Bahrs Scrub Croton
Australia's National Biodiversity Strategy r
ecognises that our Australian biodiversity is precious and significant and also acknowledges that rapid and serious decline is occuring across the continent. The strategy calls for actions for the urgent reversal of decline and those actions need to come from all jurisdiction levels, among businesses and individuals.
This position is one that concerned conservationists welcome.
An understanding and respect for the term ecologism is essential to progress survival of Australia's biodiversity.
Many of us practice shallow ecologism: that species have value only in relation to their benefit to human beings. Deep ecologism recogizes and accepts that species and landscapes have an intrinsic value and right to thriving existence.
Australia's National Biodiversity Strategy hovers between the two. However, we believe that overt commitment to deep ecologism required by all
Australians if biodiversity decline is to be reversed.
Australia's first national biodiversity strategy, the National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia's Biological Diversity, was prepared by the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) and endorsed by the Council of Australian Governments in 1996.
The strategy fulfills Australia's obligations under the International Convention on Biological Diversity.
A review of the National Biodiversity Strategy has been conducted by the Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council and a new strategy is expected to be endorsed in November 2009. You can follow the review and read submissions from this page.
Does legislation protect biodiversity?
Mostly no - legislation fails to ensure protection of unique biodiversity hotspots such as Bahrs Scrub!
The priority of current Environment and Urban Planning Laws is not to protect environment.
Priority is to mitigate species loss and/or to ensure environment does not interfere with project.
Such a perspective inevitably leads to habitat loss and therefore species loss.
Queensland is the last bastion of ‘injurious affection' ---old zonings cannot be changed without incurring massive compensation costs.
Judges, upon whose attitudes final decisions often hinge, do not have a deep ecologism perspective.
Unscrupulous developer practices and accidental catastrophes negate conservation concerns.