Skip links and keyboard navigation

A Guide to Wetland Rehabilitation for Community Groups in NSW

Search fields

Developer

Wetland Care Australia

Latest documentation

2000

Designed for use in

New South Wales, Australia

Ongoing

No

Assessment purpose

Management effectiveness, Prioritisation, Processes and components, Values

Assessment criteria

Socio-cultural, Management and planning, Flora, Fauna

Method type

Desktop, expert panel

Timescale

Short term – This is designed to be a rapid assessment.

Scale

Landscape/Catchment, Site/habitat

Wetland system

Estuarine, Lacustrine, Palustrine, Riverine

Description and method logic

Method purpose

To help prioritise which wetland to rehabilitate and to determine whether it is beneficial to rehabilitate a particular wetland.

Summary

This is a simple questionnaire with built-in weightings.

Method logic

The group or individual answers a series of questions relating to the wetland's ownership, management and values. Most of the information required to answer the questions is at a high level or should be easily available. The questionnaire's scoring allows for comparison of wetlands to prioritise rehabilitation.

Criteria groupings of the method

Wetland values that are have been identified or are easily identified, condition, restoration effort and landowner support.

Data required

This technique requires knowledge of wetlands including condition, size, ownership, species, wildlife corridors and cultural and social values.

Resources required

Expertise required

This technique relies on local knowledge of wetlands by users.

Materials required

Questionnaire.  May require additional data on representativeness, endemic or threatened species, importance to fauna and flora, wildlife life cycles, wildlife corridors and cultural significance.

Method outputs

Outputs

The results of the method provide a list of wetlands in order of management priority.

Uses

  • Help determine which wetland has highest priority for rehabilitation
  • Decide whether it is worthwhile to rehabilitate a wetland.

Criteria by category

    Socio-cultural

    • Cultural
      • Cultural, recreational or indigenous significance

    Management and planning

    • Support
      • Private landholder support
      • Tenure
    • Use
      • Accessibility to public
      • Current wetland use
      • Size

    Flora

    • Habitat
      • Endemic or threatened species
      • Vital habitat
    • Representativeness
      • Local representativeness

    Fauna

    • Habitat
      • Used by wildlife for part of their lifecycle
      • Wildlife corridors
    • Representativeness
      • Local representativeness

Review

Recommended user

Community groups, landholders can use the methodology and would also find the output useful.

Strengths

  • Simple questionnaire
  • Easy to understand.

Limitations

  • Responses to questionnaire may be inaccurate
  • Requires judgement by users.

Case studies

(not documented)

Links


References

  1. Collins, C (2000), A Guide to Wetland Rehabilitation for Community Groups in NSW, Wetland Care Australia, Ballina.

Last updated: 7 February 2019

This page should be cited as:

Department of Environment and Science, Queensland (2019) A Guide to Wetland Rehabilitation for Community Groups in NSW, WetlandInfo website, accessed 13 May 2021. Available at: https://wetlandinfo.des.qld.gov.au/wetlands/resources/tools/assessment-search-tool/a-guide-to-wetland-rehabilitation-for-community-groups-in-nsw/

Queensland Government
WetlandInfo   —   Department of Environment and Science