Submission to Parks Victoria on the Mornington Peninsula National Park Dog Walking Review November 2012
Submission by BirdLife Australia on the Mornington Peninsula National Park Dog Walking Review, November 2012 BirdLife Australia is pleased for the opportunity to make a submission with regard to the Dog Walking Review for the Mornington Peninsula National Park. Key Points BirdLife Australia strongly recommend Parks Victoria adopt OPTION 4: A TOTAL BAN FOR THE WHOLE PARK. The Mornington Peninsula National Park is one of the highest priority areas for Hooded Plover conservation and population recovery in Eastern Australia. Beach and dune habitat within the Mornington Peninsula National Park is extremely resource productive and of high habitat value. With ~30 breeding pairs, it has potential to significantly contribute to population viability. However this is not the case: the Mornington Peninsula has one of the lowest breeding success rates of any monitored region in Victoria and South Australia. Last breeding season, only three chicks fledged (0.10 fledglings per pair). This is nearly five times lower than the state average. Visitation rates to the park are the highest of any in the state and only increasing. Coupled with this are observations of non-compliance with dog regulations with 78.9% of all dogs observed being off-leash and dog owners being compliant with signage in only 2.9% of all observations. Some regulation breaches are particularly serious with nesting birds being directly attacked. Twenty years of educational efforts have not resulted in improved compliance with dog leashing in the park. Most noteworthy is that compliance with dog regulations is usually high in areas where dogs are prohibited. Prohibition of dogs within the National Park would reinforce the significance of this region and be a critical step to recovering this threatened species. It would remove any ambiguity about dog regulations within the park which are currently quite complex, and would be consistent with the prohibition of pets across the majority of National Parks across Australia. There are abundant areas on the Mornington Peninsula for off-leash dog walking, but there is no other habitat like this for the Hooded Plover. 2
Overview BirdLife Australia (formerly Birds Australia) is a highly respected, science-based, notfor-profit conservation organisation. With our specialised knowledge and the commitment of our Australia-wide network of 10,000 members, and more than 25,000 volunteers and supporters, we are dedicated to achieving outstanding conservation results for native birds and their habitats. We have an extensive program of research including our National Beach-nesting Birds (BNB) Program, developed to address the severe impacts of people and recreational activities on beaches on the breeding of Australia s native resident shorebirds. BirdLife Australia produced A practical guide for managing beach-nesting birds in Australia which presents best practise management and monitoring guidelines for Hooded Plovers (Maguire 2008). The BNB Program has been active within the Mornington Peninsula National Park since January 2006. Our research indicates that dog walking in the Mornington Peninsula National Park leads to unnecessarily high level of disturbance and depredation risks to breeding Hooded Plovers. The impacts of human recreation have contributed wholly to the threatened status of beach-nesting birds due to the overlap with their breeding season in spring and summer months (August-March). The Hooded Plover (Thinornis rubricollis) is the most threatened beach-nesting bird in south Eastern Australia because it relies exclusively on ocean beach habitat. Given the extremely low breeding success of Hooded Plovers, where less than 5% of breeding efforts are successful, we predict that the population will crash in the near future and become increasingly endangered as older birds start to die off, given there are so few juvenile replacements. The Mornington Peninsula National Park rates as one of the highest priority areas for Hooded Plover conservation and population recovery in Eastern Australia. It has the second highest density of Hooded Plovers in the entire eastern mainland range of the species (across South Australia, Victoria and NSW ocean beaches; density of 2.83 birds per kilometre). It offers abundant, intact breeding habitat where extensive dune systems are in good condition with minimal weed infestation, beaches are wide, and rock platforms offer additional foraging substrate and cover. These dune systems also have room to retreat inland in the face of rising sea levels and climate change, which makes this habitat more resilient than elsewhere on the coast. The Mornington Peninsula attracts large winter flocks as well as sustains flocks of non-breeding birds during the spring and summer months, making it a unique and important habitat resource for the species on the Victorian coast. Banded Hooded Plovers from as far East as Cape Paterson and as far west as Apollo Bay, have been detected in the park, establishing to breed or foraging in the park as they disperse. With approximately 30 consistent breeding territories (pairs), the Mornington Peninsula National Park has potential to contribute greatly to the viability of not only the Victorian population but also the entire eastern subspecies. This however is not the case, and the Mornington Peninsula has one of the lowest breeding success rates 3
of any monitored region in Victoria, South Australia and NSW. Last breeding season, only three chicks fledged from 29 pairs monitored (0.10 fledglings per pair). This is nearly five times lower than the state average (0.47 fledglings per pair). This is the lowest success rate experienced over six consecutive breeding seasons. In the 2007/08, 2008/09 and 2010/11 seasons, breeding success was still significantly lower (by almost half) than the state average at 0.29 fledglings per pair. This triggers alarm bells given the value of the habitat and size of the population persisting on the Mornington Peninsula, as this area is acting as a sink rather than a source of new individuals to the population. The high visitation rates to the park (estimated at 3.5 million visitors per annum) coupled with high rates of off-leash dogs are tipping the balance for this threatened species. It is no coincidence that there is considerable spatial variation in fledgling production across the Mornington Peninsula, with chicks typically fledging from the furthermost extremes of the park (Gunnamatta-Fingal and Portsea-Point Nepean) where human and canine visitors are rare in comparison to the middle of the park. While we have improved the outlook for the species elsewhere via community changes in beach behaviour (i.e. dog leashing, respecting fenced areas), there is such a wide visitor base to this area, that breaches of regulations by visitors are frequent. The degree of complexity around the current regulations can lead to misinterpretation by visitors and account for some of the observed low compliance. Our data shows rates of non-compliance (dogs off-leash and in the park out of walking hours) occurring in 97% of observation visits. Volunteers and BirdLife staff frequently observe off-leash dogs chasing nesting birds and running through nesting sites (see Appendix 1). This is despite intensive patrols and enforcement undertaken by Parks Victoria rangers, and education efforts by volunteers and BirdLife Australia staff over the past 20 years. Using an evidence-based approach of combined threat monitoring and social research data, BirdLife Australia strongly recommend Parks Victoria adopt OPTION 4: A TOTAL BAN FOR THE WHOLE PARK. There is considerable evidence that this would benefit a nationally threatened species, the Hooded Plover, as well as other rare and threatened fauna within the park. This would have both direct benefits by reducing disturbance and predation of eggs and chicks of the Hooded Plover, and indirect benefits, by enabling widespread fox control and ensuring limited resources are better channelled into protecting the integrity of this important natural area. This habitat is of irreplaceable and rare value considering its resilience, biodiversity and relatively pristine dune systems. Prohibition of dogs within the National Park would reinforce the significance of this region and be a critical step to recovering this threatened species. 4
Background How are breeding Hooded Plovers threatened by domestic dogs? The impacts of dogs on Hooded Plovers are well documented and there is direct evidence for all of the below threats: Direct crushing of well-camouflaged eggs and chicks by dogs off-leash moving above the high-tide mark and in the dunes; Direct predation of eggs and chicks by dogs that detect their presence through scent or sight; Disturbance of the incubating adults research shows when an off-leash dog approaches a nesting area that the birds react from more than double the distance and spend longer periods away from the nest, compared to a walker or walker with an on-leash dog (see Weston and Elgar 2007; Glover et al. 2011). This relates to the greater speed and the irregularity of direction that unleashed dogs take; they are more likely to explore and to move onto the upper beach (Burger 1986), while walkers more commonly choose to move linearly along the hard sand (and a leashed dog moves predictably alongside of them). This disturbance on a day with high temperatures or gale force winds can be lethal within less than 10 minutes for example. When a beach receives numerous visitors and numerous off-leash dogs, then the impacts quickly become cumulative. Disturbance of the chicks and adults when the eggs hatch, the chicks are tiny, well-camouflaged and flightless for 35 days after hatching. They become mobile immediately after hatching and need to feed by the water s edge. The role of the parents is to warn them of approaching danger. When a person or dog approaches, the chicks run from the water s edge or seaweed line to the upper beach or dunes. If the dog chases the adults away from the chicks, then the chicks are left unattended and can be predated by gulls and ravens, or stepped on by other approaching people as the parents can t herd them to safety. Contrary to popular belief, chasing is not the only impact of unleashed dogs to the chicks. Chicks go into hiding earlier (about 100-250m) and for longer periods when an unleashed dog is sighted, and can starve or dehydrate if hidden for too long a period (Weston and Elgar 2005). Hooded Plovers on the Mornington Peninsula The Eastern subspecies of the Hooded Plover was recently described as Nationally Vulnerable in the Action Plan for Australian Birds 2010 (Garnett et al. 2011) and will be subject to listing under the federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). There are only a total of 5500-6000 Hooded Plovers in Australia and therefore worldwide, with an estimated 3000 in the Eastern range. 5
Szabo et al. (2012) reported that the Eastern subspecies of the Hooded Plover would already be listed as Nationally Endangered if it weren t for the onground efforts by volunteers and land managers and policy changes being implemented across their range. The second highest density of Hooded Plovers of any stretch of coast along the entire Eastern Mainland range of the species occurs on the Mornington Peninsula (a density of 2.83 Hooded Plovers per kilometre; Ewers et al. 2011). On average there are 0.88 Hooded Plovers per kilometre along suitable ocean beach habitat in Victoria. This is due to the extremely high marine productivity and good quality dune systems in the Mornington Peninsula NP. Hooded Plovers are reliant on these habitat features which are very rare elsewhere on the Victorian Coast. This makes the Mornington Peninsula of highest priority for conservation and recovery of the declining Eastern Mainland population. There are approximately 69 Hooded Plovers on the Mornington Peninsula (Ewers et al. 2011) a number which fluctuates regularly due to lots of movement in and out of the peninsula of birds dispersing east and west along the Victorian coast, predominantly in winter. Typically during the breeding season, there are close to 70 adult birds (see Appendix 2 maps). This constitutes 1.2% of the total species (national population) of Hooded Plovers, 2.3% of the Eastern subspecies population and 12.5% of the Victorian population. For any species, this constitutes a significant proportion from a conservation point of view (e.g. Ramsar conventions and EPBC Act conventions for protection of shorebirds and waterbirds specify important areas as supporting 1% of international and 1% of national populations, respectively). Weston et al. (2009) maps significant flocking sites for Hooded Plovers in Victoria based on movements of colour-banded birds and two of these occur on the Mornington Peninsula, one at Portsea (near Franklin Rd access) and the other at Rye/St Andrews (near Moana court access). The Mornington Peninsula has one of the lowest breeding success rates of any monitored region in Victoria, South Australia and NSW. Last breeding season, only three chicks fledged from 29 pairs monitored (0.10 fledglings per pair). This is nearly five times lower than the state average (0.47 fledglings per pair). This is the lowest success rate experienced over six consecutive breeding seasons. In the 2007/08, 2008/09 and 2010/11 seasons, breeding success was still significantly lower (by almost half) than the state average at 0.29 fledglings per pair. This triggers alarm bells given the value of the habitat and size of the population persisting on the Mornington Peninsula, as this area is acting as a sink rather than a source of new individuals to the population. A Hooded Plover Working Group was formed in late 2010 (and first met in January 2011) in order to update and review the Hooded Plover Management Strategy for the Mornington Peninsula from 1998. This process was long overdue and one of the most significant discussions was around the poor breeding success experienced by Hooded 6
Plovers in the park and what changes to park management would be critical for improving this. Dog access was high on the agenda because of the continued and increasing observations of dogs off-leash on beaches with breeding Hooded Plovers. The group unanimously agreed that a total dog ban would be the most effective way to resolve this issue as previous educational strategies had not shifted the behaviour of dog owners within the park. It must be noted that dog groups, clubs and associations were invited to participate in the working group and with the exception of the first meeting attended by a representative of Dogs Victoria, there was no uptake of being included in these discussions. This might suggest that there is either a lack of interest and/or motivation by dog groups to contribute to improved park management and conservation outcomes on the Mornington Peninsula. The current dog walking review has not sparked any offers from dog clubs or community groups to take the lead on improving compliance with leashing to improve the conservation outlook for the threatened Hooded Plover. This is a stark contrast to a proposed dog ban at Point Lonsdale and at Phillip Island, where the pro-dog walking groups contacted BirdLife Australia and asked how they could help turn the situation around and be more responsible in accessing those beaches. Evidence of low compliance with dog regulations Leashing of dogs can improve conservation outcomes, but few dogs are leashed on beaches (82% of 2,847 dogs on Victorian beaches, 1994 2008; Weston & Maguire, 2008). For example, of 693 dogs at Mornington Peninsula National Park, Victoria, 1991 1998, only 12% were leashed in areas where leashing was required (Dowling & Weston, 1999). With seven years of intense education, awareness campaigns, and enforcement of leashing laws in the Mornington Peninsula National Park, compliance peaked with only 22% of dogs leashed (Dowling & Weston, 1999). This was reported back in 1999. More recently, over 900 threat assessments from beaches within the Mornington Peninsula National Park from 2006 to 2009 show that compliance with dog regulations is very low with 78.9% of all dogs observed being off-leash and dog owners being only compliant with signage in 2.9% of all observations. Some regulation breaches are particularly serious with nesting birds been directly attacked. Examples can be seen in Appendix 1. This amounts to 20 years of conservation and education effort in the park and still a significant off-leash dog problem. Most noteworthy is that observations indicate that compliance with dog regulations is usually high in areas where dogs are prohibited. For example, few dogs are observed in the area east of Gunnamatta where dogs are not permitted. Our data set from across Victoria is revealing that there are fewer breaches of regulations when dogs are totally prohibited from an area. 7
Dog owner attitudes towards leashing on beaches Williams et al. (2009) surveyed dog owners to explore their sense of obligation to leash dogs on beaches and to identify barriers to compliance. 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. Within the Mornington Peninsula National Park, observations of off-leash dogs are commonplace and community members have not broadly led by example, so that social norms to improve low compliance are unlikely. There is no evidence to indicate that over time, educational efforts have improved leashing within the park, while in areas on the Bellarine Peninsula and Far West Victoria, there have been visible improvements. Furthermore, feedback from dog owners within the park have revealed that some of the most common statements are that there are plenty of these birds, they can t be threatened and that foxes are the main threat and my dog doesn t go near them. Critical to improving leashing rates is recognition that dogs pose a threat to wildlife, but this is not filtering through despite education via signage, protective structures on the beach, wardening, one-to-one liaison between dog owners and either rangers, BirdLife staff or volunteers, and summer events including a dogs breakfast at Portsea. The latter was the most poorly attended of any of these type of events held in Victoria. Attitudes toward beaches in Australia In interviews with over 270 coastal residents in south-eastern Australia, the features rated as most important in their decision about which beach to visit were related to its pristineness, i.e. wide, sandy beaches with clean water, not overcrowded and with wildlife viewing opportunities; and these were rated more highly than the desire for facilities such as toilets (Maguire et al. 2011). Surveys of coastal residents in south-eastern Australia also revealed that the top factors that contribute to greater enjoyment of the beach were: presence of wildlife; rubbish bins; no litter; enforcement of bylaws; adequate parking; not overcrowded and no access for dogs. It must be noted that presence of wildlife was number one and that oddly enough enforcement of bylaws rated as the fourth highest factor improving enjoyment of beaches. No access for dogs rated on the positive side of the scale while presence of dogs rated on the negative side of the scale for respondents. It can be said that Australians value the unique natural beaches that Australia has to offer and that the Mornington Peninsula offers one of the finest examples of a wide, sandy beach coastline with opportunities to view wildlife. Coastal managers are often reluctant to limit access and to enforce regulations, particularly if this is for environmental reasons (James 2000; Schlacher et al. 2007, 2008). However, this is not in line with the desire Australians have for beach management suggesting managers need to take a more proactive role now is the time to encourage more active rehabilitation, protection and improvement of these important assets through 8
proactive planning and management (NRMMC 2006, p. 6). Prohibition of dogs within the National Park would increase peoples enjoyment of this park and ensure the natural values people rate so highly remain for generations to come. Passive recreation within the park Wildlife watching/enjoying natural values is a popular activity in national parks around Australia. This activity is being prevented in some instances by widespread noncompliance with existing dog regulations. Instances of aggression towards passive recreationalists, who are simply trying to enjoy viewing our native wildlife or partake in a conservation program, by belligerent dog walkers is on the increase (although it is not yet the norm). The density of non-compliant dog walkers in the MPNP is increasing rapidly (with increased overall visitation rates) and is threatening passive recreation in more and more areas of the park. Awareness and attitudes toward Hooded Plover conservation measures Social research is revealing that of the different recreational groups using beaches in Victoria, dog owners respond differently to the information they are provided about the Hooded Plover and to management efforts for the Hooded Plover (Maguire et al. in prep). Regular beach users, particularly those who are likely to be having an impact on Hooded Plovers (e.g. off-leash dog walkers; Weston & Elgar 2007) tended to rate threats less severely than other beach users, perhaps because their behaviour is inconsistent with the belief that that they are causing harm to plovers, or perhaps because they have witnessed dog-plover interactions and consider the impacts benign because they do not observe direct, obvious, physical consequences but rather a response which they consider benign (Kellert 1992; Kollmuss & Agyeman 2002). Recreationists at least sometimes perceive they cause less stress to wildlife than they actually cause (Taylor and Knight 2003). One feature of Hooded Plover conservation is that the adults persist in locations (even though their breeding may not be viable), so the presence of the birds may reinforce the idea that threats are overstated ( These birds have been here for as long as I have, they re not threatened ). Such subtle consequences during human-bird interactions might underpin less proenvironmental behaviour (Kollmuss & Agyeman 2002). Respondents who walk their dogs on the beach experienced more personal inconvenience in relation to exclusions and regulations than respondents without dogs. Dog walkers are required to make a greater behavioural change (i.e. to leash their dog) in comparison with non-dog walkers, and many dog walkers do not leash their dogs when required to, suggesting resistance to the idea of leashing among at least a selection of dog walkers (Williams et al. 2009). For dog-walkers, managements may prevent attainment of their goal (e.g. off-leash dog exercise) while non-dog walkers will still attain their goal (e.g. exercise or spending time on the 9
beach). Additionally, there may be a degree of dissonance, whereby dog walkers unconsciously seek consistency in their beliefs and mental frameworks, thus justify their behaviour (lack of compliance with leashing laws) by perceiving their behaviour as low impact. Indeed, Williams et al. (2009) found that dog walkers consistently viewed their own dog as having little or no impact on the birds but other people s dogs as highly threatening to the birds welfare. This internal dissonance is consistent with the high level of support among dog walkers who frequently use the beach have for the conservation of plovers. Sympathy and support seem to be present, but inconvenience acts as a barrier to compliance. Opportunities for provision of dog walking areas elsewhere in the region The Mornington Peninsula shire has a network of leash-free dog walking areas (http://www.mornpen.vic.gov.au/files/leashfreeareas2011.pdf), and thus alternative areas for dog walking are available. In many cases alternative dog walking areas are located in close proximity to the MPNP. Where this is not the case, the MPNP should not be used as a substitute for a lack of appropriate dog walking parks, at the expense of threatened and rare species of wildlife. BirdLife Australia s recommendations The current dog access regulations within the Mornington Peninsula National Park are over 12 years old (with the exception of the more recently implemented Shorebird Conservation Zone at Portsea). This was when visitation rates were estimated at 2.5 million visitors. There has been an increase of 1 million visitors since then and Mornington Peninsula National Park is still the most highly visited national park in Victoria. As the population size of Melbourne grows, this is likely to increase, and additionally, the Peninsula Link bypass is predicted to bring a further 250,000 vehicles a year to the Mornington Peninsula, many of which will be heading to the National Park. Under the current visitation rate and based on the behaviour of current users, dog access to the park is simply no longer sustainable. Using an evidence-based approach, BirdLife Australia strongly recommend Parks Victoria adopt OPTION 4: A TOTAL BAN FOR THE WHOLE PARK. There is considerable evidence that this would benefit a nationally threatened bird, the Hooded Plover, as well as other rare and threatened fauna within the park. This would occur both directly, by reducing disturbance to breeding birds, and predation of eggs and chicks, and indirectly, by enabling widespread fox control and ensuring limited resources are better channelled into protecting the integrity of this important natural area. This habitat is of irreplaceable and rare value considering its resilience, biodiversity and relatively pristine dune systems. 10
Should you require any further information on this submission please contact Dr Grainne Maguire, Beach-nesting Birds Program Manager grainne.maguire@birdlife.org.au or (03) 9347 0757. Yours Sincerely, Samantha Vine Head of Conservation BirdLife Australia 11
References Burger, J. (1986). The effects of human activity on shorebirds in two coastal bays in northeastern United States. Environmental Conservation 13, 123-130. Dowling, B. and Weston, M., A. (1999). Managing a breeding population of the Hooded Plover Thinornis rubricollis in a high-use recreational environment, Bird Conservation International 9: 255-270. Ewers, G., Hardie, M., Ekanayake, K., Cullen, M. and Maguire G. (2011). Report on the 2010 Biennial Hooded Plover Count. Birds Australia, Melbourne. Garnett, S., Szabo, J., and Dutson, G. (2011). The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2010. CSIRO, Melbourne. Glover, H. K., Weston, M. A., Maguire, G. S., Miller, K. K. and Christie, B. A. (2011). Towards ecologically meaningful and socially acceptable buffers: Response distances of shorebirds in Victoria, Australia, to human disturbance. Landscape and Urban Planning 103, 326-334. James, R.J., 2000. From beaches to beach environments: linking the ecology, humanuse and management of beaches in Australia. Ocean and Coastal Management 43: 495-514. Kellert, S.R. (1992). Attitudes toward Bears and Their Conservation. Bears: Their Biology and Management 9: 43-50. Kollmuss, A. and Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the Gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research 8, 239-260. Maguire, G. S. (2009). A practical guide for managing beach-nesting birds in Australia. Birds Australia, Melbourne. Maguire, G. S., Miller, K. K., Weston, M. A. and Young, K. (2011). Being beside the seaside: Beach use and preferences among coastal residents of south-eastern Australia. Ocean & Coastal Management 54, 781-788. 12
Maguire, G. S., Rimmer, J. M. and Weston, M. A. (in prep). Inconvenience, awareness, pet ownership and frequency of habitat usage influence stakeholder perceptions of threatened species and their management among beach visitors. Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council (NRMMC) (2006). National Cooperative Approach to Integrated Coastal Zone Management: Framework and Implementation Plan. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Schlacher, T.A., Dugan, J., Schoeman, D.S., Lastra, M., Jones, A., Scapini, F., McLachlan, A., Defeo, O., 2007. Sandy beaches at the brink. Diversity and Distributions 13: 556-560. Schlacher, T.A., Schoeman, D.S., Dugan, J., Lastra, M., Jones, A., Scapini, F., McLachlan, A., 2008. Sandy beach ecosystems: key features, sampling issues, management challenges and climate change impacts. Marine Ecology and Evolutionary Perspectives 29: 70-90. Szabo, J. K., Butchart, S. M., Possingham, H., and Garnett, S. T. (2012). Adapting global biodiversity indicators to the national scale: A Red List Index for Australian birds. Biological Conservation (early online publication). Taylor, A.R. and Knight, R.L. (2003). Wildlife responses to recreation and associated visitor perceptions. Ecological Applications, 13, 951 963. Weston, M. A. and Elgar, M. A. (2005). Disturbance to brood-rearing Hooded Plover (Thinornis rubricollis): responses and consequences. Bird Conservation International 15, 193-209. Weston, M. A. and Elgar, M. A. (2007). Responses of incubating Hooded Plovers (Thinornis rubricollis) to Disturbance. Journal of Coastal Research 23, 569-576. Weston, M. A., Ehmke, G. C. and Maguire, G. (2009) Manage one beach or two? Movements and space-use of the threatened Hooded Plover (Thinornis rubricollis) in south-eastern Australia. Wildlife Research 36: 289-298. 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. 13