Biodiversity Conservation – Report Card

2026 Assessment: Progressing – target cannot yet be demonstrated

A substantial amount of threatened-species and ecological-community conservation, research and monitoring is occurring across the Northern Agricultural Region.

Australian Government investment has supported NAR projects addressing threatened biodiversity including Malleefowl, Chuditch, Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo, threatened flora, Eucalypt Woodlands of the Western Australian Wheatbelt and Subtropical and Temperate Coastal Saltmarsh. The earlier Regional Land Partnerships project register included projects such as Gnow or Never: Supporting Communities to Save Malleefowl, work on the Scaly-leaved Featherflower and Securing the Future of Regionally Extinct Mammals in the NAR.

More recent Australian Government investment through the Natural Heritage Trust includes Protecting WA’s Black Cockatoos, Restoring the Eucalypt Woodlands of the WA Wheatbelt and Improving Subtropical and Temperate Coastal Saltmarsh in the Northern Agricultural Region.

Long-term monitoring also continues for important threatened species. National Malleefowl monitoring identifies the NAR Gnow or Never program as contributing monitoring sites to the National Malleefowl Monitoring Database.

Conservation work has produced some encouraging local outcomes. For example, regional projects have added Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo and Malleefowl breeding sites to national monitoring programs and supported the establishment of a new Chuditch population at Mt Gibson Wildlife Sanctuary.

However, conservation activity does not by itself demonstrate achievement of this goal.

The wording of the NARvis goal requires the conservation status of all relevant terrestrial threatened and priority plants, animals and ecological communities to be maintained or improved. Available public datasets do not currently provide a single NAR-wide assessment of the trajectory of every threatened or priority taxon and ecological community.

Changes in threatened-species listings also need to be interpreted carefully. An increase in the number of listed species does not necessarily represent an equivalent decline in biodiversity condition, as listings can change because of improved knowledge, taxonomic revision, reassessment or changes to listing criteria.

No evidence identified during this review indicates that a terrestrial species has been formally declared extinct within the NAR during the current NARvis reporting period. However, absence of a recorded extinction does not establish that the conservation status of all threatened and priority biodiversity has been maintained or improved.

There is substantial evidence of threatened-species conservation, habitat management, research, monitoring and restoration across the Northern Agricultural Region.

However, publicly available evidence does not provide a comprehensive NAR-wide assessment demonstrating that the conservation status of all terrestrial threatened and priority plants, animals and ecological communities has been maintained or improved since the current NARvis goals were established.

2026 Assessment: Progressing – target not yet demonstrated; significant baseline and reporting gap

The Northern Agricultural Region contains a substantial network of public conservation reserves and other areas managed for biodiversity. Conservation also occurs outside the formal reserve system through private-land conservation, conservation covenants and agreements, landholder management, restoration projects and other forms of stewardship.

However, the wording of this goal makes ecological representation, rather than the overall area protected across the NAR, the critical measure.

A regional figure showing the percentage of the entire NAR within protected areas cannot establish whether this goal has been achieved. The target requires 30% of each distinct ecological community to be managed, reserved and/or formally protected.

This distinction is particularly important because historical vegetation clearing has affected ecological communities very unevenly across the NAR.

The NARvis Biodiversity Conservation background information describes 168 vegetation associations in the region, including 74 that occur only within the NAR. It identifies 27 associations with less than 10% of their original NAR extent remaining and 68 with a remaining extent below 2,000 hectares.

Historical regional vegetation assessment similarly identified extensive clearing and substantial differences in the representation of vegetation types within the conservation estate.

Consequently, a relatively high level of protection in one widespread vegetation type cannot compensate for poor representation of another ecological community.

There is also an important measurement issue within the current goal. The phrase “30% of the land area in each distinct ecological community” does not specify whether the target refers to:

• 30% of the ecological community’s estimated pre-clearing extent; or
• 30% of its current remaining extent.

This distinction is important because some NAR vegetation associations retain less than 10% of their estimated original extent.

A second definition is also required for the term “managed”. Formal conservation reserves and conservation covenants are relatively straightforward to identify spatially, but other areas may receive biodiversity-sensitive management without being formally protected. A consistent criterion is therefore required before these areas can be counted towards the target.

Substantial areas of the Northern Agricultural Region are reserved, protected or otherwise managed for biodiversity conservation. However, available regional reporting does not currently demonstrate that 30% of each distinct ecological community meets the requirements of the NARvis goal.

The existing regional protected-area percentage should therefore not be interpreted as a direct measure of Goal 2.

2026 Assessment: Strong evidence of achievement – precise post-2021 total not yet verified

There is strong evidence of substantial ecological restoration across the Northern Agricultural Region since the current NARvis strategy was established.

One of the largest examples is the Yarra Yarra Biodiversity Corridor, a landscape-scale restoration initiative reconnecting remnant vegetation and nature reserves across the northern Wheatbelt. Current project reporting states that more than 35 million mixed native trees and shrubs have been established across more than 21,000 hectares since planting began in 2008.

Importantly, restoration has continued substantially during the current NARvis reporting period. Carbon Neutral reported more than 16,000 hectares restored by 2023, while current project reporting records more than 21,000 hectares restored and more than 35 million mixed native trees and shrubs established across the Yarra Yarra Biodiversity Corridor. These cumulative figures demonstrate continuing large-scale restoration after the NARvis goals were established, although they are not themselves a formal July 2021 NAR baseline.

Restoration continues through new properties and projects. The Wandalong Biodiverse Reforestation Project, at the northern end of the Yarra Yarra Biodiversity Corridor, covers 4,504 hectares. Of this, 2,384 hectares of previously cleared arable land is being transformed into permanent native woodland, alongside 2,020 hectares of remnant vegetation.

This landscape-scale work is additional to revegetation and habitat-restoration activities undertaken elsewhere across the NAR by private landholders, conservation organisations, government agencies, Traditional Owners, community and Landcare groups, local governments and regional NRM programs.

Care is required when combining project figures because restoration programs can overlap geographically or report cumulative areas over different time periods. Areas of existing vegetation protected from grazing or weeds should also not automatically be counted as “restored” unless restoration of degraded land can be demonstrated.

Nevertheless, the scale and continued expansion of verified restoration activity provide strong evidence that restoration across the NAR is at least of the magnitude envisaged by the 5,000-hectare NARvis target.

Landscape-scale restoration has continued across the Northern Agricultural Region since the current NARvis goals were established. The Yarra Yarra Biodiversity Corridor provides particularly strong evidence of large-scale restoration of previously cleared agricultural land, with substantial expansion continuing during the current reporting period.

Together with restoration undertaken through other public, private, community and conservation initiatives across the NAR, the available evidence strongly suggests that the target of restoring an additional 5,000 hectares of degraded land to benefit biodiversity by 2030 has been achieved. However, a precise post-2021 regional total has not yet been established.

Because currently available figures come from individual programs rather than a single NAR-wide restoration database, the precise regional total since July 2021 cannot yet be reported without risk of overlap or double counting.

2026 Assessment: Strong progress – target achievement has not yet been formally verified

Biodiversity research and monitoring is occurring across the Northern Agricultural Region through government agencies, universities and research institutions, Traditional Owner organisations, conservation organisations, citizen-science programs, community groups, private land managers and regional NRM programs.

Research and monitoring relevant to NAR biodiversity includes threatened-species population monitoring, breeding-site surveys, threatened-flora surveys, ecological-community mapping, vegetation-condition assessment, restoration monitoring, fire ecology and investigations of habitat use and ecological recovery.

Long-term examples include monitoring of Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo breeding and roosting sites and Malleefowl breeding activity. The Australian Government’s species-monitoring information identifies the NAR Gnow or Never project as maintaining monitoring sites contributing to the National Malleefowl Monitoring Database.

Current Australian Government investment also includes research and monitoring components associated with Eucalypt Woodlands, Black-Cockatoos and Subtropical and Temperate Coastal Saltmarsh within the Northern Agricultural Region.

The saltmarsh project, for example, includes mapping of the threatened ecological community to guide management, while associated work includes survey and monitoring of an existing Western Swamp Tortoise population. Further information is available through the Australian Government’s Western Swamp Tortoise conservation information.

Research and monitoring also occurs within large-scale restoration landscapes, providing information about ecological recovery and the effectiveness of revegetation.

The available evidence therefore demonstrates a substantial body of research and monitoring activity across the NAR.

However, the goal requires 25 research or monitoring projects, rather than 25 individual monitoring activities, surveys or datasets. No consolidated NAR-wide register has been identified that enables 25 separate projects undertaken during the current reporting period to be counted consistently without potential duplication.

For example, multiple surveys undertaken as components of one larger threatened-species project should not automatically be counted as separate projects.

Available evidence demonstrates extensive biodiversity research and monitoring across the Northern Agricultural Region and indicates that the region is making strong progress towards this goal.

It is possible that the threshold of 25 projects has already been reached. However, in the absence of a consolidated regional project register, this cannot yet be demonstrated confidently without potentially counting individual monitoring activities within the same project more than once.

2026 Assessment: Progressing – target not yet demonstrated

Ecological fire management recognises that fire is not simply a hazard to be prevented or controlled. Different species and ecological communities respond differently to fire frequency, intensity, season and the length of time between fires. Appropriate fire regimes therefore need to consider biodiversity conservation as well as protection of people and property.

A substantial scientific foundation for ecological fire management already exists for the Wheatbelt landscapes that include parts of the NAR.

The Fire & Biodiversity Guidelines for the Avon Basin were developed specifically to improve fire management for biodiversity conservation in fragmented landscapes. They describe nine major vegetation classes and provide fire-management recommendations based on ecological knowledge and indicator species. The guidelines also emphasise that species and communities vary in their response to fire and that ecological knowledge should underpin fire management.

The Western Australian Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions also identifies a body of fire, plants and vegetation research relevant to Wheatbelt ecosystems. This includes research into changes in vegetation structure and diversity with time since fire, contemporary fire regimes in fragmented landscapes, the implications of fire for Malleefowl and the fire ecology of eucalypt woodlands.

This provides an important knowledge base for ecological fire management in the NAR.

However, Goal 5 requires more than evidence that prescribed burning, wildfire management or fire research occurs.

To demonstrate achievement, suitable ecological fire regimes must be identified or developed for at least five distinct ecological communities and the biodiversity impacts of those regimes must be monitored.

Available public evidence does not currently provide a NAR-wide record demonstrating that all of these requirements have been met for five defined ecological communities during the current reporting period.

Prescribed burning, fuel-reduction activity, wildfire response or the existence of a fire-management plan should therefore not automatically be counted towards the goal unless there is evidence of an ecological objective and monitoring of the resulting biodiversity response.

Traditional Owner knowledge and cultural fire management may also contribute significantly to this goal where ecological objectives, appropriate fire regimes and biodiversity monitoring can be demonstrated.

Research and management guidance relevant to ecological fire regimes exists for the Northern Agricultural Region and adjoining Wheatbelt landscapes. There is a substantial scientific foundation for understanding relationships between fire, vegetation structure, species persistence and biodiversity.

However, available public evidence does not currently demonstrate that suitable ecological fire regimes have been identified or developed and their biodiversity impacts monitored in at least five distinct ecological communities within the NAR during the current reporting period.