Lord Howe seamount chain

Legal description

The Commonwealth marine area is a matter of national environmental significance under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). As such, actions that have, will have, or are likely to have, a significant impact on it require approval.

In February 2014, the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (NOPSEMA) became the sole designated assessor of petroleum and greenhouse gas activities in Commonwealth waters in accordance with the Minister for the Environment’s endorsement of NOPSEMA’s environmental authorisation process under Part 10, section 146 of the EPBC Act. Under the streamlined arrangements, impacts on the Commonwealth marine area by petroleum and greenhouse gas activities will be assessed solely through NOPSEMA.

Key ecological features (KEFs) are not matters of national environmental significance and have no legal status in their own right. However, they may be considered as components of the Commonwealth marine area.

This KEF was identified in the Temperate East Marine Bioregional Plan. Under section 176 of the EPBC Act, once a bioregional plan has been made the minister responsible for the environment must have regard to it when making any decision under the Act to which the plan is relevant.

Values

National and/or regional importance

The Lord Howe seamount chain is recognised as a key ecological feature for its enhanced productivity, aggregations of marine life, and biodiversity and endemism.

Location

The Lord Howe seamount chain runs for approximately 1000 km along the western margin of the Lord Howe Rise, extending from Lord Howe Island in the south to Nova Bank in the north (Harris et al. 2005; van der Linden 1970, in Dambacher et al. 2011). The chain includes Lord Howe Island, Balls Pyramid, Elizabeth Reef, Middleton Reef and Gifford Guyot within the Temperate East Marine Region, and to the north of the Region are Capel, Kelso, Argo and Nova banks (Dambacher et al. 2011).

The spatial boundary of this KEF, as defined on the Conservation Values Atlas, is based on pinnacles, seamounts and guyots identified in the Geoscience Australia geomorphic features dataset.

Description

Within the Lord Howe subregion of the Temperate East Marine Region, 80 % of the subregion is classed as plateau with depths ranging between 805 metres and 5140 metres, and 1 % is classed as seamount/guyot with depths as shallow as 75 metres (Keene et al. 2008)

.The Lord Howe seamount chain supports tropical shallow coral reefs and deep cold water corals (depths greater than 40 metres). The fringing coral reefs around Lord Howe Island and Elizabeth and Middleton reefs are the most southerly tropical coral reefs in the Pacific Ocean (Harriott et al. 1995; Veron & Done 1979, in Dambacher et al. 2011).

The seamount chain lies in the path of the Tasman Front, which brings a mix of warm tropical waters and colder nutrient-rich waters from the south, depending on the season (Ridgway & Dunn 2003). In general, waters surrounding this feature are nutrient poor and relatively unproductive (Dambacher et al. 2011). However, significantly higher catch rates of a range of tuna species along the seamounts suggest periodic bursts of productivity, presumably from subantarctic waters to the south. Species distributions of large, deep water benthic animals overlap on the Lord Howe Rise and southern portion of the Norfolk Ridge, where both are influenced by the Tasman Front, but do not overlap in the northern portion, which lacks a hydrographic connection (Williams et al. 2011).

Model information

The department and CSIRO conducted collaborative research on KEFs to identify indicators for monitoring marine ecosystem health in the Commonwealth Marine Area. As part of this process, qualitative models were developed for 27 KEFs, including the Lord Howe seamount chain. Further information can be found at https://publications.csiro.au/publications/publication/PIcsiro:EP132926.

Pressure

During the development of marine bioregional plans, a regional pressure analysis was conducted to assess present and emerging pressures affecting conservation values in the Marine Regions and the effectiveness of mitigation and management arrangements that are currently in place to address these pressures. The analysis enabled pressures to be categorised in terms of their relative importance or concern and has informed the identification of regional conservation priorities. For the purpose of the plans, pressures are defined broadly as human-driven processes and events that do or can detrimentally affect the region's conservation values.

No pressures were assessed as of concern for the Lord Howe seamount chain.

Pressures assessed as of potential concern are changes in sea temperature, change in oceanography, and ocean acidification as a result of climate change; chemical pollution; marine debris; extraction of living resources; bycatch; and oil pollution. These pressures are described in more detail below.

Changes in sea temperature (climate change)
Sea temperatures have warmed by 0.7 °C between 1910–1929 and 1989–2008, and current projections estimate ocean temperatures will be a further 1 °C warmer by 2030 (Lough 2009). Expected impacts include changes to food web dynamics (Hoegh-Guldberg & Bruno 2010), potentially increasing the frequency or severity of coral bleaching events, and a southerly shift in the distribution of pelagic fish species (Hobday et al. 2006). For features located in the deeper waters of the region (such as the shelf rocky reefs, seamounts and ridges), the impacts of rising sea temperatures are more complex. Rising temperatures drive changes such as thermal expansion (Hoegh-Gulberg & Bruno 2010), resulting in greater stratification in the water column, reducing mixing in some parts of the ocean, and consequently affecting nutrient availability and primary production at depth (Hoegh-Gulberg & Bruno 2010).

Changes in oceanography (climate change)
Changes in oceanography include consideration of circulation patterns; current intensities; wind strength and direction; the location and strength of eddy and upwelling events; and climatic oscillations such as the El Niño–Southern Oscillation. In the region, changes in oceanography will be primarily influenced by the East Australian Current, which is one of the key drivers of the region’s biological productivity, species distribution and abundance (Dambacher et al. 2011). The East Australian Current has been strengthening, pushing warmer, saltier water further southward along the east coast (for up to 350 km) (Ridgway & Hill 2009). Changes in the strength and extent of the current are likely to impact on productivity, shifting trophic webs, and changing migration patterns and reef and shelf habitats, all of which have implications for marine species (Chin et al. 2010). Offshore, the current is partly responsible for the unique mix of warm and cold water species associated with Elizabeth and Middleton reefs and the Tasmantid and Lord Howe seamount chains (Dambacher et al. 2011).

Ocean acidification (climate change)
Driven by increasing levels of atmospheric CO₂ and subsequent chemical changes in the ocean, ocean acidification is already under way and detectable. Since pre-industrial times, acidification has lowered ocean pH by 0.1 units (Howard et al. 2009). Furthermore, climate models predict this trend will continue, with a further 0.2–0.3 unit decline by 2100 (Howard et al. 2009). KEFs which support a range of shallow and deepwater coral reef systems are particularly vulnerable to ocean acidification. The direct impacts of ocean acidification are expected to be most marked for organisms with calcareous skeletons, such as corals, plankton, molluscs and echinoderms (Doney et al. 2009). Increasing acidity reduces the ability of these organisms to form skeletal structures, which is likely to affect not only their ability to function within the ecosystem, but the functioning of the ecosystem as a whole (Kleypas & Yates 2009). For example, research on coral cores in the Great Barrier Reef identified a 14 % decline in coral calcification rates between 1990 and 2005 (De’ath et al. 2009), which the authors attribute to excessive temperature increases, ocean acidification, or a combination of the two. For this region, increased ocean acidification and sea surface temperatures are predicted to have combined impacts, prompting reef conditions to shift from ‘marginal’ (Kleypas et al. 1999) to ‘extremely marginal’ by the middle of this century (Noreen 2010).

For the subtropical regions of the Tasmantid and Lord Howe seamount chains, it is likely that increased ocean acidity will reduce coral growth rates and resilience, making the reef systems more susceptible to erosion and disturbance from storms (Anthony & Marshall 2009). Predictive climate models indicate that the unique, deep, cold water reefs and sponge gardens of the Norfolk Ridge, shelf edge and seamount chains are also at risk from a similar range of impacts (Cohen & Holcomb 2009; Howard et al. 2009; Hyder Consulting 2008). Corals provide structural habitat complexity for a range of invertebrates and fish (Althaus et al. 2009). Consequently, any impact on coral reef habitat is likely to change the distribution and abundance of species that depend on them for food and shelter.

Chemical pollution
Chemical pollution/contaminants is of potential concern for KEFs with values that make them particularly vulnerable to the impacts of a chemical spill, such as important aggregations of marine life at or near the sea surface. As is the case with oil spills, chemical spills are unpredictable events and their likelihood is low in the context of the international and domestic regulatory mitigation measures that apply in Australia. The effects of a major chemical spill can be similar to those of oil spills (GBRMPA 2009), particularly in areas and at times of biological significance for important or threatened species. The impacts vary depending on the toxicity of chemicals, how the materials are packaged and transported, the quantity spilled, the site and ecological sensitivity.

Marine debris
Marine debris is defined as any persistent, manufactured or processed solid material that has been disposed of, or abandoned, in the marine and coastal environment (UNEP 2005). This includes a range of materials from plastics (e.g. bags, bottles, ropes, fibreglass and insulation) to derelict fishing gear, and ship-sourced, solid, non-biodegradable floating materials (DEWHA 2009). Although region-specific marine debris data is limited, key sources for the introduction and spread of debris, such as shipping, commercial fishing and major current systems, are present across the region. This suggests that all KEFs will experience a high degree of overlap with this pressure (Katsanevakis 2008). Marine debris has been listed as a key threatening process under the EPBC Act, in recognition of its negative impacts on substantial numbers of Australia’s marine wildlife, including protected species of birds, turtles and marine mammals. Therefore, this pressure has implications for values such as biodiversity and aggregations of marine life. The Australian Government has developed a threat abatement plan that provides a coordinated national approach to prevent and mitigate the effects of harmful marine debris on marine life (DEWHA 2009).

Extraction of living resources (commercial fishing)
The ecosystem effects of fishing are not well understood. The rating of potential concern is primarily driven by the impact of the targeted take of commercial fisheries on top-order predators, which are considered to be a key functional species group within these features. The extraction of top predators by fishing activities has implications for ecological communities as it influences the abundance, recruitment, species composition, diversity and behaviour of prey species. Removal of top predators can have a ‘cascading’ effect on all the components of a food web (Baum & Worm 2009; Ceccarelli & Ayling 2010). Reef sharks, cod and groupers are important for coral reef communities, while tuna and billfish are important for pelagic systems (Ceccarelli & Ayling 2010). In the context of active fisheries management and the steady move towards ecosystem-based management of fisheries by all jurisdictions in Australia, the of potential concern rating is considered a conservative assessment. This rating highlights the limited understanding of both the ecosystem effects of individual fisheries and the cumulative effects of a number of fisheries on protected species, marine communities, habitats and ecosystems.

Bycatch (commercial fishing—domestic)
Commercial fishing operations are a key activity in the region and overlap, to some extent, with this ecological feature (e.g. Eastern Tuna and Billfish Fishery, Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery). In the context of active fisheries management and the steady move towards ecosystem-based management of fisheries by all jurisdictions in Australia, the of potential concern rating is considered a conservative assessment. For example, a recent review of all Commonwealth fisheries found that the current numbers of independent observers are not sufficient to allow a cumulative assessment of the catch of non-target species (Phillips et al. 2010). The review stated that such assessment is important to understand the environmental performance of fisheries more broadly and to underpin a holistic approach to the management of ecosystem impacts (Phillips et al. 2010). Generally, there is also a need to increase our understanding of the effectiveness of bycatch mitigation measures (Bensley et al. 2010).

Oil Pollution
Oil pollution is of potential concern for KEFs with values that make them particularly vulnerable to the impacts of an oil spill, such as important aggregations of marine life at or near the sea surface, including the Lord Howe seamount chain.

Australia has a strong system for regulating industry activity that is the potential source of oil spills and this system has been strengthened further in response to the Montara oil spill. While oil spills are unpredictable events and their likelihood is low based on past experience, their consequences, especially for threatened species at important areas can be severe. The level of impact that actually occurs depends on a number of factors including the concentration of oil; chemical and physical properties of the oil (or oil and dispersant mixture).

Also influencing the impact of an oil spill event are the timing of breeding cycles and seasonal migrations of species, the amount of contact, the susceptibility of particular species; and the health, age and reproductive status of the individuals (AMSA 2011).

Particular ecological values associated with the KEFs that may be impacted by such an event include seasonal feeding aggregations of pelagic invertebrates, fish that seek refuge on seamounts; and predatory fish and seabirds that forage in waters surrounding seamounts.

Both the intensity and distribution of activities that might lead to oil spills (such as transport) are expected to increase in the region.