A New 1.3 mil sq klm Marine Park (not Coral Sea) and Future plans

[Tangles]

Hi All,

Sorry for the long post but please read if your at all interested where all this is headed with Marine Parks around Australia in the coming years. I have spent a bit of time trying to put it together and have tried to tie it together, so read if your interested in finding out what we are facing. I have done a conclusion at the end as well.

South Australia and Western Australias new 1.3 million sq klm Marine Park

A new push for a further new Marine park is being considered by the Rudd Government. Its the 1.3 million square kilometre region, stretching from Kalbarri in WA to Kangaroo Island in SA, see the attached map below.

It is led by the Save Our Marine Life is a major new collaboration between the Conservation Council of Western Australia, Australian Conservation Foundation, The Wilderness Society, WWF Australia, Australian Marine Conservation Society, The Nature Conservancy and the Pew Environment Group. In their view its Australias global responsibility under the UN’s Convention on the Law of the Sea it signed.

They all now cite the new MPA Guidance Prinicples just released in May 2009. This is what their science is.

A NEW MPA PRINCIPLES GUIDANCE STATEMENT RELEASED: (FUNDED BY PEW)

1: it was conducted by the University of Qld Ecology Centre
2: it was funded by the PEW Foundation!!!! (Surprise that)
3: To endorse it, if your scientist in a relevant field with a Masters you can OR if your organization wishes to endorse it ( there is no qualification requirement here, anyone can endorse it)..Wow, that carries a lot of weight doesn’t it.

Its on the relevant UQ webpage at http://www.uq.edu.au/ecology/index.h...441&pid=108450
It states in its first paragraph and I quote :

Scientific knowledge has a key role in informing the application of the Comprehensive Adequate & Representative (CAR) principles (see below) for the establishment of the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (NRSMPA), however, in some instances, the scientific evidence available to implement the principles is insufficient.

I really love that last sentence, sort of sums it all up for me, ie we will implement the CAR principle even without any evidence and its in writing… and I thought science was fact?

Here is a brief summary of the Principles but download it yourself and see the intent of establishing the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (NRSMPA). I have put this together myself and these are my conclusions.

1: The goal is at least 10% of each marine bioregion within MPAs by 2012. Currently as at 2008 nearly 9.5% is NRSMPA however, in their view much of this increased area of MPAs is not on the continental shelf nor within the nearshore state’s waters.

Ive attached a Govt map of the various BIOREGIONS, ie they all extend out to the edge of the Economic Zone… I repeat the GOAL is 10% OF EACH BIOREGION by 2012 and 30% finally.

I count 5-6 such regions around Australia, think about it. Its not 10%, 20% but 30% of each area of all seas right around Australia, its going to be a network of large Marine Parks right around Australia. Just add the separate State Marine Parks and you get the picture.

To Date:
• EAST BIOREGION has GBR Marine Park and proposed Coral Sea.
• SOUTH-WEST subject to the 1.3 mill proposed Marine Park now being considered in WA and SA.
• NORTHWEST.. nothing to date but no doubt its coming
• NORTH… moves are a foot I understand on this
o SOUTH EAST… there are some Marine Parks especially off Tasmania

Now even by my naked eye, the GBR and the Coral Sea is well over 10% of the EAST Bioregion? ( But the GBR is conveniently excluded form the Bio-Region) And the proposed one in SA and WA is easily over 10% of the Bioregion

2: The target audience of the Guidance Statement is scientifically trained conservation planners. (now that’s a converted audience)

3: the principles give a get out of jail card to its target audience as follows on page 5;
The principles are specifically focused on managing the uncertainty and risks inherent in designing effective and efficient MPAs in the absence of full knowledge of the biodiversity, the contemporary and developing threats, or the effectiveness of management strategies within and outside MPAs.

The principles assume that a jurisdiction’s MPA planning framework includes a science based
planning process,

I’ve only gone through 5 pages here and not even reached the actual principles and already there’s acknowledgement of absence of full knowledge, assumptions that it will include a science based process etc.. BUT WAIT THERES MORE.

OPERATIONAL PRINCIPLES:

1.1 Planning Framework.
The kicker is regarding the Bioregions noted above.

1.1.2 The biodiversity of each bioregion (~58 IMCRA (shelf) and ~24 NMB (off-shelf)
provinces) should be represented within the NRSMPA at levels appropriate to the distribution of biodiversity within the bioregions.

Combine that with the stated goal of 10% by 2012 and there it all is.

1.2 Biodiversity Data
In relation to collection of data, well I liked this at para 1.2.3, I quote:
“Regardless of the quantity and quality of data available, planning and implementation should not be significantly delayed while waiting for new data because the costs are likely to outweigh the benefits.” (Yep lets not stop just because we don’t any facts will we?)

It also wouldn’t surprise when it later states that it SHOULD capture special interest features and this word ‘Should’ is very heavily used in relation to levels of representation of conservation features, especially when some figures are bandied around.

MARINE PARK NETWORK ( the Scary bits) READ THIS CAREFULLY

1.3.3 Incomplete knowledge of ecosystem processes, human impacts and environmental
change should be managed by implementing strategies to maintain natural connection
regimes and increase the likelihood of persistence and resilience by:
• configuring a complementary network of MPAs,
• replicating each conservation feature in at least three spatially separated
• occurrences, either within the individual MPA or as part of the MPA network
• (with replication measured according to the specific conservation feature),
• using larger, rather than smaller MPAs,
• spacing individual MPAs at various ranges within the network (eg inter-MPA
distance up to 200km) to accommodate the potential for movement of a wide
variety of species,
• configuring MPA networks to maintain land-sea and freshwater-sea
• connections,
• establishing better integration between MPA and off-MPA management and
• governance arrangements for the delivery of conservation objectives, and
• implementing buffers around high protection areas.

1.4 LEVELS OF REPRESENTATION

1.4.6 The final MPA network should consist of a minimum of 30% of the area of each
bioregion

Ie the Goal after 2012 is at least 30% of each Bioregion, 10% by 2012

NEXT ONE IS VERY CLEAR

2.3.1 Strategies to maximise the public understanding and the manageability of the zones within each MPA include:
• having MPAs and management zones that are simple shapes with simple
• zoning rules;
• having boundaries that are easily identified;
• having fewer and larger high protection zones rather than more and smaller
• zones;
• minimise the number of zoning categories and ensure they clearly reflect the
• management objectives;
• having MPAs in close proximity to existing terrestrial reserves, where
• management capacity exists, to increase the management effectiveness at
• reduced cost;
• striving for jurisdictional alignment on policy and harmonisation of
• investment decisions and management activities

Funding support
This work has been supported by the Pew Environment Group (Wild Australia Project) and by the institutions hosting individual researchers named above.

Out of interest have a look at the Wild Australia Project website run by Pews which gives a rundown of what they are doing in SA and Wa as well as Kimberlies and other major areas of the inland they wish to lock off.

SUMMARY:
1: 10% of each Bioregion around Australia by 2012
2: Minimum of 30% of each Bioregion around Australia
3: Develop a network of LARGE MARINE PARKS with HIGHER Protection Zones within a network ie up to 200 klms apart around Australia.
4: This is Commonwealth, from memory they control 5 klms out ( please correct me here), ie this is Federal and will have nothing to do with State Politics except
5: State Governments will be under pressure to do 30% or their water to MPAs especially to connect freshwater and saltwater MPAs as outlined here
6: All the major conservation groups have joined together on this
7:AMCS has already over 2000 petitions/letters to Rudd on Coral Sea and aim for 5000
8:WAP ( Wild Australia Project) have in recent 6 weeks got 2000 plus to sign their petitions/letters to Rudd and Garrett re WA and SA Marine park

See the maps and look at them closely,

Hope I haven’t bored you guys too much and Join ECOfishers.

Cheers
Mike

[TerryF]

You'll find the full story of Commonwealth Marine planning right around Australia on the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts website http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mbp/index.html

In particular not ALL of those areas shown on that map of South and Western Australia will become Commonwealth Marine Parks. Those are just the areas which have been identified for further assessment. See the details in http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts...assessment.pdf

Lots and lots of details.

TerryF
=====
Beavering away in the background.......

[Tangles]

Hi Terry,
Understand that these are areas for assessment, just like the GBR, Moreton Bay where and now the Coral Sea and your areas in the West.

The new guidelines being promoted by all the conservation groups I referred to makes interesting reading.

cheers
mike

[Chris Ryan]

Isn't this bit interesting

7:AMCS has already over 2000 petitions/letters to Rudd on Coral Sea and aim for 5000
8:WAP ( Wild Australia Project) have in recent 6 weeks got 2000 plus to sign their petitions/letters to Rudd and Garrett re WA and SA Marine park

Yet when a petition to get a look at the science for Moreton Bay comes about, they can't get more than 700...........just shows that fisherman don't believe they can make a difference as an individual, yet our 'friends at the environment groups jump on immediately and in two separate petitions can garner 4000.

No wonder rec fisho's get the rough end of the pineapple all the time.

[Lovey80]

Ive said it before and I'll say it again. Until we can get the funds together to promote a country wide TV and radio campaign the Conservation propaganda will continue to consume large portions of the nation. We have do do it soon but it will be expensive. Once these things are in it will be 10 times harder getting rid of them.

Cheers

Chris