RMTools is a three-tier assessment instrument for shorebird roost sites. It is used by Shorebird Stewards in the field, by programme coordinators at their desks, and by delivery partners during supervised training visits. It is also a teaching tool — used on-site at Kakadu Beach and other Moreton Bay roosts to introduce trainees to the methodology before they arrive at the JWEEC field camp.
Even with the best intentions, people working at shorebird roost sites can make mistakes. That is not a criticism — it is simply the reality of specialised knowledge in the field. Who carries a working database of migratory shorebird conservation status in their head? Nobody. People are more likely to recall the cricket and footy scores of the past ten years than the EPBC listing status of a Far Eastern Curlew. That is not a failing — it is how human memory works. RMTools exists to supply the knowledge that no individual can reasonably be expected to hold. It translates conservation status into a clear, on-the-spot verdict: whether works proceed, and under what conditions.
But mistakes here have consequences. A wrong call at a roost site during the pre-departure fattening period is not a paperwork error. The birds that carry the cost are already running on the edge — flying eleven thousand kilometres on forty-six percent less body weight than they arrived with, organs reduced, every gram accounted for. They do not get a second chance at that window. The three tiers of this tool are designed for different people at different moments. A Senior Steward at close to ambassador level can complete all three. The EVALUATE tier draws on desktop research and institutional knowledge — some of its questions cannot be answered from a single site visit.
Works authorisation and physical site condition. Conservation status of species present drives the verdict: PROCEED / MODIFY / REDUCE / STOP. Used on-site, in real time, by anyone with Steward training.
Biological performance. VISIT/12 records what was there today. AUDIT/20 scores roost condition across four R-METT-derived management groups. The AUDIT synthesises seasonal data — it is not a single-visit instrument. Use 2–4 times per season.
Flyway and social significance. Annual, or at site intake. Assesses biological/ecological suitability against EAAF Flyway criteria, social engagement and governance, and Indigenous Australian presence. Some questions require desktop research.
The AUDIT and EVALUATE instruments draw on two internationally recognised standards. The Ramsar Site Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (R-METT) — developed under Resolution XII.15 of the Convention on Wetlands — provides the indicator structure for biological performance and social significance assessment. The EAAF Flyway Site Network (FNS) criteria, adopted at MOP12 (Cebu, November 2025), provide the threshold framework for the EVALUATE tier. Neither is applied dogmatically: RMTools adapts both for the community steward context, with source attribution on every indicator. R-METT will be new to most practitioners in the field. Your delivery partner will explain its significance during your first supervised site visit.
VISIT Assessment — every field session. Generates a disturbance risk score /12 and a management decision. Use Section 5 (Observer Position Protocol) in the field before closing distance. Record the full result in the SRMP Field Records Sheet under VISIT LOG.
1 Record Setup
2 Species Observed
Check all shorebird species confirmed at or adjacent to the roost. The highest-status species drives the Species Risk score. BTG corrected to CE (EPBC uplift 2021).
3 Disturbance Activity
Select the most significant disturbance level observed during this visit.
R-METT Data Sheet 3 §6 — Human intrusions and disturbance (6.1 Recreational; 6.3 Research and education; 6.4 Manager activities). Convention on Wetlands, Resolution XII.15.
4 Site Vulnerability & Protection Status
Assess the access management and protection level in place at this site during this visit.
R-METT Data Sheet 4 Q10 — Protection systems. Convention on Wetlands, Resolution XII.15.
5 Observer Position Protocol — Should I Move Closer?
Use this before closing distance on the roost. The protocol applies FID thresholds to your current conditions and outputs a position recommendation. Record your actual approach distance in the VISIT LOG.
FID values from RMTools v1.0 field data and Moreton Bay disturbance records. CE precautionary buffer (+30 m) applies when Bar-tailed Godwit, Far Eastern Curlew or Great Knot confirmed present. Group size adjustment: +20 m for 2–3 observers, +50 m for groups of 4+. Approach protocol consistent with BirdLife Australia shorebird monitoring guidance.
Condition Audit — minimum twice per season. Scores roost condition /20 across four management groups: does the site serve the birds, the steward, the community, and the programme? Record in SRMP Field Records under AUDIT LOG using the same Record ID as your VISIT assessment.
Attribution. Indicators below are adapted from the Ramsar Site Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (R-METT), Resolution XII.15, Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971). Indicators Q5, Q7 and Q8 extend the R-METT framework for the RMTools v1.0 community steward context: observation site suitability, interpretive infrastructure, and community social licence. Adaptation by Conversations With Birds / FSB, 2026.
Audit Record Setup
Ten Roost Condition Indicators — Score 0 – 2 each
EVALUATE — Flyway and social significance. Completed annually or at site intake by a Senior Steward or programme coordinator. Some questions require desktop research rather than field observation. On Section C (Indigenous Australian Presence): if the custodial group's information is uncertain, score 0 and flag for follow-up. Do not estimate.
Assessment Record
A Biological and Ecological Suitability — 8 points
Section A draws on seasonal count records, EPBC listings, and EAAF Flyway Site Network criteria. Sources: R-METT Data Sheet 3 Q1–Q4 (Status and trend of key species); Data Sheet 5 (Ecological character condition and trend); EAAF FNS Criteria ii and iii (MOP12, Cebu 2025).
B Social Engagement and Governance — 6 points
Section B assesses whether the community is structurally embedded in management decisions. Sources: R-METT Data Sheet 4 Q20 (Education and awareness); Q25 (Economic and social benefit to local communities); Q26 (Monitoring and evaluation feeding into adaptive management). Convention on Wetlands, Resolution XII.15.
C Indigenous Australian Presence — 6 points
Section C is a management legitimacy question. If the custodial group's connection to this site is not documented and the relationship is not established, score 0 and initiate contact before the next assessment. Sources: R-METT Data Sheet 4 Q23–Q24 (Indigenous peoples and local communities). Convention on Wetlands, Resolution XII.15.