have been lost as water has been diverted to irrigation projects. Others have been effectively lost to elevated salinity, or because water levels have been stabilised, leading to permanent water regimes and the growth of thick vegetation that

does not suit shorebirds. In the Coorong Ramsar site in South Australia, counts of migratory shorebirds have dropped dramatically since the 1980s; Curlew Sandpiper numbers have dropped by 85 per cent, while both Red-necked Stints and Sharp-tailed Sandpipers have decreased by over 70 per cent, something not seen in most parts of the country. All this evidence shows clearly that the south-east of the country is not capable of supporting as many shorebirds as it once was.

GrasslandsA few of Australia’s shorebirds spend little or no time along shorelines. The plains and savannah grasslands of tropical Australia are the global non-breeding stronghold for the Little Curlew and Oriental Plover. Another migratory shorebird found in this habitat, the Oriental Pratincole, used to be considered uncommon. However, in 2004 a combination of restricted wet-season rains and a localised locust plague forced this species to contract into one region along the coast of north-western Australia.

This afforded the first opportunity to assess the population of this species. It turned out that rather than being uncommon, the Oriental Pratincole may be the most numerous shorebird in the Flyway: an astonishing 2.88 million birds were counted.

Loss of native grasslandsFewer than 2 per cent of Australia’s original native grasslands remain in south-eastern Australia. Huge areas have been turned over to cultivation, or irretrievably altered by overgrazing, “pasture improvement”–a process in which native plant species are replaced by introduced plants–weed invasion and altered fire regimes. Effects on native wildlife vary according to species, and a few species have adapted to life on altered grasslands. A good example is the Masked Lapwing, a conspicuous and noisy inhabitant of much agricultural and urban grassland. The Plains-wanderer, a resident species from the plains of the Murray–Darling Basin, is much more specialised in its habitat selection and has undergone huge declines as natural grasslands have been lost to cultivation, overgrazing and weed invasion. The total population for this species has been estimated at 2,000 to 7,000.


Migratory shorebirds in Australia and avian influenza– a reason for concern?Strains of the influenza virus infect many bird and mammal species. The scientific consensus is that avian influenza (or ‘bird flu’) originated in birds such as ducks, geese, gulls, and shorebirds. Cell biology differences in birds and humans normally prevent avian strains of flu from establishing in humans. Cross-species transmission is rare and when it does occur (usually in situations where very large numbers of domestic poultry, people and pigs occur in close proximity), it rarely lasts.

Avian Influenza hit the headlines when a very dangerous strain, HN51, evolved in domestic poultry in China and infected some humans, hence the correct name of this disease is “poultry influenza”. Very unusually, it spread into wild bird populations, which are likely to have been involved in the rapid spread of the virus to Europe and Africa. Dabbling ducks such as Mallards are thought to have transmitted the disease. Thankfully, sustained transmission of H5N1 in humans has not occurred and the virus has not reached pandemic proportions.

To this day, H5N1 has not been recorded in Australia, and it appears that there are natural barriers to its spread here, likely including: the very low numbers of ducks that migrate here; the recent decline in significant waterbird breeding events, which provide optimal conditions for interspecies transmission; and low densities of humans and poultry in northern Australia. H5N1 has only once been found in shorebirds (a Green Sandpiper close to an outbreak in domestic poultry in western Siberia), and given their wary nature, circum-stances in which the disease could be directly transmitted from wild shorebirds to humans are difficult to envisage (there are also usually intermediate species involved i.e. wild duck to domestic duck to humans). While it would be prudent to maintain monitoring and improve our understanding of bird movements into Australia, there is no reason to believe that shorebirds put us at any risk from H5N1.

Andrew GeerinGQueensland Wader Study Group

Clockwise from top opposite page:

Little Curlew on Roebuck Plains near Broome, WA. Little Curlews are found on coastal and inland grasslands and black soil plains in northern Australia. Photo by Rohan Clarke

A large proportion of the global population of species such as the Latham’s Snipe occur in small wetlands in quite heavily populated areas, which are no longer pristine but nevertheless provide valuable non-breeding habitat. Photo by Chris Tzaros

Sanderlings feeding on an ocean beach, Sandy Point, Victoria. The Sanderling is a near-cosmopolitan species, found on sandy beaches around the world. Photo by Rohan Clarke

The Sooty Oystercatcher prefers rocky shores. It breeds on offshore islands and isolated rocky headlands. Photo by Sonja Ross

Climate Change

It is now widely accepted, both in the scientific and general community, that climate change is occurring and is causing higher temperatures, rising sea levels and changing rainfall patterns. During the 20th century, global sea levels rose by 17 cm and are continuing to rise. In Australia the NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change has released a Draft Sea Level Rise Policy, accepting best-case projections of sea level rise along the NSW coast of up to 40 cm by 2050 and 90 cm by 2100 (relative to 1990 mean sea levels), and promoting an adaptive risk-based approach to managing sea level rise impacts in the future. The effects of climate change are likely to have significant impacts on both resident and migratory shorebirds. While it is difficult to predict exactly what the magnitude of the impacts will be, the most likely scenarios, both nationally and internationally, include:

• Lossofroostingand feeding habitat (i.e. coastal wetlands, saltmarsh, mangroves, tidal flats) as a result of rising sea levels

• Changestothedistributionandabundanceof benthic infauna affecting food resources as a result of altered coastal processes and topography

• Lossofnestinghabitatanddirectlossofnestsduring spring tides and storm surges

• LossofinlandwetlandsthroughoutsouthernAustralia as rainfall decreases and over-extraction for agriculture further decreases environmental flows

• LossofnestinggroundsintheArctictundraasvegetation changes and the coastline recedes

• Departureandarrivaltimingatthebreedinggrounds becoming out of sync as the birds’ internal rhythms limit their ability to adjust to seasonal shifts, jeopardising breeding success.

of hatching are capable of walking and feeding themselves. However they are initially dependent on their parents. The chicks’ down is wonderfully camouflaged, but it doesn’t insulate as well as adult plumage, and small chicks lose heat rapidly. They could freeze within minutes if they are not kept warm by their parents. Adult shorebirds have brood patches–bare vascular patches of skin on the sides of the belly–which can be used to raise the body temperature of chicks. Heat transfer is very rapid, as the chicks have large blood vessels at the back of their necks which they press against the brood patch of their parents when prompted by brooding calls.

As soon as chicks are large enough to fly, their parents abandon them and migrate south. They have a tight schedule to meet, because if they do not get to their non-breeding areas and complete their annual flight feather moult on time, they will not be able to attempt breeding in the next summer. The chicks remain a little longer, fattening up before the Arctic freezes over. Like the adults, they migrate south using a range of navigational cues, including the stars, the sun and the Earth’s magnetic field. Unlike adults, however, they lack experience. It takes the young birds longer to find food on the staging areas and they typically arrive in non-breeding areas 1–2 months after the adults.

Long-distance migrants take a long time to mature. In many species, youngsters do not initially migrate north with the adults. Instead, they remain in the non-breeding areas learning to feed in wetland habitats, and finding the non-breeding area to which they will probably remain faithful for the rest of their lives. After two years–or three or four, depending on the species–they are ready to join the adults in their migrations to the other end of the world.

There is more to migration than extraordinarily long direct flights: each flight is preceded by a long period of preparatory feeding, as birds accumulate the fuel needed for a non-stop flight of several days. There is a huge range of foraging tactics in migratory shorebirds, but one thing all species share is efficiency. Not only do they need to find enough food to almost double their body mass, they need to do it quickly, or they won’t be able to depart on schedule.

Fat is the main fuel used in migration, as it releases more energy per gram than any other form of tissue. Protein also plays an important role. In the early stages of weight gain, shorebirds increase the size of their digestive organs, thereby increasing their ability to turn food into fat. Yet on the flight itself there is no food to digest, and a large digestive tract would add to body weight and flight energy costs. Shorebirds have a remarkable ability to adjust the sizes of their internal organs, and just before they depart on migration, they reallocate protein from the digestive organs to the flight muscles.

BreedingThe breeding season of migratory shorebirds is a hectic period that capitalises on the abundant supply of insect food present in the brief Arctic summer. Birds must arrive and breed as soon as snow and ice starts to melt in the nesting areas. Clutches, typically of four eggs, are laid within a week or two of arrival; incubation then takes about three weeks and fledging a further three. Then it’s time to head south before the weather worsens and the food supply dries up.

By the time the chicks hatch, the Arctic has bloomed, with enormous amounts of food to support the growing birds. Chicks hatch in downy plumage, and within minutes

adaptations foR a migRatoRy lifestyle


Above: Migrating Bar-tailed Godwits in an aerodynamic v-shape formation. This type of

formation increases the flight range of migratory shorebirds as each bird flies in the slipstream of the

birds ahead (except for the bird at the front!). Photo by Brian Chudleigh

Below: Shorebirds moult into breeding plumage before they reach the nesting areas. Breeding

plumage camouflages birds on the tundra whilst incubating, as seen here in a Red Knot, and also

insulates the birds in subzero temperatures. Photo by Jan van de Kam

Migration of shorebirds starts with a bout of intensive feeding lasting several weeks, which transforms slender birds into extraordinarily fat ones. Once they have put on enough weight, they set off on a non-stop flight of several thousand kilometres. Several days later they land at their destination–skinny once again, as they have consumed all the fat that fuels their flights. Having carried out this extraor-dinary feat of endurance and navigation, they immediately prepare to do it again! For most of our species, migration from Australia to breeding grounds in the far northern hemisphere is carried out in just two flights: one from Australia to “staging areas” where shorebirds refuel during migration in east Asia, and then, after a few weeks of fattening, another direct flight to breeding grounds which can be north of the Arctic circle.

A large proportion of our shorebirds stage on the shores of the Yellow Sea, a region with huge tidal flats that are so rich in food that shorebirds can almost double their mass there in the space of a few weeks. It is one of the greatest wildlife spectacles in the world, but sadly, the tidal flats of the Yellow Sea are being lost to so-called “reclamation” projects, in which natural tidal flats are converted to land for industry, agriculture or aquaculture.

Until recently, the single most important staging site for shorebirds in this Flyway was Saemangeum, on the west coast of South Korea. This was the staging site for 30 per cent of the world population of Great Knots, and the world’s largest staging population of the endangered Spoon-billed Sandpiper. However, Saemangeum is also the site of the world’s largest tidal-flat “reclamation” project. In 2006 the 33 km Saemangeum sea-wall was completed to convert 400 km2 of tidal flat into freshwater lakes and dry land.

Just before the Saemangeum sea-wall was closed, Birds Korea and the Australasian Wader Studies Group (AWSG) joined forces to investigate the effects of this reclamation project on shorebirds. Using large teams of volunteers to carry out repeated, intensive

surveys during the northwards migration period, the Saemangeum Shorebird Monitoring Project revealed that shorebird numbers crashed at Saemangeum after the sea-wall closure. There were no concurrent increases in shorebird numbers at other Korean sites (which were also surveyed systematically), despite claims by reclamation proponents that shorebirds would simply be displaced to other sites.

Over the same period, the AWSG was conducting intensive surveys in north-western Australia to assess the fortunes of shorebirds there, especially the Great Knot. They calculated the proportion of Saemangeum Great Knots that came from the north-western Australia study area using resightings of leg-flags and colour-bands in Korea. Great Knots are faithful to their non-breeding areas, returning to the same sites year after year. Therefore, if the Saemangeum reclamation had resulted in the death of Great Knots, rather than simply displacing them to undiscovered staging areas, declines should have been expected and predicted in north-western Australia. The declines observed in north-western Australia matched these predictions closely, indicating that over 80 per cent of the 90,000 Great Knots that went missing from Saemangeum have died. Assuming that the remaining missing Great Knots fared equally badly, this single reclamation project killed 20 per cent of the world population of Great Knots.

The most frightening thing about this study is that Saemangeum is just one of many ongoing reclamation projects around the Yellow Sea. Nearly 50 per cent of the Yellow Sea’s tidal flats have been destroyed, mostly in the last three decades. Just how many shorebirds we have lost as a result remains uncertain, but it is clear that the conservation of shorebirds depends not only on what we do in Australia, but on improved protection of their staging areas elsewhere.

Main picture: Tidal flats at Saemangeum. After the sea-wall was closed, millions of shellfish, the main prey of Great Knots, came to the surface and died of dehydration. Photo by Jan van de Kam

Below: Great Knot at Saemangeum, South Korea. Photo by Ken Gosbell

sa e m a ngeum and the deCline of the gReat Knot


10 Shorebird Conservation in Australia Shorebird R esearch in Austr alia

at some of the larger areas used by shorebirds. While far from conclusive, this kind of evidence becomes hard to ignore when the magnitude of declines is high, or when the declines show up in more places across more species. Evidence from sites where shorebirds have been counted annually in the same way for over 25 years is even stronger. Unfortunately, with the existing data, analysis is only possible for a handful of shorebird species at a handful of sites, and there are not enough data to report on a trend for the whole of Australia.

Recent analysis has revealed that in order to be able to identify statistically significant declines in shorebird species populations nationally, the

number of regularly monitored sites around the country needs to increase to around 150, or 35 sites for each of 33 species found in sufficient areas. In the best case, this design would be able to identify a population change of 50 per cent in five years or 30 per cent in 10 years. Recruiting more shorebird counters is therefore crucial in order to collect count data from many more sites. Working towards ensuring that data are collected consistently each time will also go a long way to improving count data.

The available data do not allow us to know for certain what the trends are at a national level, but the patterns are clearly showing that more species are decreasing than increasing; decreasing species are being reported in more areas; and some of the decreases being observed are quite alarming (see table, p. 11). Some of the more alarming results of recent shorebird population trend studies include: analyses carried out by Birds Australia and the AWSG, which found that shorebird species such as Curlew Sandpipers and Eastern Curlews have experienced population declines throughout southern Australia of up to 75 per cent and 50 per cent respectively, over the last 25 years; and work by the Department of Environment and Resources Management,

For those fortunate enough to visit Broome in north-western Australia, it is a place where at certain times of the year the sky is filled with swirling clouds of tens of thousands of shorebirds. It is a place where you can take flight, just for a moment.

Shorebirds are incredible and diverse animals that are under increasing threat in a world that is shrinking fast. In order to conserve them it is critical that we understand what factors are impacting shorebird populations, and define how much of an impact different activities throughout the Flyway are having. As home to many visiting migratory shorebird species, Australia is well

placed to uncover significant population changes by implementing a comprehensive monitoring program. The Shorebirds 2020 program aims primarily to report on the population trends of shorebirds in Australia with greater confidence than has been possible in the past, and to further identify what factors are driving those changes.

While shorebird monitoring began at some sites as early as the 1960s, national shorebird monitoring in Australia started in 1981, with the Australasian Wader Studies Group’s (AWSG) Population Monitoring Program. The data generated from these counts is one of the most important datasets for shorebirds in Australia, and has been critical in identifying important wetlands, estimating shorebird populations and determining shorebird distributions. Over 15,000 visits were made to more than 5,800 locations when the program was funded from 1981 to 1985. Since then it has continued as a volunteer program with regular counts at 29 sites.

Historic data has demonstrated that a growing number of shorebird populations are in trouble. Some evidence showing shorebird population declines comes simply from comparisions of complete counts between years

shoR ebiR ds 2020 :nat iona l shoR ebiR d popul at ion

moni toR ing pRogR a m

Preliminary review of shorebird species trends evident at some sites in Australia*

Number of speciesincreasing at >1 site

Number of speciesdecreasing at >1 site

Increasing and decreasing in different areas

Residents 3 9 3

Migratory 1 12 7

Total 4 21 10

*As we learn more these numbers may shift, but they are based on the best available information, which in some cases only includes large changes in a few years of repeated counts. A species was classified as increasing or decreasing if there was evidence of a change in numbers in at least one site, and was classified as both increasing and decreasing when there was evidence of both in different areas. Decisions were based on a review of reports, papers, and available data. There is no information on the remaining 21 resident or regular migratory species.

The key outcomes of the program will be:• Improvedconservationandmanagementofshorebirdsandtheirhabitats• Improvedunderstandingoftheimpactofchangesinhabitatandsitemanagementon

shorebirds• Apracticalmodelforcommunity-basedshorebirdmonitoringsuitableforusein

East Asia• AnincreaseinthenumberofskilledshorebirdcountersactiveinAustralia• Anincreaseinthenumberofregularlymonitoredshorebirdsites• Animprovedknowledgeofshorebirdpopulationtrendsbothnationallyandatthe

site level.

To find out more information or get involved go to www.shorebirds.org.au or contact Birds Australia at email: [email protected]; ph: (03) 9347 0757.

which reported trends from Moreton Bay and Queensland that indicate significant declines in Eastern Curlews among others. Recent work in north-western Australia has reported declines in Curlew Sandpipers, Terek Sandpipers, Great Knots and Bar-tailed Godwits. Surprisingly, both Queensland and north-western Australia report large declines in the Greater Sand Plover, a species not previously thought to be in trouble. Again, there are limitations that need to be overcome in order to be able to provide robust, reliable long-term data capable of detecting shorebird population trends. In the meantime, given the amount of evidence suggesting shorebirds are in trouble, we should use the precautionary principle when deciding what areas to protect.

The Shorebirds 2020 program will also work to identify and advocate for the protection of shorebird habitat. It was recently recommended that any area with 0.1 per cent of the Flyway population or 2,000 migratory shorebirds be designated as nationally important shorebird habitat (see map, p. 16). This step would allow for the identification of more habitat used by species that are not well represented in habitats identified using existing international criteria.

Finally, the Shorebirds 2020 program is only possible because of the hundreds of volunteers that are involved in a variety of ways. Anyone with an interest in shorebird conservation is encouraged to get involved. Background materials, guides on how to count and identify shorebirds, data sheets, instructions, maps and details on who to contact in order to get involved can all be found at www.shorebirds.org.au. Workshops are also held around the country to introduce the program to a wide audience and to begin to train new counters.

Increased involvement from volunteers that have been trained and mentored by existing counters will mean the information that managers and policy makers need to make informed decisions on how to conserve shorebirds will be available. Further, with more rigorous and defensible evidence of population declines we will be able to convince a wider audience of the need for action to conserve shorebirds. If continued properly, this work will help contribute to the conservation of shorebirds, and without it, the places where the air is alive with shorebirds may disappear.

The Shorebirds 2020 program is supported by Birds Australia and the AWSG, through funding from the Australian Government’s Caring for our Country and WWF-Australia. Additional partners who make this work possible include the Queensland Wader Study Group (part of Birds Queensland), Bird Observation and Conservation Australia, Birds SA, Birds Australia Western Australia, the Hunter Bird Observers Club, Birds Tasmania, Wetlands International, NSW Wader Study Group and a wide variety of other organisations and volunteers.

Main picture: Shorebird observers at Bush Point, Roebuck Bay, Western Australia. Photo by Rob Clemens

Below: Members of the Far South Coast Birdwatchers during a shorebird workshop at Wallagoot Lake, Bournda National Park, NSW. Photo by Max Sutcliffe


In early 2006, Birds Australia began a project to improve and inform decision-making for the conservation management of Australia’s resident beach-nesting birds. Threats to these birds originate from recreationists, so the solution to their conservation must also come from this group. Total beach closures to protect these sensitive birds have been suggested, but this would deprive Australians of access to one of their most favoured environments and would not be feasible. In any case, such radical moves are not necessary, as most of the threats faced by these birds can be abated through changes in human behaviour. The project was therefore titled ‘Promoting Coexistence between Recreationists and Beach-nesting Birds’, aiming to strike a balance between the needs of the birds and beach users.

Phase 1 of the project (January 2006–December 2008) was funded by the Australian Govern-ment’s Natural Heritage Trust through a

Coastal environments, in particular sandy beaches, are a highly favoured environment for human recreation. This places enormous pressure on resident shorebirds that nest on beaches during the warmer months, when human recreation is at its peak. Adding to this conflict over beach use are rising sea levels and heavy modifi-cation of dune habitats–largely from efforts to control erosion by planting Marram Grass and brush matting–which leads to a ‘coastal squeeze’, whereby beach-nesting birds have limited nesting habitat available to them. Consequently, resident beach-nesting birds in Australia are suffering population declines stemming from poor breeding success. The Hooded Plover is the most threatened species, with as few as 60 birds remaining in NSW, where they are listed as Critically Endangered under state legislation, and populations between 400 and 600 in Victoria and South Australia, respectively, where they are listed as Vulnerable.

pRomoting CoexistenCe bet ween ReCReationists and

be aCh-ne s t ing biR ds

Right: A Hooded Plover nest on the Mornington Peninsula, Victoria. Nests are extremely vulnerable to disturbance by dogs, vehicles and people on the

beach. Photo by Glenn Ehmke

Below: Hooded Plover chick on the Mornington Peninsula back beaches using a purpose built shelter.

Chicks will use shelters either as a refuge from disturbance or to stay out of extreme temperatures.

Photo by Glenn Ehmke

Bottom: Hooded Plover adult and chick at Point Roadknight, Anglesea, Victoria. Photo by Glenn Ehmke

12 Shorebird Conservation in Australia Shorebird R esearch in Austr alia

regional competitive grant hosted by Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment Management Authority. Phase 1 used the following approach to improve the conservation management of beach-nesting birds, using the Hooded Plover in Victoria as a case study:

1. Biennial count with a difference: Since 1980, volunteers have been surveying the entire Victorian coastline for Hooded Plovers every second year, over a given November weekend. This has enabled Birds Australia to monitor trends in the state’s population and to recognise local extinctions. In 2006, volunteers were asked to fill out a threats checklist (e.g. presence of people, dogs, horses, vehicles, foxes, etc) and to assess any existing management at each site where the birds were sighted during the count.

2. Choice of project sites: Using data collected from volunteers during the count, coupled with on-site threat assessments, Hooded Plover locations were coded according to threat level. The most threatened sites were targeted for monitoring and management, and several sites experiencing low to moderate threats were also selected for comparison. Workshops were held in each coastal Catchment Management Authority area (East and West Gippsland, Port Phillip, Corangamite and Glenelg-Hopkins) to generate involvement from existing community groups (such as field naturalist groups, BOCA clubs), individuals (Birds Australia volunteers, interested locals) and management agencies (state and local government, Committees of Management). Ninety Hooded Plover locations were chosen for inclusion in the project (about 40 per cent of the Victorian population), with data consistently collected from 70 sites over the three years of the project.

3. Monitoring of breeding success and threats: Volunteers initially participated in on-site training to ensure that monitoring would pose no threat to the birds. During each breeding season (August to late March), they followed the nesting attempts of Hooded Plovers at chosen sites. For each pair this enabled construction of a detailed nesting history, including nest locations, causes of nest failure, and number of eggs and chicks surviving. During each visit, volunteers collected additional information on threats present within the vicinity of the breeding site, and their intensity (e.g. number of dogs off leashes, number of people using beaches and dunes). This allowed Birds Australia to relate breeding success directly to threats experienced by the pair, as well as management actions implemented. With over 100 volunteers collecting this data, close to 4,500 visits were documented during the three seasons.

4. Implementing on-ground management: Forty land managers from 13 different agencies participated in the project. A range of management actions were trialled, including: signage (permanent interpretive signs, temporary signs flanking breeding sites, noticeboards); permanent and temporary fencing of breeding sites; chick shelters; wardening; and fox control measures (taste aversion training, baiting, trapping). Educational actions were also carried out, including: distributing brochures; mail-outs of flyers to coastal residents; primary school talks; ‘Dogs Breakfast’ events; and media releases. In areas where managers had limited resources to commit to nest protection, Birds Australia staff and volunteers were primarily responsible.

5. Evaluating the effectiveness of management: Nest success varied regionally and seasonally. In the 2006–2007 breeding season, 147 nesting attempts were made by 82 pairs; some pairs made as many as seven attempts. Forty per cent of nests hatched (a loss of 211 eggs) and 39 per cent of these fledged chicks (a loss of 107 chicks). The results were very similar in 2007–2008: 157 nests were found for the 76 breeding pairs monitored. Thirty-six per cent of nests hatched (a loss of 221 eggs) and 42 per cent of these fledged chicks (a loss of 108 chicks). In the 2007–2008 season, 70 pairs were monitored regularly, with 112 nests found in total. There were high rates of hatching failure due to tides and storms, but of those that hatched, 29 chicks survived to fledging. Of the chicks

that fledged successfully over the three seasons, 48 per cent were from isolated areas of the coast, 47 per cent came from highly threatened nesting sites that were managed and 5 per cent from unmanaged, moderately threatened areas. No fledglings were produced from highly threatened pairs that weren’t managed. A similar rate of fledging success of nests in isolated areas to those in highly threatened but managed areas suggests that management is highly effective–managed birds in these busy areas have the same chances for successful breeding as those in areas where threats are limited.

6. Production of ‘A practical guide to managing beach-nesting birds in Australia’: This 300-page reference manual contains comprehensive information on managing and monitoring resident shorebirds that nest on beaches. It is available for download from http://www.birdsaustralia.com.au/our-projects/management-manual.html

Phase 2 of the project (January 2009– December 2010) has received funding through the Australian Government’s Caring for our Country Coastcare grants. Phase 2 seeks to continue work in Victoria for the conservation of Hooded Plovers, including the monitoring of 50 breeding pairs and to expand efforts interstate. A national network will be established to ensure better communication between everyone working on resident shorebirds.

Communities saving threatened speciesDedicated Birds Australia volunteers, together with the local community and primary school children, have led the way in conserving Hooded Plovers in Port Fairy and Narrawong, Victoria. The birds are under threat from vehicles on beaches, horses ridden on the upper beach above the high-tide mark, unregulated dog access, foxes and disturbance from recreationists. A group of dedicated locals has been monitoring the breeding success of Hooded Plovers in this region, and decided to involve the primary school children because their awareness would be key to changing behaviour of people on the beach and building community concern for this threatened species. The children from Port Fairy Consolidated, St Josephs and Narrawong Primary schools learned about Hooded Plovers and then created informative posters, built wooden teepees that would act as shelters for Hooded Plover chicks, and were taken to a local wetland to learn how to use binoculars and identify birds such as the Latham’s Snipe visiting from Japan. The Port Fairy IGA supermarket set up a display window about the Hooded Plover with a fake nest and the children’s posters, which attracted lots of attention from locals and tourists, raising awareness about the plight of the birds. The most endearing comments came from the students who just couldn’t understand why anyone would choose to ignore the warning signs on beaches if it meant risking the life of these birds.

The students of Rye Primary School have made signs to warn beach users about the dangers posed to Hooded Plovers


instance, in north-western Australia, a Bar-tailed Godwit that had been banded at age two, 28 years previously, was recaptured from the same stretch of beach!

A major limitation with banding is the need to recapture birds in order to obtain the band number. In the early 1990s a leg-flagging program was developed using small coloured plastic (sometimes alpha numeric) ‘flags’ attached to the legs of the shorebirds. Shorebirds have been flagged in 14 different countries throughout the Flyway. Each region in the Flyway has a unique colour combination; in Victoria it is orange, in north-western Australia is yellow and in south-eastern Queensland is green. Leg flags are easily seen in the field with binoculars or a telescope, making it possible for birdwatchers to spot flagged birds without needing to catch them.

The leg-flagging program has vastly increased our knowledge of shorebird movements, the timing of migrations of different populations, and the location of critically important sites such as stopover locations and breeding areas. Every flag sighting is valuable. You can find out more about the program, as well as report sightings, on the AWSG website at: www.awsg.org.au

Global Flyway Network The Global Flyway Network, established by Theunis Piersma and Dr Alan Baker and funded by Birdlife Netherlands in 2006, is a partnership between researchers from around the world devoted to long-term worldwide studies of migratory shorebirds. Detailed data are needed to determine demographic parameters such as annual survival rates, which allow more accurate modelling of predicted population changes. Examples of this work include a long-term colour-banding and resighting program in Roebuck Bay, north-western Australia, and similar work in

In light of increasing threats to migratory birds within the Flyway, it is essential that scientific research be carried out and data shared with governments and other decision makers. Organisations that carry out or support international research programs include Wetlands International, WWF, Australasian Wader Studies Group (AWSG) and the Australian Government’s Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. One example of such a program is the Asian Waterbird Census, an ongoing population monitoring program run by Wetlands International to promote public participation in monitoring the distribution and populations of waterbirds and the status of wetlands along the Flyway.

Banding, colour flagging and related programsShorebird migrations have long fascinated people. How and why do they do it? Shorebird study groups in Australia and other countries carry out banding and flagging programs to increase our knowledge of these amazing birds and to try to find answers to some of these questions. In Australia, banding programs have been operating since 1975, starting with the Victorian Wader Study Group. To date more than 300,000 birds have been banded. The birds are banded on the leg with a uniquely numbered metal band, then measured, aged, weighed and released.

Analysis of banding data provides information on migratory destinations, seasonal breeding success, survival rates and site fidelity. It also increases our understanding of the shorebirds’ physiological characteristics (e.g. weight gain prior to migration). The recapture of banded birds along the Flyway adds to our knowledge of movements and migration strategies. Some birds are recaptured after many years: for

inteRnational ReseaRCh

Clockwise from above:

Important Waterbird Sites (blue) and Flyway Network Sites (red) in the East Asian–Australasian Flyway.

Illustraion by Maki Koyama, Partnership for EAAF

Shorebirds are captured using a cannon net that is fired over a roosting flock. Here, the netted birds are covered with shade mesh to prevent

overheating before the birds are removed. Photo by Jan van de Kam

Bar-tailed Godwits (including A9, pictured) were fitted with satellite transmitters and their migration

paths to the northern hemisphere were tracked. Photo by Jan van de Kam



New Zealand. Around 2,500 shorebirds have been individually colour-banded in Australia and New Zealand in addition to the thousands of flagged or engraved-flagged birds. It takes several years of data to generate survival rate estimates, but meanwhile these colour-banded birds are providing extremely valuable information on long-distance and local movements of individual birds, thus helping to identify some of the causes of population changes. Individual marking has also revealed how fixed birds can be in their stopovers during migration; one Bar-tailed Godwit from New Zealand was seen at the same mudflat in Korea three years in a row. This highlights the links between habitats scattered throughout the Flyway and how vital the importance of conserving all habitats throughout the Flyway is if shorebirds are to be protected. For more information visit www.globalflywaynetwork.com.au

Pacific Shorebird Migration Program – tracking shorebirds around the globeBiologists from PRBO Conservation Science, the U.S. Geological Survey, Global Flyway Network and other partners have combined efforts to study the global migration patterns of godwits and curlews in the Pacific Basin, using the latest remote sensing technology. In 2007, 16 Bar-tailed Godwits were fitted with satellite-tracking devices at the Miranda Shorebird Centre in New Zealand, and their migration journeys tracked using Google Earth. The results astonished birders and the news media globally, with the Bar-tailed Godwits flying non-stop from New Zealand to the Yellow Sea. At the time this was the longest bird flight ever tracked. After refuelling in Asia the birds flew another 6,500 km to their Alaskan breeding grounds. One of these birds, E7, eclipsed her own flight record just a few months later, flying an incredible

11,700 km non-stop in eight days from Alaska direct to New Zealand.

Following the remarkable success of this work, in February 2008 15 Bar-tailed Godwits were implanted with satellite transmitters in Roebuck Bay, north-western Australia. Three of these birds remained in the Roebuck Bay area, while the remaining 12 headed north toward the Yellow Sea, spending six weeks refuelling before continuing north to the Siberian breeding grounds–only to have their breeding attempts stalled by unseasonal summer snowfalls. Eight birds were known to have made it back to Roebuck Bay, completing a remarkable 21,200 km return journey. For more information on the satellite-tracking studies visit www.globalflywaynetwork.com.au/ourwork-tracking.php

Phil Battley & Chris HassellGlobal Flyway Network

Australasian Wader Studies Group

The AWSG was formed in 1981 as a special interest group of Birds Australia. Its objectives are to:

• Monitorshorebirdpopulations,feedingecology and migration at local, national and international levels by a program that includes counting, leg banding and colour flagging.

• Instigateandencourageotherscientificstudies of shorebirds such as feeding and breeding studies.

• Communicatetheresultsofthesestudiesto a wide audience through the journal Stilt, the newsletter Tattler, other journals, the Internet, the media, conferences and lectures.

• Formulateandpromotepoliciesfortheconservation of shorebirds and their habitat, and to make available information to local and national governmental conservation bodies and organisations to encourage and assist them in pursuing this objective.

• Promotewetlandconservationandassistin the nomination of important sites for listing under the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Convention).

• Encourageandpromotetheinvolvement of a large band of amateurs, as well as professionals, to achieve these objectives.

• Encourageandassistsimilarprogramsthroughout the Asia Pacific region

Membership enquiries: Birds Australia, Tel: (03) 9347 0757; email: [email protected]. Visit the AWSG website at: www.awsg.org.au

For many species in the East Asian–Australasian Flyway, the Yellow Sea region provides high quality staging sites for refuelling during migration, so that they arrive at their breeding sites in good condition. Yalu Jiang National Nature Reserve in northern China is the single most important site in the Flyway for Bar-tailed Godwits migrating from New Zealand and Australia. Over 115,000 Bar-tailed Godwits use the site and adjacent tidal flats during April and May. As with much of the Yellow Sea region, Yalu Jiang is under enormous pressures from development, particularly from the rapidly growing port city of Donggang adjacent to the reserve. Seawalls were constructed in 2009 to reclaim a significant section of

tidal flats adjoining this area. In April 2004 the Miranda Naturalists’ Trust (MNT), a community group from the Firth of Thames, New Zealand, signed an agreement with Yalu Jiang reserve officials establishing a sister-site partnership to promote conservation of shorebirds and their habitat, and raise public awareness. Members of the MNT have visited Yalu Jiang each year since 2006, participating in shorebird surveys, banding, school visits and other public awareness activities. The partnership has had great success in raising the profile of the two sites nationally and internationally. For more information visit www.miranda-shorebird.org.nz

Keith woodleyMiranda Naturalists Trust

Firth of Thames and Yalu Jiang: a sister-site partnership


International agreementsAustralia is signatory to a range of international instruments developed to promote interna-tional collaboration for the conservation of migratory birds. These include:

• BilateralMigratoryBirdAgreements• ConventiononWetlandsofInternational

Importance (Ramsar Convention) • TheEastAsian–AustralasianFlyway

Partnership (Flyway Partnership)• TheConventiononMigratorySpecies

(CMS) (for more information visit www.cms.int)

• TheConventiononBiologicalDiversity(CBD) (for more information visit www.cbd.int)

Bilateral Migratory Bird AgreementsAustralia plays an important role in international efforts to conserve migratory birds in the East Asian–Australasian Flyway. This work began with bilateral migratory bird agreements, which provide a formal framework for cooperation between two countries on issues of mutual interest. The Australian Government has entered into three bilateral migratory bird agreements:

• Japan–AustraliaMigratoryBirdAgreement (JAMBA) signed in 1974

• China–AustraliaMigratoryBird Agreement (CAMBA) signed in 1986

• RepublicofKorea–Australia Migratory Bird Agreement (ROKAMBA) signed in 2007

These bilateral agreements require the parties to protect migratory birds by:

• limitingthecircumstancesunderwhich migratory birds are taken or traded

• protectingandconservingimportanthabitats

• exchanginginformation• buildingcooperativerelationships

For more information visit www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/migratory/waterbirds/bilateral.html

Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Convention)The Convention on Wetlands, signed in Ramsar, Iran in 1971, is an intergovernmental treaty which provides the framework for national action and international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources. Australia is one of 159 contracting parties and currently has 65 Ramsar sites covering approximately 7.5 million hectares. The Ramsar Strategic Plan 2009–2015 sets out three main goals for implementing the Convention. These are:

1. Wise use: Wise use of all wetlands, including the participation of local

a) The development of a single Flyway Site Network (for all migratory waterbirds) to raise awareness of important sites for migratory waterbirds along the Flyway (see Flyway, p. 14). The Flyway is home to over 50 million migratory waterbirds from over 250 different populations, and there are estimated to be 700 sites supporting significant populations of migratory waterbirds.

b) Facilitating opportunities for collaboration and information sharing on education, capacity building and research activities.

c) Promoting sustainable development and the conservation of migratory waterbird habitat at important sites along the Flyway.

For more information visit www.eaaflyway.net

Australian measuresIn order to conserve migratory shorebirds in Australia, and meet our obligations under the international arrangements, migratory shorebirds are afforded protection by Commonwealth, State/Territory and Local Governments.

The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act

1999 (EPBC Act)The EPBC Act recognises migratory species, including migratory shorebirds, as ‘a matter of national environmental significance’ (NES), along with Ramsar listed wetlands, nationally threatened species and ecological communities. Both the Plains-wanderer and Australian Painted Snipe are listed as Vulnerable under the EPBC Act. The Act provides for

Commonwealth assessment and approval of actions that are likely to

have a significant impact on a matter of NES. For more information visit www.

environment.gov.au/epbc

The Wildlife Conservation Plan for Migratory ShorebirdsThe EPBC Act also provides for the development of Wildlife Conservation Plans which set out the research and management actions necessary to support the survival of these species. The Wildlife Conservation Plan for Migratory Shorebirds (2005) outlines Flyway and national level activities to support Flyway shorebird conservation initiatives and provides a strategic framework to ensure these activities plus future research and management actions are integrated and remain focused on the long-term survival of migratory shorebird populations and their habitats. The Plan is available from www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/migratory/publications/shorebird-plan.html

communities in wetland management and conservation and decisions being made with an awareness of the importance of the ecosystem services provided by wetlands.

2. Wetlands of International Importance: Develop and maintain an international network of wetlands that are important for the conservation of global biological diversity, by ensuring that all contracting parties are appropriately designating, managing and reporting on the condition of Ramsar sites.

3. International cooperation: Enhance the conservation and wise use of wetlandsusing effective international cooperation.

For more information visit www.ramsar.org

Multilateral cooperation on migratory bird conservation–The Partnership for the East Asian–Australasian Flyway (Flyway Partnership)Launched in November 2006, the Flyway Partnership is a unique initiative that aims to advance the conservation of migratory waterbirds in the East Asian–Australasian Flyway while addressing the social and economic needs of communities dependent upon wetlands and waterbirds. There are currently 20 partners including 10 countries, 3 intergovernmental agencies and 7 interna-tional non-government organisations.

The Flyway Partnership provides a framework for international cooperation, including:

shoR ebiR d ConseRvat ion

Important Migratory Shorebird Sites in Australia

• Internationally Important Sites• Proposed Nationally Important Sites


Successful shorebird conservation in Australia can be achieved through partnerships between local communities, management authorities, businesses, land owners, governments, scientists and NGOs. Examples showcasing the impressive efforts of dedicated volunteers, successful local partnerships as well as recent applied shorebird conservation research are profiled below, to serve to inspire more people to get involved and make a difference to shorebird conservation in Australia.

Giving shorebirds some spaceAll species of shorebird like some space between people and themselves–if approached too closely, shorebirds, like most other wildlife, will flee from people. If such disturbance is too frequent, it could compromise shorebird breeding, preparation for or recovery from migration, and may lead to areas being abandoned. There is extensive overlap between shorebirds and people, so such disturbance is considered a widespread problem. Recent research by Deakin University has documented the distance at which shorebirds flee from people, information which can potentially be used to manage sensitive areas by maintaining separation distances between people and shorebirds.

Michael Weston & Hayley GloverDeakin University

Integrated management the key to success in VictoriaThere are only 10 pairs of breeding Hooded Plovers remaining between Port Lonsdale and Anglesea in Victoria. Coastal development and changes to beach morphology have limited habitat availability and rendered many beaches unsuitable for breeding. Most of these beaches experience hundreds to thousands of visitors on a given summer’s day, plus unrestricted dog access and even horses. Dunes are covered with brush matting to reduce erosion caused by so many beach users, a disaster for breeding Hooded Plovers, who prefer blowouts and bare dune faces for nesting in this region. Birds Australia has established a network of land managers, community groups and local volunteers to monitor Hooded Plovers along this coastline and actively protect nesting sites with temporary signs and fences. Nine groups worked together (Surf Coast shire, Great Ocean Road Coastal Committee, Barwon Coast, Barwon Water, City of Greater Geelong, ANGAIR, Bellarine Bird Observers Club, Geelong Field Naturalists and Birds Australia) to protect the last remaining nesting dunes that were under threat of erosion control. This effort saw the areas permanently fenced with accompanying interpretive signs. GORCC/Surf Coast Shire and Barwon Coast subsequently designated their Hooded Plover beaches as dog-prohibited areas and provided nearby off-leash beaches as an alternative. These Committees of Management are leading the way in protecting the environmental values of the coast, and they dedicate revenue from caravan parks to coastal restoration so that in some way the visitor pressure is balanced with caring for the coast. Signs and interpretive programs have also been used effectively to protect migratory shorebirds from dogs, e.g. by BOCA at Jam Jerrup in Western Port.

Grainne Maguire Birds Australia, Promoting Coexistence Between

Recreationists and Beach-nesting Birds project

Scoping the Shoreline Eyre Peninsula beaches, while remote, are under pressure from recreational and fishing activities, pest species and habitat loss. There are no published data on the impacts of such disturbances on the resident shorebirds of these beaches. The Scoping the Shoreline project has been funded from 2006 to 2009 with the support of the Department of Environment and Heritage, Eyre Peninsula NRM Board, Wildlife Conservation Fund, Birds Australia, Community Coastcare 2008 and the Eyre Peninsula community. The project will identify the impact of threats on resident shorebird populations of Eyre Peninsula, South Australia, and use this information to guide planning and coastal management. The Hooded Plover is the focus for the project, although Scopers will collect data on all species. The group will record the presence and abundance of resident shorebirds, survey and map Hooded Plover breeding territories, and identify potential sites for monitoring Hooded Plover breeding pairs. The project area encompasses 51 sites across the Eyre Peninsula coastline. The project harnesses the wealth of ornitho-logical experience on the peninsula, involves long-time local birdwatchers, Friends of Parks groups and Southern Eyre Birds members. Local communities are encouraged to take responsibility for monitoring and managing the impacts of increased human activity on their own beaches.

Jane Cooper

aC t ion in aus t R a l i aBelow: Scoping the Shoreline Yanerbie Workshop October 2006. Photo by Peter Needle

Each species of shorebird has its own tolerance distance to human approaches. The diagram shows the distance at which a walker causes selected species to flee. Preliminary data from Shorebirds in Victoria. Further study may reveal larger buffers are required. Illustrations by Jeff Davies

How wide should buffers be for shorebirds?

Distance at which shorebirds flee from people:Latham’s Snipe 19 m +/- 6.23 SERuddy Turnstone 30 m +/- 5.84 SESooty Oystercatcher 64 m +/- 11.51 SERed-necked Avocet 73 m +/- 17.52 SEEastern Curlew 126 m +/- 6.23 SE

Latham’s Snipe

Ruddy Turnstone

Sooty Oystercatcher

Red-necked Avocet

Eastern Curlew


Birds and beaches, dogs and leashesBeaches are a popular place for people to enjoy time with their dogs. However, domesticated dogs threaten the conservation of beach-nesting birds in Australia through disturbance and destruction of eggs and chicks. Leashing of dogs can improve conser-vation outcomes, but few dogs are leashed on beaches. In 2006, a multidisciplinary team of researchers from Birds Australia, Melbourne University and Deakin University surveyed dog owners to explore their sense of obligation to leash dogs on beaches. Dog owners were more likely to feel obliged to leash their dog when they believed other people expected dogs to be leashed, and when they believed their dog was a threat to wildlife or people. Dog owners were less likely to feel obliged to leash their dog if they considered unleashed dog recreation to be important. The findings indicated that improved compliance with leashing regulations may be achieved through community-based approaches to create a sense of social obligation (acceptable normal practice or social ‘norms’) among dog owners to leash their dog. Tailoring information products to emphasise the risk that unleashed dogs may pose to beach-nesting birds and raising awareness about alternative designated off-leash areas for dog exercise and recreation may also be effective at improving compliance.

Williams, K. J. H., Weston, M. A., Henry, S. and Maguire, G. S. (2009). Birds and Beaches,

Dogs and Leashes: Dog Owners’ Sense of Obligation to Leash Dogs on Beaches in Victoria, Australia. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 14, 89-101.

Recent Tasmanian coastal management effortsTwo projects in Tasmania have improved coastal management and raised community awareness of resident and migratory shorebirds on beaches. The first was a series of “Dogs’ Breakfast” sausage sizzle events in coastal communities in the Sorell, Glamorgan Spring Bay, Break O’Day and Central Coast council areas on the northwest and east coasts of Tasmania. The events have drawn up to 60 people at a time, who are given talks by representatives from the local government, Parks and Wildlife staff, Canine Defence League staff and Birds Tasmania members.

Each dog owner was given a dog leash with the text: “I’m a wet sand walker and don’t chase chicks”. The second project has resulted in 29 new interpretive and management signs on 24 beaches in south-eastern Tasmania that are experiencing very high levels of human activity during the summer months. The signs provide information on the site-specific values, issues and threats at each beach and a message on shorebird and seabird conservation. Representatives from four local governments, the Parks and Wildlife Service, NRM South, the Tasmanian Conservation Trust and Birds Tasmania were responsible for managing the project, which was funded by the Federal Government. Other local governments with coastal areas are being encouraged to adopt the design elements and messages from these signs for other beaches with shorebirds and small terns, so that a single interpretive strategy is used throughout Tasmania.

Eric WoehlerBirds Tasmania

Ships to Shorebirds–Port of Brisbane constructed shorebird roost siteMoreton Bay is one of the most significant wetlands for migratory shorebirds on the Queensland Coast, supporting 40,000 migratory shorebirds and more than 3,500 resident shorebirds. In 2005, the Port of Brisbane Corporation (PBC) established a permanent 12 ha Shorebird Roost on Fisherman Islands. PBC worked closely with the Queensland Wader Study Group, QPWS-Marine Parks and Environment Protection Agency to design a roost which met the specific needs of shorebirds, while providing educational opportunities for the community.

Key elements considered in the design included:

• Inclusion of a range of habitat types (wet margins, dry open areas, rough ground, and bund walls).

• Sight lines and sanctuary (landform profiles and protective moat).

• Minimisation of disturbance (feral animals, people and traffic).

• Water quality maintenance (tidal flow exchange and stormwater diversion systems).

• Site security and public access (feral animal-resistant fencing, designated access points with keyed viewing hides).

Left to right:

A temporary sign erected around the nesting site when Hooded Plovers are breeding. By following

the instructions, you are guaranteed to do no harm! Photo by Grainne Maguire

Dog owners were more likely to leash their dog if they believed other people expect dogs to be

leashed, and if they believe their dog is a threat to wildlife or people. Photo by Glenn Ehmke

One of two hides at the Port of Brisbane Shorebird Roost Site. Photo courtesy of the Port of

Brisbane Corporation

Australian Painted Snipe require shallow wetlands with complex shorelines, low vegetation and small low-lying islands which provide nesting adults with protection from predators. Photo by Ashley Herrod

One of the Global Flyway Network’s youngest volunteers releases a Bar-tailed Godwit at

Roebuck Bay, north-western Australia. Photo by Kandy Curran

The Shorebird Roost has become a lead attraction at the Port’s Visitors Centre and has been visited by many school, community and environmental groups. Monthly shorebird counts, carried out by QWSG since the roost opened, indicate there are several species that favour the constructed roost over the Port’s reclamation areas. As the Port continues to be developed, the purpose-built roost will become increasingly important to shorebirds roosting in the area.

A Shorebird Management Plan has also been prepared which provides guidance on the goals and objectives for shorebird management at the port. Further information is available in the publication, ‘Shorebirds of the Port’ available at www.portbris.com.au/environment

Brad KitchenPort of Brisbane Corporation

Conserving the Australian Painted SnipeThe Australian Painted Snipe is a resident shorebird of freshwater ephemeral wetlands that is found from northern to south-eastern Australia. Since 2001, the Australian Painted Snipe Project, initiated through Birds Australia’s Threatened Bird Network and the Australasian Wader Study Group, has collected critical data on the species’ abundance, distri-bution and habitat requirements. The project has also highlighted an alarming rate of population decline particularly throughout the south-eastern part of its range. The difficulty with surveying wetlands in the north however, makes it hard to confidently determine population abundance. The main contributing factors driving this decline are thought to be loss and deterioration of habitat, particularly in the Murray–Darling Basin, an area considered highly significant for these birds. Vegetation clearance, overgrazing by stock, salinisation, modified water regimes due to agricultural irrigation, and climate change are some of the threats impacting Australian Painted Snipe habitat. Through the ongoing support of our enthusiastic volunteers, the Birds Australia Threatened Bird Network aims to continue habitat and population surveys and to increase our efforts in public education and raising awareness of this elusive, but important, wetland species.

Janelle ThomasBirds Australia, Threatened Bird Network

getting involved: how you Can help

Everyone can become involved in shorebird conservation, whether as individuals, through community groups or NGOs, or at the local government level. The suggestions below include specific strategic actions that will enhance shorebird conservation in Australia.

What can I do?• Borrowsomebinocularsanddiscover

birdwatching, or join a birding organi-sation such as Birds Australia or BOCA (Birds Observation and Conservation Australia).

• If you enjoy spending time on the beach or near wetlands, whether by exercising, walking your dog or boating, be aware that you are sharing the beach with shorebirds, and keep your distance. Keep your dog under control so as not to disturb the birds, and obey local signs and regulations. Walking on wet sand will reduce disturbance to nests of resident shorebirds (above the tide-line), especially in the spring–summer breeding season.

• Drive4WDsandmotorcyclesonlywheretheyarepermitted,anddriveclosetothewater’sedge.• Joinacommunityconservationgrouporgetinvolvedwithanexistingshorebirdconservation

project. Contact Birds Australia to find out about projects in your local area.• WriteletterstotheAustralianGovernmentandgovernmentsofothercountriesencouraging

them to take action to halt the destruction of shorebird habitat throughout the Flyway; or to your local council, encouraging them to manage their important shorebird habitat responsibly.

What can community groups and NGOs do?• Educateothersaboutshorebirds,theirneedsandthreats.

Educating the community about shorebirds is one of the most valuable things that community groups and NGOs can do. Some examples for raising awareness include signage, workshops and mobile community displays. Supporting education initiatives in schools is a great way to encourage students to learn about shorebirds. The “Feathers, Flyways and Friends” website has some great education resources: www.shorebirds.wetlands.org.au

• Developyourowncommunity-drivenshorebirdconservationproject.For information and resources to help you plan your project visit the Shorebirds 2020 Shorebird Conservation website: www.shorebirds.org.au, and Chapter 5 of the manual ‘A practical guide to managing beach-nesting birds in Australia’ available at: www.birdsaustralia.com.au/our-projects/management-manual.html

• Helpwithsurveysandmonitoring.Local and national NGOs are the major groups undertaking shorebird surveys and monitoring providing crucial information for shorebird conservation.

• Continuetoadvocateandlobbyforshorebirdconservation.Community groups and NGOs play an important role in addressing shorebird conservation issues and providing crucial input into development proposals that will potentially impact shorebirds and their habitats.

What can local government and catchment authorities do?• Identifyimportantshorebirdsitesinyourjurisdiction.

Having information on the location of important sites for shorebirds is the first step towards managing shorebirds and meeting your obligations.

• Incorporateshorebirdsintoplanning.Shorebirds and threats to their habitat should be considered when managing wetlands and coastal adjacent areas. For example, erosion control in dunes can destroy nests and remove breeding habitat.

• Minimisedisturbance.Disturbance of shorebirds during feeding, roosting and nesting is a major problem in populated areas. Methods to minimise disturbance include seasonal or permanent fencing of sensitive sites, dog restraint, management of off-road vehicle access, and beach closures.

• Useregulatorytools,suchaszoningregulationsanddogcontrolacts,toprotectshorebirdsand their habitat.

• Increasestakeholderinvolvementanddeveloppartnerships.Local governments can form partnerships and co-operative management arrangements with NGOs, industry and landholders to achieve more environmentally sustainable land-use plans and practices that benefit shorebirds.


fuRtheR ReadingAntos, M. J., Weston, M.A. & Priest, B. (2006). Factors Influencing Awareness of

Community-Based Shorebird Conservation Projects in Australia. Applied Environmental Education and Communication 5, 63–72.

Bamford, M., Watkins, D., Bancroft, W., Tischler, G. & Wahl, J. (2008). Migratory Shorebirds of the East Asian – Australasian Flyway: Population Estimates and Interna-tionally Important Sites. Wetlands International – Oceania. Canberra, Australia.

Buick, A. M. & Paton, D. C. (1989). Impact of off-road vehicles on the nesting success of Hooded Plovers Charadrius rubricollis in the Coorong Region of South Australia, Emu, 89, 159-72.

Chambers, L. E., Hughes, L. & Weston, M. A. (2005). Climate change and its impact on Australia’s avifauna, Emu, 105, 1-20.

Church, J.A. & White, N.J. (2006). A 20th Century acceleration in global sea-level rise, Geophysical Research Letters, 33, L01602.

DECC NSW. (2009). Draft Sea Level Rise Policy, Department of Environment and Climate Change NSW, Sydney.

DEH. (2005). Wildlife Conservation Plan for Migratory Shorebirds, Department of the Environment and Heritage, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

DEH. (2005). Background Paper to the Wildlife Conservation Plan for Migratory Shorebirds, Department of the Environment and Heritage, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Environment Australia. (2001). A Directory of Important Wetlands in Australia, Environment Australia, Canberra. Available online: www.environment.gov.au/water/publications/environmental/wetlands/database/

Garnett, S. & Crowley, M. (2000). The Action Plan for Australian Birds, Environment Australia, Canberra.

Geering, A., Agnew, L. & Harding, S. (2007). Shorebirds of Australia, Queensland Wader Study Group, CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne.

Hayman, P., Marchant, J. & Prater, T. (1986). Shorebirds: An Identification Guide to the Waders of the World, Christopher Helm, London.

Lane, B. (1987). Shorebirds in Australia, Nelson Publishing, Melbourne.McCallum, H. I., Roshier, D. A., Tracey, J. P., Joseph, L., Heinsohn, R. (2008). Will

Wallace’s Line save Australia from avian influenza? Ecology and Society, 13, 41. [Online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss42/art41/.

Maguire, G. S. (2008). A practical guide for managing beach-nesting birds in Australia, Birds Australia, Melbourne. Available online: www.birdsaustralia.com.au/beach.

Marchant, S. & Higgins, P. J. (eds). (1993). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds, vol. 2. Raptors to Lapwings. Oxford University Press, Melbourne.

Straw, P. (ed). (1997). Shorebird Conservation in the Asia–Pacific Region, AWSG, Melbourne.

Williams, K. J. H., Weston, M. A., Henry, S. & Maguire, G. S. (2009). Birds and Beaches, Dogs and Leashes: Dog Owners’ Sense of Obligation to Leash Dogs on Beaches in Victoria, Australia. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 14, 89-101. DOI: 10.1080/10871200802649799.

Jo Oldland, Rob Clemens and Lainie Berry co-ordinate the Shorebirds, 2020 program at Birds Australia; Grainne Maguire is Project Manager of the Promoting Co-existence Between Recreationists and Beach-nesting Birds project at Birds Australia; Danny Rogers is a consultant avian biologist specialising in migratory shorebirds and Chair of the Australasian Wader Studies Group’s (AWSG) Scientific Committee; Ken Gosbell is Chair of the AWSG.

aKnowledgements This Birds Australia Conservation Statement supersedes the “Shorebird Conservation in Australia” Supplement to Wingspan, vol. 12, no. 4, December 2002, by Bianca Priest, Phil Straw and Michael Weston.

Many people have contributed to the development of this conservation statement. In particular, Birds Australia thanks: Michael Weston, Bianca Priest, Phil Straw, Doug Watkins, Phil Battley, Jane Cooper, Andrew Geering, Hayley Glover, Chris Hassell, Stacey Henry, Brad Kitchens, David Melville, James O’Connor, Theunis Piersma, QWSG members, Janelle Thomas, Eric

Date post:	31-Jan-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

shoRebiRd - Home | BirdLife · In other parts of the East Asian–Australasian Flyway, including...

Documents