3 May 2016
Baird’s plan to gut conservation laws spells disaster for nature across the state
The Baird government’s draft biodiversity package will spell disaster for nature in NSW by enabling the return of broad scale land clearing and habitat destruction across the state.
“They will be cheering in the boardrooms of big agribusiness and property developers today because the Baird government has done their bidding by agreeing to sweep away the Native Vegetation Act and introduce much weaker nature conservation laws,” NSW Nature Conservation CEO Kate Smolski said.
“Mr Baird’s Bill appears more concerned with fast-tracking land clearing than conserving nature, and has clearly been crafted to please big agribusiness and the developer lobby. If it passes parliament in its current form and becomes law, there will be more extinctions, more farms destroyed by soil erosion and salinity, and more greenhouse gas pollution fueling runaway climate change.
“In Queensland, land-clearing rates trebled under Campbell Newman’s LNP government. [1] Mr Baird is squandering an historic opportunity to develop strong conservation laws to addresses the mounting extinction emergency in NSW. If substantial changes are not made, there is a high risk his Bill will make matter worse, not better.”
FUNDING CANNOT COMPENSATE FOR LOST LEGAL PROTECTIONS
“It is unacceptable to trade binding legal protections for funding promises that are not enforceable by law,” Ms Smolski said.
“Governments have a record of dishonouring funding commitments and raiding the budgets of environmental agencies when tax revenues decline. A funding promise is worthless without a legislative guarantee. We need both.
“The $240m in Mr Baird’s package for private land conservation falls well short of what’s needed. The conservation movement has calculated that it would take $375m just to bring properties with existing conservation agreements up to scratch and modestly expand the private land conservation estate.
“This will not compensate for the increased clearing that this bill will allow.”
KEY FLAWS
- Nothing is considered too precious to destroy. There are no “red flag” areas where the most important wildlife habitats are off limits for clearing and development.
- It does not address climate change. Land clearing is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions, yet the Bill fails to address this in any meaningful way.
- Funding falls well short of what’s needed. The funding package of $240m over five years for conservation on private land is only 64% of the $375m that required to bring properties with existing conservation agreements up to scratch and expand the amount of private land conservation in any meaningful way. [See Background below]
- It relies too much on “self-regulation”. Companies and individuals who want to destroy bushland will often decide for themselves (using “self-assessable codes”) whether it is allowed under the new rules.
- It relies on wider use of dodgy ‘biodiversity offsetting’. The flawed biodiversity offsets system that lets miners destroy wildlife habitat will be available for a much wider range of developments.
- It relies on dodgy maps for decision making. Decisions about which bushland can be destroyed will be based on maps known to be wrong. [2]
- It lacks ambition. The aim of the laws has been downgraded from “maintaining or improving” biodiversity (Native Vegetation Act). At a time when more species are being listed as threatened with extinction, we must not let standards slip.
HARMFUL EFFECTS
Ms Smolski said if the package was implemented it would:
- add extinction pressure to the state's 999 threatened animal and plant species by accelerating land clearing, one of the main threats; [See Background below]
- threaten clean, reliable water supplies by increasing erosion and siltation of streams and dams;
- degrade fertile farms by increasing topsoil loss and salinity;
- put landmark trees and bushland in towns, suburbs and cities at greater risk;
- release millions of tonnes of carbon pollution into the atmosphere by increasing land clearing;
- undermine Federal Government programs that pay farmers millions to retain bushland.
REFERENCES
[1] The Conversation, 18-3-2015 - Land clearing in Queensland triples after policy ping pong. https://theconversation.com/land-clearing-in-queensland-triples-after-policy-ping-pong-38279
[2] SMH 15-1-2016 - Losing the plot: how native vegetation mapping went feral.
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/conservation/losing-the-plot-how-native-vegetation-mapping-went-feral-20160114-gm5xj9.html
MEDIA CONTACT
James Tremain, 0419 272 254
BACKGROUND MATERIAL
BIODIVERSITY DECLINE AND EXTINCTION IN NSW
The crisis being faced by nature was brought into sharp focus by the latest NSW State of the Environment Report 2015, release in March, which found:
- 999 native species of plants and animals are now threatened with extinction (that figure has since risen to 1001).
- 59% of native mammal species, including koalas, are threatened with extinction.
- Land clearing is a threat to the survival of 87% of species.
- Only 9% of vegetation is in a natural condition.
Source: http://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/soe/20150817soe-2015.htm
LANDCLEARING IN QUEENSLAND
The relaxing of laws in Queensland under Campbell Newman’s Liberal-National Park government resulted in a huge pulse of vegetation clearance with 275,000ha cleared in 2013-14.
See: Taylor, M. Bushland destruction rapidly increasing in Queensland, http://awsassets.wwf.org.au/downloads/fl024_bushland_destruction_rapidly_increasing_in_queensland_16sep15.pdf (2015).
Maron, M. et al. Land clearing in Queensland triples after policy ping pong, https://theconversation.com/land-clearing-in-queensland-triples-after-policy-ping-pong-38279 (2015).
CLEARING RATES IN NSW UNDER DIFFERENT REGULATORY REGIMES
|
Regime
|
Average annual clearing (hectares)
|
10-year equivalent
|
|
1988-2006
Before Native Vegetation Act
|
17,575*
|
175,750
|
|
2006-2011
During Native Vegetation Act
|
10,540*
|
100,540
|
|
2017-2027
During Biodiversity Conservation Act
|
17,496**
|
170,496
|
*Source: Native wildlife at risk if NSW Native Vegetation Act is repealed, WWF 2015. http://www.wwf.org.au/news_resources/resource_library/?12820/Native-wildlife-at-risk-if-NSW-Native-Vegetation-Act-is-repealed
** 2017-27 Annual Clearing Rate = 2006-11 Annual Clearing Rate + 66%, which is equivalent to pre-Native Vegetation Act rates.
FUNDING FOR CONSERVATION ON PRIVATE LAND (Compiled by Humane Society International)
|
Approximate funding summary (over first 5 years)
|
|
COMPONENT
|
$ MILLIONS
|
|
Biodiversity Offsetting Agreements
|
$98m
|
|
Conservation Agreements
|
$213m
|
|
Wildlife Refuges
|
$23m
|
|
Third-Party Program Support
|
$36m
|
|
Private Land Conservation Committee
|
$5m
|
|
TOTAL
|
$375m
|
|
Ongoing Funding
Approximately $50m per year, with areas of investment prioritised by the Private Land Conservation Committee for support and expansion of the program.
|
|
BIODIVERSITY LAW REFORM TIMELINE
|
Date
|
Action
|
|
2003
|
Native Vegetation Act enacted.
|
|
2005
|
Native Vegetation Act implemented.
|
|
2014, Jun
|
The NSW Government orders a review of:
- Native Vegetation Act (2003),
- Threatened Species Conservation Act (1995),
- Nature Conservation Trust Act (2001), and
- parts of the National Parks and Wildlife Act (1974).
|
|
2014, Dec
|
Review Panel hands down its recommendations.
|
|
2015, Mar
|
Government commits to implement all the panel’s recommendations, including repealing the Native Vegetation Act (2003) and drafting a new Conservation Bill.
|
|
2015, May
|
Draft Conservation Bill to be made public.
|
|
2016 Sep (tbc)
|
Draft Conservation Bill to be introduced to parliament.
|
|
2017 (tbc)
|
Native Veg Act to be repealed after the Conservation Bill comes into force.
|
Tags
Forests and wildlife
Let others know about this issue