Search

Wetland area and condition are declining globally despite their importance to climate change mitigation and biodiversity. Introduced ungulate species are contributing to the global decline. Their impacts on wetlands are widespread and varied, however poorly understood. We summarise global impacts of introduced unmanaged and domesticated ungulates on wetlands highlighting potential outcomes of their removal. We place an emphasis on Australia due to the disproportionate impacts of ungulates on wetlands and potential for emerging carbon and biodiversity markets to incentivise private investment in wetland conservation and restoration. Our Systematic Literature Review assessed impacts of cattle, pigs, horses, deer, buffalo, sheep, camels, and other ungulates on wetlands. There were 372 relevant resources from 35 countries, with highest representation from Australia and the United States. The majority related to cattle (29 %) and pigs (19 %). More impacts were reported in freshwater wetlands (51 %) than marine (19 %). A quarter of studies related to riparian habitats. Ungulate impacts varied geographically and among climates. More studies reported soil damage, weed dispersal, decreased vegetation cover, and woody vegetation suppression than neutral or positive changes in these metrics. Decreases in richness and abundance of native flora and fauna were more frequently reported than increases. Of 33 studies reporting wetland carbon impacts, 24 reported increased CO 2 emissions due to loss of soil carbon or vegetation biomass. Ungulate exclusion from wetlands could enhance carbon stocks and biodiversity, however further studies comparing wetland typologies and carbon dynamics are needed to quantify levels of enhancement given differences in ungulate species and environments. • Wetlands are declining despite their importance for climate change and biodiversity. • Impacts of feral and domesticated ungulates on wetlands vary by ecology, region, climate, and wetland type. • Ungulates damage soils and reduce ground cover, which may increase carbon emissions. • Reported ungulate impacts on flora and fauna are most often negative, but effects depend on taxa and region. • Control of ungulates in wetlands may support wetland conservation and restoration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Pricing greenhouse gas emissions is a burgeoning and possibly lucrative financial means for climate change mitigation. Emissions pricing is being used to fund emissions-abatement technologies and to modify land management to improve carbon sequestration and retention. Here we discuss the principal land-management options under existing and realistic future emissions-price legislation in Australia, and examine them with respect to their anticipated direct and indirect effects on biodiversity. The main ways in which emissions price-driven changes to land management can affect biodiversity are through policies and practices for (1) environmental plantings for carbon sequestration, (2) native regrowth, (3) fire management, (4) forestry, (5) agricultural practices (including cropping and grazing), and (6) feral animal control. While most land-management options available to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions offer clear advantages to increase the viability of native biodiversity, we describe several caveats regarding potentially negative outcomes, and outline components that need to be considered if biodiversity is also to benefit from the new carbon economy. Carbon plantings will only have real biodiversity value if they comprise appropriate native tree species and provide suitable habitats and resources for valued fauna. Such plantings also risk severely altering local hydrology and reducing water availability. Management of regrowth post-agricultural abandonment requires setting appropriate baselines and allowing for thinning in certain circumstances, and improvements to forestry rotation lengths would likely increase carbon-retention capacity and biodiversity value. Prescribed burning to reduce the frequency of high-intensity wildfires in northern Australia is being used as a tool to increase carbon retention. Fire management in southern Australia is not readily amenable for maximising carbon storage potential, but will become increasingly important for biodiversity conservation as the climate warms. Carbon price-based modifications to agriculture that would benefit biodiversity include reductions in tillage frequency and livestock densities, reductions in fertiliser use, and retention and regeneration of native shrubs; however, anticipated shifts to exotic perennial grass species such as buffel grass and kikuyu could have net negative implications for native biodiversity. Finally, it is unlikely that major reductions in greenhouse gas emissions arising from feral animal control are possible, even though reduced densities of feral herbivores will benefit Australian biodiversity greatly. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]