Description:    The condition of many wetlands across Australia has deteriorated due to increased water regulation and the expansion and intensification of agriculture and increased urban and industrial expansion. Despite this situation, a comprehensive overview of the distribution and condition of wetlands across Australia is not available. Regional analyses exist and several exemplary mapping and monitoring exercises have been maintained to complement the more general information sets. It is expected that global climate change will exacerbate the pressures on inland wetlands, while sea level rises will adversely affect coastal wetlands. It is also expected that the exacerbation of these pressures will increase the potential for near-irreversible changes in the ecological state of some wetlands. Concerted institutional responses to such pressures have in the past proven difficult to sustain, although there is some evidence that a more balanced approach to water use and agriculture is being developed with the provision of increasing funds to purchase water for environmental flows being one example. We identify examples from around Australia that illustrate the impacts on wetlands of long-term climate change from palaeoecological records (south-eastern Australia); water allocation (Murray-Darling Basin); dryland salinisation (south-western Australia); and coastal salinisation (northern Australia). These are provided to illustrate both the extent of change in wetlands and the complexity of differentiating the specific effects of climate change. An appraisal of the main policy responses by government to climate change is provided as a basis for further considering the opportunities for mitigation and adaptation to climate change. Content Type Journal Article Category Effects of Climate Change on Wetlands Pages 1-21 DOI 10.1007/s00027-011-0232-5 Authors C. M. Finlayson, Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University, PO Box 789, Albury, NSW 2640, Australia J. A. Davis, School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3800, Australia P. A. Gell, Centre for Environmental Management, School of Science and Engineering, University of Ballarat, PO Box 663, Ballarat, VIC 3353, Australia R. T. Kingsford, Australian Rivers and Wetland Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia K. A. Parton, Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University, PO Box 883, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia Journal Aquatic Sciences - Research Across Boundaries Online ISSN 1420-9055 Print ISSN 1015-1621

Description:    This review reports background information on wetlands in the Northeast Asia and High Asia areas, including wetland coverage and type, significance for local populations, and threats to their vitality and protection, with particular focus on the relationship of how global change influenced wetlands. Natural wetlands in these areas have been greatly depleted and degraded, largely due to global climate change, drainage and conversion to agriculture and silviculture, hydrologic alterations, exotics invasions, and misguided management policies. Global warming has caused wetland and ice-sheet loss in High Asia and permafrost thawing in tundra wetlands in Northeast Asia, and hence induced enormous reductions in water-storage sources in High Asia and carbon loss in Northeast Asia. This, in the long term, will exacerbate chronic water shortage and positively feed back global warming. Recently, better understanding of the vital role of healthy wetland ecosystems to Asia’s sustainable economic development has led to major efforts in wetland conservation and restoration. Nonetheless, collaborative efforts to restore and protect the wetlands must involve not only the countries of Northeast and High Asia but also international agencies. Research has been productive but the results should be more effectively integrated with policy-making and wetland restoration practices under future climatic scenarios. Content Type Journal Article Category Research Article Pages 1-9 DOI 10.1007/s00027-012-0281-4 Authors Shuqing An, The State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, The Institute of Wetland Ecology, School of Life Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093 People’s Republic of China Ziqiang Tian, River and Coastal Environment Research Center, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing, 100012 People’s Republic of China Ying Cai, The State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, The Institute of Wetland Ecology, School of Life Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093 People’s Republic of China Teng Wen, The State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, The Institute of Wetland Ecology, School of Life Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093 People’s Republic of China Delin Xu, The State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, The Institute of Wetland Ecology, School of Life Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093 People’s Republic of China Hao Jiang, The State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, The Institute of Wetland Ecology, School of Life Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093 People’s Republic of China Zhigang Yao, The Wetland Management Station, Jiangsu Administrate of Forestry, Nanjing, 210036 People’s Republic of China Baohua Guan, The Institute of Geography and Limnology, China Academy of Science, Nanjing, 210008 People’s Republic of China Sheng Sheng, The State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, The Institute of Wetland Ecology, School of Life Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093 People’s Republic of China Yan Ouyang, The State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, The Institute of Wetland Ecology, School of Life Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093 People’s Republic of China Xiaoli Cheng, Key Laboratory of Aquatic Botany and Watershed Ecology, Wuhan Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, 430074 People’s Republic of China Journal Aquatic Sciences - Research Across Boundaries Online ISSN 1420-9055 Print ISSN 1015-1621

Description: The biodiversity of aquatic inland habitats currently faces unprecedented threats from human activities. At the same time, although much is known about the functioning of freshwater ecosystems the successful transfer of such knowledge to practical conservation has not been universal. Global awareness of aquatic conservation issues is also hampered by the fact that conditions under the water surface are largely hidden from the direct experience of most members of society. Connectivity, or lack of it, is another challenge to the conservation of freshwater habitats, while urban areas can play a perhaps unexpectedly important positive role. Freshwater habitats frequently enjoy benefits accruing from a sense of ownership or stewardship by local inhabitants, which has led to the development of conservation movements which commonly started life centred on the aquatic inland habitat itself but of which many have now matured into wider catchment-based conservation programmes. A demonstrable need for evidence-based conservation management in turn requires scientific assessments to be increasingly robust and standardised, while at the same time remaining open to the adoption of technological advances and welcoming the rapidly developing citizen science movement. There is evidence of real progress in this context and conservation scientists are now communicating their findings to environmental managers in a way and on a scale that was rarely seen a couple of decades ago. It is only in this way that scientific knowledge can be efficiently transferred to conservation planning, prioritisation and ultimately management in an increasingly scaled-up, joined-up and resource-limited world. The principle of ‘prevention is better than cure’ is particularly appropriate to most biological conservation issues in aquatic inland habitats and is inextricably linked to educating and/or nudging appropriate human behaviours. When prevention fails, some form of emergency rescue such as captive breeding or translocations may be justified for particularly important animal or plant populations. However, long-haul missions of habitat rehabilitation or restoration are generally to be preferred even if they usually take many years if not decades to reach fruition. Conservation researchers, managers and practitioners must be realistic in their objectives and timescales for such programmes and take positive steps to communicate such information to stakeholders. Now more than ever, people are interested in conservation and sustainability. There are substantial challenges ahead, but these are better days for the biological conservation of aquatic inland habitats.