Abbott and Murdoch exposed

Rupert Murdoch's News Ltd The Australian 1 June 2013:

A growing number of the nation's estimated five million recreational anglers are furious that laws set to come into effect next year will lock them out of 1.3 million square kilometres of ocean. Some fear the bans could eventually extend to include iconic fishing spots such as Sydney Harbour and Melbourne's Port Phillip Bay.

With a view to the power of the swinging vote, up to 1000 anglers are expected to gather tomorrow at Torquay fishing club, in the heartland of the nation's most marginal seat -- Corangamite in Victoria, held by Labor's Darren Cheeseman by just 0.4 per cent -- to demand change.....

ABC Radio AM 4 June 2013:

GREG HUNT: Well unfortunately this particular process hasn't had genuine consultation and been based on deep science. 

From no_filter_Yamba 4 June 2013:

Hansard 4 June 2013:

Mr BURKE (Watson—Minister for the Arts,

Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water and Population and Communities) (14:45):

On the weekend I saw a big article in The Australian that told me that there were going to be up to 1,000 people rallying in Torquay who were going to be very angry about this process. After The Australian article—and I will table it—there was no media coverage of it at all. Then I discovered the reason must be the funny way 1,000 people was calculated. Those numbers were in some way short—they used the shadow Treasurer to do the figures, clearly. Why would so few people turn up to the rally?

What the shadow minister for the environment did not tell them was that when they were making their speeches from the tinny they were speaking from—they spoke in a tinny, though admittedly it was on land—they did not let people know that if you wanted to go from that rally to an area where you are not allowed to fish, you would have to go out, turn left, go across the Bass Strait and, after 460 kilometres, you would get to the first place where you could not fish, a place where the no-fishing zone was put in place in 2007 when the member for Wentworth was the minister for the environment. The nearest restriction on recreational fishing was put in place by the Howard government when they were in charge.

This is a process where the science it has been based on was commenced under the Howard years. Some of these plans on the inside cover have the happy smiling face of the member for Wentworth and the member for Dawson for science. As for the process of consultation when they say, 'No consultation happened at all,' there were five separate rounds of consultation and three quarters of a million submissions engaged—in a process that works. What we found for the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park work which has now come back with restrictions put in place by the Howard government that they now conveniently forget, is that fish stocks do improve. Coral trout numbers are six times what they used to be. Crown of thorns starfish are at a quarter of the levels in the protected zones that they are in the rest of the park. It is a process which for 20 years had had bipartisan support, and which the opposition are hoping will come to nothing tonight... [my red bolding]

The Liberal-Nationals Coalition lost their six motions to disallow the Commonwealth Maritime Reserve Network Management Plans by one vote each time and Northern Rivers readers will recognise the Nationals MP whose name was on these motions as the same John Cobb who (as Assistant Minister for the Environment and Water Resources in 2007) supported in the unsuccessful Howard-Turnbull push to dam and divert east coast rivers - in particular, the Clarence River.

These disalllowance motions may have been unsuccessful, however they offer a window on the attitude an Abbott-led government would have to marine reserves and attempts to ensure sustainable fish stocks in Australian waters. 

Meet The Great Barrier Reef - virtual tour

http://www.catlinseaviewsurvey.com/seaview.htm

The Catlin Seaview Survey aims to carry out the first comprehensive study to document the composition and health of coral reefs on the Great Barrier Reef and Coral Sea across an unprecedented depth range (0-100m). There are three components to the Catlin Seaview Survey:

1) The shallow reef survey will involve photographing the reef in full 360 degree panoramic vision on an unprecedented scale using specially developed cameras. These images will be analysed automatically using image recognition software creating an incredibly rich broad scale baseline for scientific analysis from locations along the entire length of the 2300km reef. The visual baseline will be made freely available through Google, for scientists all around the world to study.

2) The deep reef survey looks into the effects of climate change on one of the least known ecosystems on the planet – the deep-water reefs or mesophotic coral ecosystems (between 30-100m). It will provide a comprehensive study of the health composition and biodiversity of the deepwater reefs on the Great Barrier Reef as well as experimentally assess their susceptibility to increased temperature and climate change.

3) The third component of the survey is the mega fauna survey. This is led by Emmy award winning cinematographer and shark researcher Richard Fitzpatrick. We’re going to be tagging and tracking manta rays, turtles and tiger sharks using satellite tags and tracking their movements live in relation to oceanographic data. This is a really important study as there are almost no comprehensive studies that have examined how large animals are changing their distributions in response to rapidly warming seas.

Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg is the chief scientist on the project and is overseeing all three components.

Project home page here.

This virtual tour may become a poignant reminder of the past due to the ongoing industrial ravages imposed on this natural wonder:

MILLIONS of tonnes of potentially toxic dredge spoils from coal and gas port expansions along the Queensland coast have been earmarked to be dumped into the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park.

Is the Japanese whaling fleet refusing to obey a lawful direction to leave Australian territorial waters?

Since at least 11 January 2012 the Government of Japan-sponsored whaling fleet operating in the Southern Ocean has failed to obey a lawful direction of the Federal Government to quit Australian territorial waters surrounding World Heritage listed Macquarie Island - which also form part of the Australian Whale Sanctuary and the wider International Whaling Commission-endorsed Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.

One has to wonder why the Japanese Government imagines it has a right to ignore Australia's sovereignty in this manner.

Should it continue this intransigence then the Federal Government would be well within its rights to withdraw the credentials of the Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Japan, His Excellency Mr Shigekazu Sato.

The Australian Whale Sanctuary has been established to protect
all whales and dolphins found in Australian waters

The Sydney Morning Herald 12 January 2012:

A JAPANESE whaling ship has defied high-level Australian complaints to stay in the waters of World Heritage-listed Macquarie Island.

The harpoon-equipped whale hunter Yushin Maru No.3 was still there late yesterday, hours after the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, said the ship was leaving.

''I'm aware that there has been one vessel which I'm advised has been in Australian territorial waters and I'll advise that it will leave Australian territorial waters,'' Ms Gillard said.

The Australian embassy told the Japanese government on Tuesday that whaling vessels were not welcome in the country's waters, repeating earlier complaints.

But the Japanese ship was photographed yesterday within a few miles of the coast of Macquarie Island, which is part of the state of Tasmania……

ANU professor of international law Don Rothwell said if Yushin Maru No.3 was staying close to Macquarie Island it was violating the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea which would normally allow a ship to proceed though these waters.

''The actions of Yushin Maru No.3 are not consistent with the right of innocent passage,'' Professor Rothwell said.

The Greens leader, Bob Brown, said the ship's presence was illegal and called for a naval vessel to be sent there.

Yushin Maru No.3 stayed just off the coast of Macquarie Island yesterday.

Photo: Carolina A Castro/Sea Shepherd

A reminder of the 2008 Federal Court of Australia ruling against Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1519 OF 2004

BETWEEN: HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL INC

Applicant

AND: KYODO SENPAKU KAISHA LTD

Respondent

JUDGE: ALLSOP J

DATE OF ORDER: 15 JANUARY 2008

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

1. THE COURT DECLARES that the respondent has killed, injured, taken and interfered with Antarctic minke whales (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) and fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) and injured, taken and interfered with humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Australian Whale Sanctuary in contravention of sections 229, 229A, 229B and 229C of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth), (the “Act”), and has treated and possessed such whales killed or taken in the Australian Whale Sanctuary in contravention of sections 229D and 230 of the Act, without permission or authorisation under sections 231, 232 or 238 of the Act.

2. THE COURT ORDERS that the respondent be restrained from killing, injuring, taking or interfering with any Antarctic minke whale (Balaenoptera bonaerensis), fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) or humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Australian Whale Sanctuary, or treating or possessing any such whale killed or taken in the Australian Whale Sanctuary, unless permitted or authorised under sections 231,n232 or 238 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth).

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

Reasons for Judgement

Ramifications of Judgement

Is the Japanese whaling fleet overfishing the Antarctic?

From IWC Report of the Scientific Committee 2011

On July 25, 2007 a The Sydney Morning Herald article stated :

Japan's whaling research body, the Institute of Cetacean Research, today said 91.6 per cent - or 262 of the 286 mature female minkes taken during the last hunt - were pregnant.

In June 2011 the International Whaling Commission (IWC) REPORT OF THE SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE 2011 addressed the issue of declining Minke Whale stocks in the Antarctic:

WHALE STOCKS……..

Two different methods for estimating Antarctic minke whale abundance from these data have been developed in recent years (see below) and although they gave different estimates of abundance, both were consistent in showing an appreciable decline in estimated circumpolar abundance between CPII and CPIII……..

It is clear from Table 5 that while circumpolar Antarctic minke whale abundance estimates have declined during the period from CPII to CPIII, there are substantial differences in relative changes between Areas, with only relatively moderate increases or declines in some Areas, but appreciable declines in others (Table 6). No significant decline is seen in Areas III, IV and VI, whilst estimated abundance is substantially lower in CPIII for Areas I, II and V. Areas II and V encompass the Weddell and Ross Seas

As noted above, large declines in estimates of Antarctic minke whale abundance occurred in Areas I, II and V (there were no statistically significant changes in the other three Areas). The Committee agrees that these declines do indeed reflect genuine changes in abundance in the open-water areas surveyed that need to be explained. Such changes may be due to changes in distribution or reflect a true decline (or some combination of both)……

There are two classes of explanation for possible true declines in abundance. The first, quantitative approach involves the population dynamics statistical catch-at-age analyses (SCAA) from Area III East to VI West, which can potentially account for the changes in overall abundance in terms of variations over time in mortality and recruitment (note that this may explain how but not why changes occurred). The second, less quantitative approach involves attempts to identify mechanisms whereby mortality and recruitment may have changed (e.g. ecosystem effects, interspecies competition, climate changes, etc.).

It may be time to reflect on the fact that one of the management areas identified in the IWC report as experiencing an agreed marked decline in minke whale numbers is also one of those areas in which Japan’s whale fleet has actively hunted these whales, for at least twelve austral summer seasons during its approximately twenty-three year history of Antarctic commercial whaling conducted under the guise of scientific research.

During that time Japanese research documents show that the fleet has consistently taken both lactating and pregnant minke females.

From Polar Biology, Vol 31, Number 12

Click on image to enlarge

The Government of Japan’s whaling fleet is heading towards its Southern Ocean killing grounds as I write.

During the 2011/12 season the inappropriately named Institute of Cetacean Research will sponsor so-called ‘lethal research’ on as many as 930 minke whales and possibly a handful of fin whales and even humpbacks according to Japan Times Online on 11 December 2011. The IWC's own documents clearly indicate that the whaling fleet again intends to operate in one of the management areas showing significant minke whale decline.

One of the reasons why Japan thumbs its nose at Australia and continues to slaughter whales in the Southern Ocean?

A Japanese ship injures a whale with its first harpoon.

 It took three harpoon attempts to kill the mammal.

Photograph: Kate Davidson/EPA/Corbis,

The Guardian UK December 14, 2011

Perhaps this is the answer to the puzzle of why, in the face of ongoing Australian opposition, the Government of Japan (under the guise of research) continues to needlessly kill whales in Antarctica for a dwindling domestic whale meat market – it thinks it owns us.

According to the Australian Parliament’s About the House Magazine in December 2011:

Japan [is] ranked as Australia’s third largest source of merchandise imports in 2010 (after China and the United States), worth $18.2 billion. The automotive sector dominates this trade, with Australia constituting the third-biggest market for new passenger motor vehicles manufactured in Japan.

The economic relationship between Australia and Japan is not only about trade. Japan has been Australia’s third largest foreign investor for many years (after the United States and the United Kingdom). The total stock of Japanese investment in Australia at the end of 2010 was $117.6 billion, almost twice as large as that of China (including Hong Kong). When both trade and investment are included – and taking account of both the depth and breadth of that investment, which has been critical to the development of Australia’s most important industries – Japan could still be considered to be Australia’s most important economic partner overall.

Japanese demand for Australia’s resources – and the accompanying investment – has contributed enormously to the development of Australia’s mining industry. In the area of agriculture, over 40 per cent of ‘Aussie beef’ imported into Japan comes from Japanese-owned farms in Australia. Kirin Holdings now owns Australia’s largest dairy company, as well as some of Australia’s largest beer producers. In the field of manufacturing, Toyota not only exports passenger vehicles to Australia, but – through its in-country production facilities – is also the largest producer of these vehicles in Australia. Furthermore, Japanese investment is increasingly targeted at using Australia as a springboard into the emerging economies of Asia. Japanese investment has been remarkable for its breadth, continuity and steady expansion over time, regardless of fluctuations in the global economic situation.

Australians can noticeably alter this scenario if enough individuals refuse to purchase goods imported from Japan or goods produced by Japanese–owned companies operating in this country, for as long as Japan acts as an inhumane environmental vandal in the Southern Ocean.



The Big Blue Army at work

Proposed South-west Commonwealth Marine Reserve Network

A record 42,000 demand sanctuaries in consultation period

Thank you to the 42,000 people that called for a network of large marine sanctuaries in Australia’s South West during the recent consultation period. This is the highest number of submissions ever sent to a government process on a conservation issue in Australia.

This also represents an enormous community backlash against totally inadequate marine sanctuaries proposed by Environment Minister Tony Burke in May this year. With 8 out of 10 hotspots for South West marine life left unprotected by this original proposal, we would expect some dramatic changes to the final sanctuaries being decided upon around November 2011.

These new sanctuaries should deliver what science says is needed – not what fishing and oil industries may want. However we are concerned that these vested interests will be working to undermine the overwhelming call from the community for protection.

To ensure that proper protection is delivered we will have to remain vigilant and we will need your help.

Join the Big Blue Army and we’ll keep you informed of developments in the run up to the final decision in a few months time.

According to a Save Our Marine Life email  only 112 submissions were received opposing this West  Australia marine reserve network

Australians have just 74 days left to protect 'their' whales

Humpback Whale from Australian National Geographic

From the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS):

Australia's Environment Minister Tony Burke has released draft plans for this network, but they do not meet the benchmark set by the science evidence, and make far too many concessions to the oil and gas industry. Important whale and dolphin habitats have been left out of the proposal.

The proposal is now open for public comment.

We have just 75 days to change his mind. This is our once in a generation opportunity to make sure that proper sanctuaries are created for the blue, southern right, and humpback whales who make these waters their home.

Please send an email to Australia's Environment Minister Tony Burke urging him to make the right decision. We have prepared the email for you - it will only take a few moments of your time but could secure the future of whole generations of whales .

-----------

Text of the prepared email:
To:
The Hon. Tony Burke, Minister For Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population And Communities
I am writing to you about the proposed network of marine sanctuaries in Australian waters.
Recently released draft plans for this network do not meet the benchmark set by the science evidence. Important whale and dolphin habitats have been left out of the proposal, and once again the welfare of these animals, and others, has been sacrificed for the sake of the oil and gas industry.
8 out of 10 hotspots for marine life are still at risk. You have proposed new marine parks in the South West, but many are not in the right places.
Australia's South West has a greater level of unique marine life than even the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, but currently less than one per cent of it is protected.
I feel that this is a once in a generation opportunity to make sure that proper sanctuaries are created for the blue, southern right, and humpback whales who make these waters their home, and I urge you to make the right decision.

The barbarians are not longer at the gate - they are inside the castle walls

It would be hard to find worse news for one of Australia's most endangered marine species, the Grey Nurse Shark, than this press release from an underwhelming and incredibly short-sighted NSW Minister for Primary Industries and Nationals MP for the landlocked seat of Burrinjuck, Katrina Hodgkinson, who appears hell-bent on ecological destruction for its own sake:

Minister for Primary Industries, Katrina Hodgkinson, today announced a revocation of the recreational fishing closures introduced at Fish Rock and Green Island in January this year, as promised in the lead up to the NSW election. Katrina Hodgkinson said that the NSW Government would put the closures back out to public consultation for a further three months to ensure the best outcome is achieved for both the grey nurse shark population and the local community.
"The NSW Government is committed to protecting the grey nurse shark population at Fish Rock and Green Island," she said.
"However, as promised prior to the election, we want to ensure the community have a proper chance to be consulted before any final decision is made.
"The NSW Government has also committed to a scientific review of the effectiveness of management arrangements in meeting domestic and international commitments to the conservation of marine biodiversity, and to ensuring the conservation needs of grey nurse shark are met well into the future.
"The outcomes from community consultation and scientific review will be used to guide the development of new management arrangements for Fish Rock and Green Island.
"Fishing and diving at Fish Rock and Green Island provide many social and economic benefits to the local community and it is important that the community have the chance to provide input into the future of the area.
Minister Hodgkinson said the revocation of the fishing closures means that the critical habitat rules that existed prior to Friday, January 28 will be reinstated.
"Recreational anglers are reminded that fishing with bait or wire trace while anchored or moored, or attaching weights of more than 500 grams to fishing lines is prohibited within 200 metres of Fish Rock and Green Island," she said.
"Today's announcements only affect recreational fishing, the commercial fishing closures at Fish Rock and Green Island to protect grey nurse sharks will continue unchanged.
For further information visit www.dpinsw.gov.au/fisheries

* Image from ABC Coffs Coast

Japan continues to wail about its Antarctic whaling in 2011

The Government of Japan-sponsored Institute of Cetacean Research continues to ramp up its propaganda war against the Sea Shepherd organisation with a long list of video show and tell:

• 2011.01.06 Steve Irwin activists throw glass projectiles toward the Japanese Research vessel Yushin Maru No. 2 (Part 2）(724KB)

• 2011.01.06 Steve Irwin activists throw glass projectiles toward the Japanese Research vessel Yushin Maru No. 2 (Part 1）(1.50MB)

• 2011.01.05 The antiwhaling trimaran Gojira deploys a wire rope aimed to disable the Yushin Maru No. 2 rudder and propeller (2.95MB)

• 2011.01.05 Antiwhaling activist readies to fire a high-power launcher against the Yushin Maru No. 2 (2.69MB)

• 2011.01.05 Antiwhaling activist uses a sling shot to launch a projectile toward the Yushin Maru No. 2 (2.45MB)

• 2011.01.01 Antiwhaling activists aboard a zodiac boat throwing glass bottle projectiles against the Yushin Maru No. 3 (2.91MB)

• 2011.01.01 Antiwhaling activists aboard a zodiac boat prepare to deploy a rope aimed at the Yushin Maru No. 3 propeller and rudder (794KB)

Accompanied by a handful of press releases:

• 2011.01.06 Steve Irwin attacks Japanese ship Yushin Maru No.2

• 2011.01.05 Japanese ship Yushin Maru No. 2 attacked by antiwhaling trimaran

• 2011.01.01 Antiwhaling activists attack Japanese ship Yushin Maru No. 3

Great Barrier Reef not immune from 2011 Queensland flooding

Look what's heading out to the Great Barrier Reef. A freshwater and heavy sediment plume which is likely to stress certain coral species.

NASA image of Queensland flooding on 4 January 2011

Click on image to enlarge

One of the reasons so many people choose to live on the NSW North Coast

Dolphin in flying leap
Photograph taken by Matt Deans
just south of Split Solitary Island off Coffs Harbour
in December 2010
Published in The Daily Telegraph
Click on photo to enlarge

Threatened species, wildlife crimes and marine protection

The International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC) came into effect on 23 November 2010 after the Secretary-General of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), the Secretary-General of ICPO-INTERPOL, the Executive Director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the President of the World Bank and the Secretary-General of the World Customs Organization (WCO) have signed a Letter of Understanding which includes this:

HEREBY agree, within the context of their respective responsibilities, capabilities, and priorities to:

• highlight within their institutions the importance of the fight against wildlife crimes and other related violations and promote ICCWC among governments of States, through inter alia, relevant international fora;
• assist countries in reviewing their current responses to wildlife crimes and related violations, facilitate national multi-agency interaction and cooperation, and encourage effective responses throughout the justice system;
• develop a joint work program that will include joint activities in the fields of capacity building, operational support and coordination of transnational interdiction efforts;
• disseminate existing, and jointly develop new, capacity building materials and tools to enhance the knowledge and skills of national agencies in combating wildlife crime and related violations;
• undertake research into the causes, nature, scale and value of wildlife crime and related violations and propose innovative ways to prevent and discourage such crime and related violations, for example, through the provision of socio-economic incentives which encourage local communities to use natural resources in a lawful and sustainable manner and to participate in related monitoring and control efforts;
• assist in promoting best practice in the fields of natural resource conservation and management; and where appropriate, seek donor support to enable the provision of such services in the form of joint projects and programmes.

We further agree that our agencies, when collaborating together, will work under the title, the ‘International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime’.

Meanwhile this month, the Gillard Labor Government’s Fisheries Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2010 finished wending its way through both Houses of the Australian Federal Parliament.

According to the Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry this bill will:

provide strengthened arrangements to combat illegal fishing both in our remote sub-Antarctic territories and closer to home. The first set of amendments will address a technical issue that currently permits foreign fishers to traverse the Australian fishing zone to fish illegally in state and Northern Territory coastal waters. The second set of amendments will implement an international agreement with France, allowing cooperative fisheries law enforcement activities in our respective Southern Ocean maritime zones. Both amendments are to the Fisheries Management Act 1991 and will strengthen Australia’s fishing and maritime security.

The first set of amendments to the bill will address a technical legal issue in fisheries management legislation which currently allows foreign fishers to traverse the Australian fishing zone to illegally fish in coastal state and Northern Territory waters. It is important that this matter is rectified quickly lest foreign fishers take advantage of this situation and change their methods of operation to avoid prosecution. The second set of amendments will address illegal fishing in Australia’s remote southern maritime territories……

Illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing is a concern for the Australian government. Illegal fishing on the high seas is a highly organised, mobile and elusive activity undermining the efforts of responsible countries to sustainably manage their fish resources. International cooperation is vital to effectively enforce Australia’s national laws in our remote and expansive maritime territories.

Additionally this month Humane Society International (HSI) announced that is has been successful:

in having southern bluefin tuna (SBT) formally protected under Australia’s national environment laws as a threatened species.

HSI submitted a nomination for SBT to be protected under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act in December 2006 and Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke has just announced that protection will be given.

Previous environment ministers rejected our earlier nominations on grounds HSI considered a cover for concerns over the economic and political fall out of protection for this highly lucrative species, even though the Minister’s own science advisers had previously determined the species to be ‘endangered’.

Even today, SBT has not been listed in the category it qualifies for – critically endangered – because that would put a stop to the commercial exploitation and export of SBT from Australia[i]. The SBT population has been reduced to 4.6% of its unfished biomass. IUCN lists the species as critically endangered.

Instead, Minister Burke has opted for the lesser ‘conservation dependent’ listing which is the lowest protection available for a threatened species and which allows for continued fishing and exports.

Also in November the ever hypocritical Government of Japan began its 2010 Antarctic whaling season and once its government-funded 'research' fleet reaches the Southern Ocean it is expected to kill for commercial sale at least 1,000 whales, including an endangered cetacean species and possibly for the first time since the 2007 agreement, humpback whales.

Margi Prideaux asks "Will Australian Environment Minister Burke deliver on marine protected areas?"

Cross-posted from Wild Politics where it was first published on 11 November 2010:

Will Australian Environment Minister Burke deliver on marine protected areas?

The science of protection stacks up. The international community has spoken. Will Minister Burke deliver on marine protected areas?

A few weeks ago, the great and the good convened in Nagoya, Japan to deliberate the future of our planet. Perhaps a little melodramatic, but in many ways it’s the truth. This 10^th meeting of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was every bit as important as the Climate Change meetings are. After all, the CBD itself is there to protect the genetic resources, ecosystems and species that we depend on for our quality of life and who share this planet with us. We need this protection to be sorted out, because we are devastating biodiversity at an alarming rate.

The compact that came from the meeting was long, and not surprisingly whittled into irrelevance by the incredible detail of negotiation that was applied to every word. The document is so precise, so exacting and limited in what it is prepared to say, it actually says very little. However, there are a few indicators of the direction the global community at least plans to go. One such directive is the new target for marine protected areas, that:

By 2020, at least … 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscape and seascapes. (CBD Strategic Plan for Biodiversity for the Period 2011-2020: Target 11)

This is particularly pertinent for Australia because we are in the midst of deciding the level of protection to be applied to a large section of our coastline and offshore areas. The south east declarations have been completed. Next is the southwest, from the eastern tip of Kangaroo Island to the waters off Shark Bay, then the northwest, the north and finally the east from the northern tip of Cape York to the New South Wales town of Bermagu.

We do this as a nation because pollution, over fishing, species entanglement in nets the destruction of important habitats, and the ecosystem devastation of oil spills are just some of the many threats to Australia’s remarkable marine life. If these threats continue unabated we risk joining the unprecedented global collapse of marine life where two-thirds of the world’s coral reefs are dead or dying and 90 per cent of the world’s large fish have been fished-out.

Today, scientists from the University of Queensland have released a comprehensive and deep study gathering the best available scientific data and applying world leading design principles to their recommendations. ‘Systematic Conservation Planning – A Network of Marine Sanctuaries for the South West Marine Region’ identifies that 50 per cent of the south west region will need to be protected in a network of marine sanctuaries if the marine life is to remain healthy. For clarity, sanctuaries are areas where extractive uses such as commercial fishing and oil and gas are not allowed. Currently, less than 1 per cent of the south west region is protected from these threats.

At the same time 44 of Australia’s leading marine and social scientists in support of marine protection have released a consensus statement – ‘Scientific Principles for Design of Marine Protected Areas in Australia’ – as a peer-level guidance on the selection, design, and implementation of marine protected areas. They concur that significant protection is needed/

Earlier this month another study by the University of Queensland provided a damning assessment of the success of Australia’s national parks, marine parks and nature reserves that are failing to adequately protect more than 80 per cent of Australia’s threatened species. Their study detailed how the fundamental aim of securing species most at risk was not being achieved. Yet another recent study by the University of the Sunshine Coast revealed ancient, giant coral reefs found on Australia undersea mountains are being wiped out by trawling on the sea floor confirming the importance of maintaining and extending Australia’s marine protected areas.

Since moving to the Environment portfolio, Minister Tony Burke has said very little publically about the roll out of marine protected areas around the country. Perhaps this isn’t surprising given that, in their previous term, Labor dithered on everything marine related except championing whale protection internationally. They inherited a well established, Coalition developed, marine planning process but failed to deliver anything on the water, eroding confidence and credibility. Combine this with the unfortunate and poorly informed Liberal and National ‘dog-fish whistles’ to fishers in tinnies during the election and recent history probably gives little confidence to the Minister in his new role.

None-the-less, the timelines still stand, and these decisions are important ones. Indications are that the Minister will make his first and crucial decision for the south west region soon. A huge variety of fish, sharks, whales and seals live in the south west submerged mountain ranges, deep sea canyons and both cool and tropical coral reefs. These waters provide refuge for the magnificent blue, humpback, and southern right whales, as well as bottlenose, spotted and striped dolphins. All these things matter, but perhaps what matters more is that the level of protection that Minister decides to apply will define the level of protection that will be applied to the rest of Australia’s waters for the next 10 to 20 years.

Tim Nicol from the Conservation Council of Western Australia has said today that “The federal government now has the scientific evidence it needs to confidently make important decisions about the future health of the oceans and marine life in Australia’s south west”. Add to this the international consensus and the decision would appear to be a clear cut case. His confidence should be high. If the Minister chooses the side of science he invests in the future. He will also take the first steps towards the largest conservation contribution in Australian history, delivering the biggest network of marine protected areas in the world. If he doesn’t, it will be a once in a lifetime opportunity lost.

Margi Prideaux

http://www.cetaceanconservation.com.au/