Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Australia’s long-sought stronger environmental laws just got indefinitely deferred. It’s back to business as usual

News Feed
Wednesday, April 17, 2024

We’ve long known Australia’s main environmental protection laws aren’t doing their job, and we know Australians want better laws. Labor was elected promising to fix them. But yesterday, the government walked back its commitments, deferring the necessary reforms to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act indefinitely in the face of pressure from the state Labor government in Western Australia and the mining and resources industries. Federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek was on the front foot yesterday, promising the new national agency Environment Protection Australia and Environmental Information Australia will still go ahead. But decisions by the planned agency can be overruled by the minister via expansive “call in” powers. And because Labor has backed away from rolling out essential legally enforceable national environmental standards this term, it’s hard to see how the agency can actually be the “tough cop on the beat” we were promised. Labor promised substantive change that would prevent further species extinctions. But yesterday’s announcement was basically the continuation of business as usual. Environmental organisations such as the Australian Conservation Foundation – which backed many of Labor’s proposed reforms – are now “deeply disappointed”. What just happened? Yesterday’s announcement effectively defers substantive change until after the next federal election. Rather than a full package, the government has split its planned reforms into three parts, under the umbrella name of the Nature Positive Plan. Read more: 5 things we need to see in Australia's new nature laws The first is the nature repair market, which many stakeholders – conservationists and business leaders alike – have been sceptical of. It was legislated in December, but nature repair projects can’t start until the market governance and methods are established. The second will create the federal Environmental Protection Australia agency and Environment Information Australia body. The agency will be responsible for development assessments, decisions and compliance and enforcement, with staff drawn from existing divisions within the department, while the information agency will support decision-making with data, as well as report on progress against environmental targets. But the third is the crucial bit – the reformed environment protection and biodiversity laws, and the legally enforceable national environmental standards underpinning them. We need these standards and laws to properly address longstanding deficiencies such as lack of clear policy objectives and “no go” zones for development, failure to account for climate change impacts, ongoing native vegetation clearing and habitat destruction that drives extinction, and a lack of alignment with other laws. But these vital elements have been deferred to “an unspecified date”. Despite the urgency of our extinction crisis, we have a cart but no horse in sight. How did we get here? In 2020, Graeme Samuel released his scathing report detailing the many failings of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. The laws, he wrote, were “ineffective” and needed fundamental reform. Labor came to office pledging to end extinctions, tackle climate change, and repair nature. But two years later, little solid progress has been made. In cases such as the controversial Lee Point development planned in Darwin, the government has appeared to put development ahead of considerations of threatened species and First Nations’ cultural values. Samuel called for comprehensive amendments to the laws within 12 months, and for full reform by 2022. Instead, the government only began consulting in May 2023, undertook a “lockup” consultation with peak environment bodies in October, and ran public consultation in November. Now we hear these reforms have been pushed back indefinitely. In the West Australian, Minister Plibersek describes the changes as: a staged rollout of sensible reforms that better protect Australia’s natural wonders, while also supporting faster, more efficient decision making […] This package is a win for the environment and a win for business Speaking on ABC radio, she denied there was any “unnecessary delay”: there is a careful approach to make sure we get this right, because this is generational change […] I’m not going to go into the parliament with a flawed set of laws that we can’t get support for. This is questionable. In 2022, Australia signed up to the ambitious global push to turn around the destruction of the natural world, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. We agreed to work to bring biodiversity loss almost to zero by 2030 and for native wild species to become more abundant and resilient by 2050. Deferring our main environment laws is not the way to do this. Read more: The historic COP15 outcome is an imperfect game-changer for saving nature. Here's why Australia did us proud Restoring nature isn’t possible without stronger environment laws Preserving nature can only be done with substantive legislative reform, given Australia’s existing environmental laws do not effectively regulate and stop the ongoing destruction of nature. As Samuel pointed out, our current laws are not keeping the environment in good shape. They focus on individual approvals for projects, not clear outcomes for the environment. Read more: 'Nature positive' isn't just planting a few trees – it's actually stopping the damage we do As it stands there will be no climate trigger – meaning no assessment of impact on climate change – despite the threat this poses to biodiversity. The Great Barrier Reef is suffering its worst recorded mass bleaching this year, the fifth in eight years. Even so, fossil fuel production continues with many more projects awaiting approval. Fossil fuel production continues apace. Phillip Schubert/Shutterstock Nature can’t afford further delays Without the reformed environment protection laws, the strengthened Safeguard Mechanism – the government’s main plan to drive down emissions from large polluters – will not work properly. This is because environmental law needs to be amended so greenhouse gas emissions from new coal and gas developments are reported on and tracked. In fact, without the national environmental standards – which the federal environment department dubs the “centrepiece of our reforms” – the whole package of reform seems toothless. Labor’s failure so far to deliver on its promise puts their goals of “no new extinctions” and a “nature positive” future for Australia at risk. Read more: Get the basics right for National Environmental Standards to ensure truly sustainable development Euan Ritchie receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Department of Energy, Environment, and Climate Action. Euan is a Councillor within the Biodiversity Council, and a member of the Ecological Society of Australia and the Australian Mammal Society.Megan C Evans has received funding from various sources, including the Australian Research Council through a Discovery Early Career Research Award (2020-2023), the Australian Conservation Foundation, the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, WWF Australia, and the National Environmental Science Program's Threatened Species Recovery Hub.Yung En Chee receives funding from an Australian Research Council linkage grant. She also receives funding and research contracts from Melbourne Water through the Melbourne Waterway Research-Practice Partnership 2023-2028. Yung En is a member of the Society for Conservation Biology.

An end to extinctions. An environmental cop on the beat. Labor promised a great deal on the environment. But yesterday, they backed away from the main challenge.

We’ve long known Australia’s main environmental protection laws aren’t doing their job, and we know Australians want better laws. Labor was elected promising to fix them.

But yesterday, the government walked back its commitments, deferring the necessary reforms to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act indefinitely in the face of pressure from the state Labor government in Western Australia and the mining and resources industries.

Federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek was on the front foot yesterday, promising the new national agency Environment Protection Australia and Environmental Information Australia will still go ahead.

But decisions by the planned agency can be overruled by the minister via expansive “call in” powers. And because Labor has backed away from rolling out essential legally enforceable national environmental standards this term, it’s hard to see how the agency can actually be the “tough cop on the beat” we were promised.

Labor promised substantive change that would prevent further species extinctions. But yesterday’s announcement was basically the continuation of business as usual.

Environmental organisations such as the Australian Conservation Foundation – which backed many of Labor’s proposed reforms – are now “deeply disappointed”.

What just happened?

Yesterday’s announcement effectively defers substantive change until after the next federal election.

Rather than a full package, the government has split its planned reforms into three parts, under the umbrella name of the Nature Positive Plan.


Read more: 5 things we need to see in Australia's new nature laws


The first is the nature repair market, which many stakeholders – conservationists and business leaders alike – have been sceptical of. It was legislated in December, but nature repair projects can’t start until the market governance and methods are established.

The second will create the federal Environmental Protection Australia agency and Environment Information Australia body. The agency will be responsible for development assessments, decisions and compliance and enforcement, with staff drawn from existing divisions within the department, while the information agency will support decision-making with data, as well as report on progress against environmental targets.

But the third is the crucial bit – the reformed environment protection and biodiversity laws, and the legally enforceable national environmental standards underpinning them.

We need these standards and laws to properly address longstanding deficiencies such as lack of clear policy objectives and “no go” zones for development, failure to account for climate change impacts, ongoing native vegetation clearing and habitat destruction that drives extinction, and a lack of alignment with other laws.

But these vital elements have been deferred to “an unspecified date”. Despite the urgency of our extinction crisis, we have a cart but no horse in sight.

How did we get here?

In 2020, Graeme Samuel released his scathing report detailing the many failings of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. The laws, he wrote, were “ineffective” and needed fundamental reform. Labor came to office pledging to end extinctions, tackle climate change, and repair nature.

But two years later, little solid progress has been made. In cases such as the controversial Lee Point development planned in Darwin, the government has appeared to put development ahead of considerations of threatened species and First Nations’ cultural values.

Samuel called for comprehensive amendments to the laws within 12 months, and for full reform by 2022. Instead, the government only began consulting in May 2023, undertook a “lockup” consultation with peak environment bodies in October, and ran public consultation in November. Now we hear these reforms have been pushed back indefinitely.

In the West Australian, Minister Plibersek describes the changes as:

a staged rollout of sensible reforms that better protect Australia’s natural wonders, while also supporting faster, more efficient decision making […] This package is a win for the environment and a win for business

Speaking on ABC radio, she denied there was any “unnecessary delay”:

there is a careful approach to make sure we get this right, because this is generational change […] I’m not going to go into the parliament with a flawed set of laws that we can’t get support for.

This is questionable. In 2022, Australia signed up to the ambitious global push to turn around the destruction of the natural world, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. We agreed to work to bring biodiversity loss almost to zero by 2030 and for native wild species to become more abundant and resilient by 2050. Deferring our main environment laws is not the way to do this.


Read more: The historic COP15 outcome is an imperfect game-changer for saving nature. Here's why Australia did us proud


Restoring nature isn’t possible without stronger environment laws

Preserving nature can only be done with substantive legislative reform, given Australia’s existing environmental laws do not effectively regulate and stop the ongoing destruction of nature.

As Samuel pointed out, our current laws are not keeping the environment in good shape. They focus on individual approvals for projects, not clear outcomes for the environment.


Read more: 'Nature positive' isn't just planting a few trees – it's actually stopping the damage we do


As it stands there will be no climate trigger – meaning no assessment of impact on climate change – despite the threat this poses to biodiversity. The Great Barrier Reef is suffering its worst recorded mass bleaching this year, the fifth in eight years.

Even so, fossil fuel production continues with many more projects awaiting approval.

sign saying no gas on grassland
Fossil fuel production continues apace. Phillip Schubert/Shutterstock

Nature can’t afford further delays

Without the reformed environment protection laws, the strengthened Safeguard Mechanism – the government’s main plan to drive down emissions from large polluters – will not work properly. This is because environmental law needs to be amended so greenhouse gas emissions from new coal and gas developments are reported on and tracked.

In fact, without the national environmental standards – which the federal environment department dubs the “centrepiece of our reforms” – the whole package of reform seems toothless.

Labor’s failure so far to deliver on its promise puts their goals of “no new extinctions” and a “nature positive” future for Australia at risk.


Read more: Get the basics right for National Environmental Standards to ensure truly sustainable development


The Conversation

Euan Ritchie receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Department of Energy, Environment, and Climate Action. Euan is a Councillor within the Biodiversity Council, and a member of the Ecological Society of Australia and the Australian Mammal Society.

Megan C Evans has received funding from various sources, including the Australian Research Council through a Discovery Early Career Research Award (2020-2023), the Australian Conservation Foundation, the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, WWF Australia, and the National Environmental Science Program's Threatened Species Recovery Hub.

Yung En Chee receives funding from an Australian Research Council linkage grant. She also receives funding and research contracts from Melbourne Water through the Melbourne Waterway Research-Practice Partnership 2023-2028. Yung En is a member of the Society for Conservation Biology.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Point break? Why sharing its ‘secret’ wave with the Olympics could cost a tiny Tahitian village dear

This week all eyes will be on Teahupo’o as it hosts the world’s best surfers. Many islanders welcome the new infrastructure brought by the 2024 Paris Games, but are concerned that any benefits will be undone by longer-term damagePhotographs by Atea Lee Chip SaoFPeva Levy, often called the “godfather” of Teahupo’o, has witnessed his home town change from remote fishing village to surfing mecca in a matter of decades. Levy was a child of the ocean. He grew up swimming and fishing and was one of the first to bodysurf the “secret” wave beyond the reef, a dangerously thrilling, near-perfect barrel known only to local people. Levy couldn’t have known that the wave would one day attract the world’s leading surfers and, eventually, the Olympic Games. Continue reading...

FPeva Levy, often called the “godfather” of Teahupo’o, has witnessed his home town change from remote fishing village to surfing mecca in a matter of decades. Levy was a child of the ocean. He grew up swimming and fishing and was one of the first to bodysurf the “secret” wave beyond the reef, a dangerously thrilling, near-perfect barrel known only to local people. Levy couldn’t have known that the wave would one day attract the world’s leading surfers and, eventually, the Olympic Games.“When someone says ‘Teahupo’o’ these days, the first thing that everyone thinks of is the wave, because it has become such a mythical spot,” says Levy, in his handbuilt house overlooking the lagoon.Peva Levy, ‘godfather’ of Teahupo’oJust outside his front gate things have recently changed. Roadworks block parts of the main road, as workmen fill in holes and smooth the asphalt before 27 July, when Teahupo’o, in Tahiti, French Polynesia, will be showcased to the world as host of the 2024 Paris Olympic surfing event.“It was so quiet and good here,” says Levy, who is also a marine biologist and member of environmental association Vai Ara O Teahupo’o. “Now, everything has changed.”Despite the building sites and increasing numbers of tourists, Teahupo’o retains its charm. People smile and greet one another. There are no hotels – instead, visitors stay in family-run guesthouses or at local homestays. Life is centred around the ocean. The black sand beach at the end of the village road is typically full of children riding the small waves. Spearfishers emerge from the lagoon in the mornings and late afternoons with their catch.Heimiri Afo, a 38-year-old firefighter and mother of five, sums up life in the village. “We live simply, and the ocean is everything to us,” she says, watching her family play on the beach. “The food we eat every day comes from the sea.”She motions out to the reef: “We grew up here on that wave and we have always respected it.”Visitors arrive on the beach. Teahupo’o has gone from remote fishing village to surfing meccaGraffiti on construction site walls shows that not everyone welcomes the surfing boomLike many people, Afo is pleased with some of the new infrastructure that’s being built but is worried about whether the benefits of hosting the Games outweigh the drawbacks.Léon Estall, 33, a professional fisher, cannot see the economic benefits for the village. “It’s not the local population here who are making much money from this,” he says, while working his side job selling coconuts to tourists on the roadside. “Unfortunately, the money is going elsewhere. We’re a bit heartbroken about that.”There’ll be a lot of people coming into this village … It’ll change us. We’ll never be like before and that’s a shameAlthough villagers may not see a huge change in income due to the Games, many rely on the money they make renting out their properties to tourists and surfers to provide for their families. Since the Olympics was announced, there has been a rise in the number of new houses being built, and the number of places available to rent to visitors.Fisher Léon Estall sells food to tourists as a sideline but sees no economic benefits to the villageRairoa Parker manages the Havae Lodge in Teahupo’o, which he opened last October. He loves meeting people from around the world through the lodge, a local style family house on the beachfront.He says business has been going well, and while he’s not against the Games, he doesn’t agree with the way some of the infrastructure projects have been handled and worries about the long-term consequences.Paradise lost as a mechanical digger clears the seafront for new developmentAt the rainbow’s end in Teahupo’o … a surf towerOne example is the Olympic control centre, a backstage area that will handle logistics during the Games. The area, which is now government-owned, covers almost two hectares of land, which has been cleared, filled with rocks and covered with large temporary tents.“There used to be a taro and sweet potato field there, which provided food for all the schools in this district,” says Parker. “But the government prefers to stop the taro and stick an Olympic village in there.”What Parker and other people would like to know is what will happen to areas like this once the Games are over, as the land will not be able to be used to grow crops. Some are hoping for a skate park or children’s playground, but the local government has not made any announcements.The most controversial project, the 500m Pacific franc (£3.5m) judges’ tower, now stands in the lagoon. Opposition to the tower was strong internationally and in Teahupo’o itself, due to the short- and long-term environmental impacts of construction – and opinion is still divided.Tahitian surfing star Michel Bourez competed in his sport at the 2020 Olympics and, despite some of his friends in Teahupo’o campaigning against the tower, is sanguine about the latest addition to the island.“As we say in French, you can’t make an omelette without breaking the eggs. At the end of the day, I feel like the government did the right thing to go ahead with the tower,” he says.Anaihe, 17, flanked by two friends. She fears the long-term impact to her villageOn the beach opposite the tower, sitting with her friends, 17-year-old Anaihe says she recognises that it is a privilege to host the Olympics but she is also worried about the longer-term impact. “There’ll be a lot of people coming into this little village and I think after they leave, they’ll leave traces. It’ll change us. We’ll never be like before and for me, that’s a shame.”It’s a concern echoed by Levy. “Teahupo’o has strong mana (natural energy). When you come here, you feel it. If you come, you need to respect it, respect the people, and respect nature. Respect – that’s all we ask.”A monument pays homage to the ‘secret’ wave beyond the reef in Teahupo’o

Costa Rica President Downplays Illegal Logging in Gandoca Manzanillo

President Rodrigo Chaves spoke about the case of alleged illegal logging in Gandoca Manzanillo. Chaves minimized the facts, arguing that “only 23 trees were cut.” “The scandal with which they want to distract the population, talking about 23 trees that were cut down with permits on a property of 26 hectares, that is the ecological […] The post Costa Rica President Downplays Illegal Logging in Gandoca Manzanillo appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

President Rodrigo Chaves spoke about the case of alleged illegal logging in Gandoca Manzanillo. Chaves minimized the facts, arguing that “only 23 trees were cut.” “The scandal with which they want to distract the population, talking about 23 trees that were cut down with permits on a property of 26 hectares, that is the ecological disaster that the Frente Amplio and all those shout about to distract you from the real disaster in Crucitas,” he said. Likewise, President Chaves avoided mentioning that these logging permits are under investigation by the Public Prosecutor’s Office and that five people were arrested last week. This is not the first time that Chaves has defended the permits issued to this company. “The permit is in order; we have investigated it. It complies with all our procedures to grant a forest harvesting permit,” the President stated in a press conference. The Environmental Prosecutor’s Office suspects that several irregularities were committed to change the land use in the forest and wetlands areas, with the purpose of carrying out urban constructions. Among those arrested is businessman Allan Pacheco Dent, who has been linked to Chaves’ administration and political campaign. Other governmental authorities such as Attorney General Iván Vincenti warned that deforestation could be taking place inside the protected area. According to a note sent by Vincenti to the Constitutional Chamber, the National System of Conservation Areas (SINAC) granted tree-cutting permits to the company Manzanillo S. A., represented by Pacheco Dent, despite the fact that, in the plans that gave rise to the titling of the land, “there is evidence of its presumed location within the refuge.” At least three documents from the Attorney General’s Office (PGR) have indicated to the National System of Conservation Areas (SINAC) that it must restore the original limits of the refuge. However, to date, SINAC has not done so. The Environmental Prosecutor’s Office is investigating alleged irregularities in the issuance of logging permits on a farm owned by Playa Manzanillo, S.A. in Talamanca, on land located within the hectares that were under the declaration of Gandoca Manzanillo Refuge until Law 9223 was approved in 2014. The post Costa Rica President Downplays Illegal Logging in Gandoca Manzanillo appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

Australia’s environment could be fixed and threatened species saved for just 0.3% of GDP, experts say

Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists estimates $7.3bn a year for 30 years could avoid most extinctions, repair soils and restore riversFollow our Australia news live blog for latest updatesGet our morning and afternoon news emails, free app or daily news podcastSaving Australia’s threatened wildlife, repairing degraded land and restoring ailing river systems is possible and would cost just 0.3% of Australia’s GDP, according to a new blueprint produced by more than 60 experts.For the first time scientists, governance and business leaders have produced a dollar estimate of what it would take to fix Australia’s environment.Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup Continue reading...

Saving Australia’s threatened wildlife, repairing degraded land and restoring ailing river systems is possible and would cost just 0.3% of Australia’s GDP, according to a new blueprint produced by more than 60 experts.For the first time scientists, governance and business leaders have produced a dollar estimate of what it would take to fix Australia’s environment.They set out 24 actions which, if followed, could “avoid most extinctions and recover almost all threatened species”, repair the productive base of agricultural soils and fix over-allocated and fragmented river systems.The dollar figure – $7.3bn annually for the next 30 years – is less than two-thirds of the federal government’s reported annual expenditure on fossil fuel subsidies.“The cost is less than 0.3% of our GDP. Given that nearly half of our GDP depends on nature, that’s a pretty sound investment,” the University of Queensland professor Martine Maron told the National Press Club on Wednesday.Maron is part of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists, which spent six years developing its Blueprint to Repair Australian Landscapes.She said Australia’s spectacular and unique landscapes and beloved wildlife were a drawcard for domestic and international tourists alike, bringing billions of dollars into the Australian economy every year.But she said many Australians did not realise that “all of this is genuinely under threat”.“You’re all familiar with the ASX? Well, we have an index that tracks how our threatened species are going too,” she said.“It’s called the TSX – the Threatened Species Index – and it shows that populations of our threatened species have declined 60% since 2000.”The blueprint puts forward a national case for repairing degraded landscapes and taking practical action at a continental scale.If adopted, the Wentworth Group said the measures it proposed “could repair much of the past two centuries of degradation”.The actions include protection and restoration of threatened species habitat; addressing threats such as invasive species; expanding the use of Indigenous fire management practices; work to improve the physical and chemical condition of soils; and returning the Murray Darling Basin to environmentally sustainable levels of surface water extraction through measures including strategic water licence buybacks.skip past newsletter promotionOur Australian morning briefing breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it mattersPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionThe group said it was possible to return Australia’s native vegetation to at least 30% of its pre-1750 extent by restoring 13 million hectares of degraded ecosystems – much of that on non-prime agricultural land – and incentivising landholders to retire non-prime agricultural land and set it aside for nature conservation. They said this alone would abate almost one billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent and produce $16-$34bn in carbon market revenue to landholders within 30 years.Professor of geography at the Australian National University Jamie Pittock said Australia needed to recognise that the transition to net zero emissions was also an opportunity to repair the country’s landscapes at scale.“The blueprint shows the repair actions will contribute to Australia meeting our international commitments on climate change and biodiversity, at the same time as boosting the economy through increasing regional employment, improving agricultural productivity, and building resilience to climate change,” he said.“The key finding of our blueprint is that Australians don’t have to choose. We can afford to have both a healthy environment and a productive economy.”The group estimates that after capital investment of $7.3bn annually for 30 years about $250m a year would be required to maintain the environmental outcomes.The blueprint has been released at a time when the Albanese government is under pressure to deliver its full reform package for Australia’s national environmental laws.Legislation is before parliament to establish a national environment protection agency and a new agency for environmental information.But a broader package of legislation, including new national environmental standards, to fix Australia’s failing system of environmental protections has been delayed.

Yes, Australia’s environment is on a depressing path – but $7 billion a year would transform it

A new report challenges the notion that repairing our continent is a task too big and expensive to tackle.

The condition of Australia’s environment continues to decline. Many Australians wonder if it’s possible to reverse this depressing trajectory – and our landmark assessment released today shows the answer is yes. Our report, launched today by the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists, demonstrates how repairing Australia’s landscapes is not only achievable and affordable, it’s in the national interest. Using the best available science and expert advice, we identified 24 actions worth A$7.3 billion each year over 30 years, which could repair much of the past two centuries of degradation. For context, the investment amounts to about 0.3% of Australia’s gross domestic product. It’s also far less than the estimated $33 billion a year Australians spend on their pets. This report is the most comprehensive of its kind undertaken in this country. It is a tangible, practical pathway which challenges the notion that repairing our continent is a task too big and expensive to tackle. The strong case for repair Australia’s population is projected to grow to 37 million by 2052. Earth’s population will reach ten billion in the same period. Global food demand will increase and competition for land will intensify. Climate change makes the environmental repair task more pressing. The Australian continent has already warmed almost 1.5°C since records began. We have experienced shifts in rainfall patterns, droughts, bushfires, flooding and more. Extreme weather is predicted to become even more frequent and severe. About half Australia’s land surface has been significantly modified since European settlement, and at least 19 ecosystems are collapsing due to climate change and other pressures. And the capacity of agricultural landscapes to maintain productivity has significantly declined, and they are becoming less able to support native species and ecosystems. Our key findings Our assessment focuses on five key landscape components identified as degraded in successive State of the Environment reports: soils, inland water, native vegetation, threatened species and coastal environments. We defined objectives for each component, and actions to meet them, based on public policy ambitions and expert advice. We then sourced data to identify where in the landscape each action is required, and the spending it would entail. Independent experts reviewed our findings. Our blueprint identifies 24 practical actions needed now to repair Australia’s degraded landscapes. See the below infographic for full details. The list includes: applying lime and gypsum to agricultural soils to improve productivity remediating high-risk gullies encouraging landholders to restore vegetation along the banks of rivers, streams, lakes and wetlands restoring 13 million hectares of degraded native vegetation addressing key threats and restoring habitat for threatened species maintaining or improving the condition of degraded salt marsh ecosystems. We estimate investment of $7.3 billion each year (in 2022 dollars) is needed from 2025 to 2054 to deliver these all actions. That includes: • $580 million to repair the productive base of agricultural soils • $2.9 billion to fix fragmented, degraded river systems • $1.7 billion to restore ecosystems to at least 30% of their pre-1750 extent • $1.2 billion to mitigate imminent extinction risk and ensure medium-term survival of Commonwealth-listed threatened species • $35 million to maintain and improve estuary health • $640 million in transaction costs (such as legal fees, data and compliance) • $250 million a year to maintain the improvements (such as monitoring, and management of pests, weeds and fire). How will Australia pay for this? We cannot accurately measure the true cost of environmental degradation to the environment, people and the economy. But evidence suggests these costs far outweigh the cost of nature repair. Our report proposes measures for Australia that are feasible and fiscally responsible. And they also address multiple objectives. For example, restoring native vegetation across 13 million hectares would also abate almost one billion tonnes of carbon dioxide-equivalent – equal to 18% of Australia’s net emissions over the next 30 years. Through carbon markets, private landholders could be paid to regenerate native vegetation. Our analysis shows this could generate 7% to 15% of the investment needed. The investment we propose would also support employment and jobs in the short- and long-term. This would promote a strong circular flow of income, generating government revenue in the form of income tax, GST and associated revenues. A broad range of financing mechanisms is needed to enact this plan. As a starting point, we suggest: significantly increased public investment for stewardship programs, Indigenous land managers and threatened species recovery revenue-neutral changes to the tax system to encourage conservation and remove subsidies that degrade the environment public investment in the federal government’s green bond program, which will enable investors to back public projects that contribute to environmental repair using markets and other emerging private sector solutions to encourage conservation on private land fundraising via philanthropy. Indigenous Australians are key Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have been stewards of Country for more than 60,000 years and have continuing cultural connections to land and waters. We propose four key measures to give Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples leading roles in managing and repairing landscapes: increase Indigenous ownership and management of land and water recognise the value of traditional knowledge in areas such as managing species and using fire to maintain the health of Country establish and improve programs to employ Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to repair and manage Country, such as expanding Indigenous ranger programs and providing resources and long-term funding ensure Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are supported to generate meaningful, commercially sustainable employment and businesses on Country through land and water ownership. A healthier, more resilient Australia All Australians are stewards of this unique land and seascape. It is our responsibility to ensure nature is preserved for its own sake, and for current and future generations. Our plan expands on successful efforts to conserve the environment. It won’t fix everything – for instance, it did not address air quality, urban settlements or marine environments. But the actions we propose – if done together, at scale, and built into broader public policy reforms – will leave our landscapes healthier and more resilient. Australians don’t have to choose between a healthy environment and a productive economy – we can have both. The report underpinning this article was prepared by the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists with input from more than 60 experts. See the report for the full list of contributors. Jamie Pittock is a member of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists. He also chairs the ACT Natural Resources Management Advisory Committee, is on the board of NRM Regions Australia, and is a member of the Biodiversity Assessment Expert Reference Group advising the federal government. He holds other roles with environmental non-government organisations. The report underpinning this article was funded with support from the Ian Potter Foundation, the Purves Environmental Fund, the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation through the Eldon & Anne Foote Trust, and the John T. Reid Charitable Trust. Bradley J. Moggridge is affiliated with the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists, WWF Australia and the Biodiversity Council. The report underpinning this article was funded with support from the Ian Potter Foundation, the Purves Environmental Fund, the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation through the Eldon & Anne Foote Trust, and the John T. Reid Charitable Trust.Martine Maron is a member of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists and co-authored the report mentioned in this article. She has received funding from various sources including the Australian Research Council, the Queensland Department of Environment and Science, and the federal government's National Environmental Science Program, and has advised both state and federal government on conservation policy. She is a director of the Australian Wildlife Conservancy, a councillor with the Biodiversity Council, a governor of WWF-Australia, and leads the IUCN's thematic group on Impact Mitigation and Ecological Compensation under the Commission on Ecosystem Management. The report underpinning this article was funded with support from the Ian Potter Foundation, the Purves Environmental Fund, the Lord Mayor’s Charitable Foundation through the Eldon & Anne Foote Trust, and the John T. Reid Charitable Trust.

Does kelp restoration work?

Kelp forests have declined across the world and governments, organizations and businesses are mounting efforts to restore 9 million acres of kelp globally by 2040.

Kelp forests have declined across the world and governments, organizations and businesses are mounting ambitious efforts to protect and restore 9 million acres of kelp globally by 2040.Still, the dilemma remains: is kelp restoration even feasible, given the billions of purple urchins feasting on the seaweed and eradicating it from the ocean?“That is the question that keeps me up at night,” said Tristin McHugh, the Nature Conservancy kelp project director. “But what’s the alternative? Do we let this ecosystem lapse into something that can be irreparable? I’ve seen the success stories from around the world. When a culture acknowledges that an ecosystem is worth saving, they will do it. This might be our chance.”Restoration methods vary depending on local ocean conditions, scientific expertise, community engagement and the money that’s available, McHugh said. What works in one area may be less successful elsewhere.The world’s most ambitious and largest kelp restoration effort in South Korea has an annual budget of $29 million and aims to restore about 123,500 acres of kelp forest by 2030. The 20-year project has installed over 49,000 acres of kelp on both artificial and rocky reefs at 173 sites using aquaculture techniques. Kelp activists say it’s proof that with enough funding and nationwide focus, restoration at scale is possible.In Tasmania, researchers have been transplanting baby kelp grown in the lab from algae that possess a higher tolerance for warmer waters. In Norway, they have found success with tossing green gravel – small rocks seeded with baby kelp – into the ocean from a boat. And in Australia near Sydney’s coastline, scuba divers have transplanted crayweed –- the country’s most important canopy-forming seaweed – onto reefs using mats drilled into the seafloor, cable-ties and silicon tubing, leading to significant regrowth of underwater forests.Most efforts on the West Coast in the past four years have been much smaller in scale and duration, with a few seeing limited success.In California’s Mendocino County, nonprofits, government agencies, commercial urchin divers and volunteers hand-harvested tens of thousands of purple urchins in urchins barrens in Noyo Bay, 170 miles north of San Francisco, to sell them to seafood processors. Scientific surveys at the restoration site documented an increase in kelp densities over 15 months, with bull kelp reaching 20% of the historical density while little to no kelp growth happened in the control area.But the project did not lead to a full regrowth of the canopy. And the restored area dwindled after urchin removal ended.Elsewhere in California, recreational divers successfully petitioned the state to allow higher urchin harvests in several northern counties and unlimited culling of purple urchins at specific locations. Over two years, divers at Tanker Reef in Monterey County crushed more than half a million urchins, leading to a phenomenal regrowth of giant kelp, the predominant canopy-forming kelp species in the area.In Oregon, the Kelp Alliance and local recreational divers are working to facilitate similar removal opportunities and to ease state permitting for such efforts. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife said it’s developing a proposal to increase purple urchin harvest limits as well as to form small experimental urchin culling areas similar to California’s to allow the public to participate more broadly in kelp restoration.But, unlike regulators in California and Washington, Oregon’s fish and wildlife management agency told The Oregonian/OregonLive it is not pursuing a statewide kelp forest conservation and restoration plan – leaving the job to the Oregon Kelp Alliance and its supporters.— Gosia Wozniacka covers environmental justice, climate change, the clean energy transition and other environmental issues. Reach her at gwozniacka@oregonian.com or 971-421-3154.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.