protecting critical marine habitats - Humane Society International

PROTECTING CRITICAL MARINE HABITATS THE KEY TO CONSERVING OUR THREATENED MARINE SPECIES PROTECTING MARINE CRITICAL HABITATS: Lydia Gibson (WWF-Australia) and The key to conserving our threatened marine species WWF-Australia | Humane Society International Alexia Wellbelove (Humane Society International)

1

© WWF-Australia. Humane Society International. All rights reserved.

1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ISBN: 978-1-921031-41-0 Authors: Lydia Gibson and Alexia Wellbelove WWF-Australia Head office Level 13, 235 Jones St Ultimo NSW 2007 Tel: +612 9281 5515 Fax: +612 9281 1060 www.wwf.org.au

Humane Society International PO Box 439 Avalon NSW 2107 Tel: +612 9973 1728 Fax: +612 9973 1729 www.hsi.org.au

Published June 2010 by WWF-Australia and Humane Society International. Any reproduction in full or in part of this publication must mention the title and credit above-mentioned publishers as copyright owners. First published June 2010. For bibliographic purposes, this report should be cited as: Gibson, L.E and Wellbelove, A.P. 2010. Protecting Critical Marine Habitats: The key to conserving our threatened marine species. A Humane Society International and WWF-Australia Report. Design and layout by Mary Phillips ([email protected]). Printed by Platypus Graphics on FSC-certified paper. Cover images (left to right): Whale tail © WWF-Canon / Diego M. GARCE Australian sea lions, Cow pup bull © Peter Shaughnessy, SA Museum Great white shark © WWF-Canon / Jêrome Mallefet Snubfin dolphin © Guido J. Parra. In the interests of the environment, limited copies of this resource have been printed. Digital copies are available for download at www.wwf.org.au and www.hsi.org.au. World Wide Fund for Nature ABN 57 001 594 074 Humane Society International ABN 63 510 927 032

The Australian Government has committed to international and national biodiversity goals for conserving threatened species, yet the globally agreed target to significantly reduce the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010 has not been achieved. This year marks the International Year of Biodiversity. With many experts stating that Australia is in the early stages of a mass extinction, 2010 is an important opportunity for the Australian Government to make commitments to arrest this decline in biodiversity. This report draws attention to the role of critical habitat designation and protection in the marine environment. Currently less than 5% of Australia’s marine environment is highly protected and marine conservation is much further behind terrestrial efforts. The identification and protection of critical habitat should form the central plank of any long term strategy to stem biodiversity loss and form an essential element of threatened species recovery. Protecting habitat in the marine realm can differ in approach to terrestrial efforts, particularly given the inherent mobile and dynamic nature of the marine environment. However, a wide range of conservation tools and legislative options can be effectively used to help overcome these challenges and allow for a holistic approach that will maximise critical habitat protection. These tools are detailed in 10 recommendations with the overall objective of a streamlined, systematic and cost effective approach towards identifying and protecting critical habitat in the marine environment.

They include: •

Mapping critical habitat;

•

Registering critical habitat within 12 months of listing new threatened species;

•

Bringing critical habitats as a priority into marine protected areas, indigenous protected areas or conservation zones reflecting in the marine environment an existing target for terrestrial species under the National Reserve System 2030 Strategy;

•

Committing to protection for critical habitats using a range of available conservation and regulatory tools. The range includes use of various provisions in the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, temporary closures of areas to specific uses, fisheries management measures and strengthening of environment, fisheries, mining, shipping and petroleum legislation.

While this report predominantly focuses on the marine environment, the recommendations should be integrated into the National Biodiversity Strategy for the Federal Government (working with state and territory governments) with an overarching goal to halt and then reverse the decline of biodiversity both in the marine and terrestrial environments. The recommendations should also be included as part of the Federal Government’s response to the Hawke Review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act, 1999 as the key legislative tool for implementing the National Biodiversity Strategy. By adopting these recommendations, governments can demonstrate true commitment to protecting Australia’s status as the most ‘megadiverse’ of all the developed countries.

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1

Executive Summary

2

2

Table of Contents

3

3

Recommendations (1-10)

4

4

Background

14

5

What is Critical Habitat?

15

6

Identifying and Protecting Critical Habitat in the Marine Environment

16

How has Critical Habitat Designation and Protection Worked in the Past?

19

7 8

Critical Habitat as a Climate Adaption Strategy 20

9

International and National Obligations to Protect Critical Habitat

22

9.1 International obligations

22

9.2 National obligations

22

10 Critical Habitat Protection in Australia 10.1 Recommendations of the Hawke Review 2009

The Great Barrier Reef © Viewfinder

22 24

11 Conclusion

24

12 Critical Habitat Maps

26

13 Acknowledgements

43

PROTECTING CRITICAL MARINE HABITATS: The key to conserving our threatened marine species WWF-Australia | Humane Society International

3

3

RECOMMENDATIONS (1-10)

Identifying and protecting critical habitat in the marine environment is an essential step to stem the rapid decline of our rich and unique marine biodiversity. It is possible to stem this decline whilst also meeting objectives to streamline processes and enhance cost effectiveness of conservation effort. Indeed, without protection for the critical habitats of a threatened species, other conservation efforts for the species are at risk of being ineffective.

4

PROTECTING CRITICALPROTECTING MARINE HABITATS: CRITICAL MARINE HABITATS: The key to conserving our The threatened key to conserving marine species our threatened marine species WWF-Australia | HumaneWWF-Australia Society International | Humane Society International

1

Inclusion of targets for critical habitat identification and protection within the pending National Biodiversity Strategy will ensure sufficient support from federal and state governments.

1. Develop and implement a long term critical habitat protection strategy that:

Funding will be needed to identify present and predict future critical habitats in terms of broad and regional scale spatial mapping for key marine species. These critical habitat maps should build on the examples as shown in this document, and take into account shifting ranges under climate change, where these can be modelled. The National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility (NCCARF) program and the Australian Marine Mammal Centre (AMMC) grants scheme, already funded by government provide ideal and existing funding sources to identify critical habitats.

• Is a core element of the National Biodiversity Strategy (NBS) and includes timebound, quantitative targets for systematically identifying and protecting critical habitats; • Includes estimates for the financial requirements and levels of investment required to achieve the strategy’s aims; • Recognises that Indigenous people have specific legal and cultural responsibilities and rights to marine areas. Any form of protected area should result from meaningful dialogue and full prior informed consent of Traditional Owners, and should not extinguish the marine Native Title rights of Indigenous people. In order to truly protect critical habitat, a long term strategy is required to implement the regulatory tools available and to ensure that sufficient resources are devoted to updating, protecting and enforcing critical habitat protection. This strategy must apply to those species already listed under federal and state legislation, as well as those that may be listed in the future.

Green sea turtle © WWF-Canon / Jürgen FREUND

A key component of any long term critical habitat protection strategy is recognition that Indigenous people have specific legal and cultural responsibility and rights to marine areas. Any form of protected area in such areas should result from meaningful dialogue and full prior informed consent, and should not extinguish the marine Native Title rights of Indigenous people. Opportunities exist to utilise unspent funds from the Caring for Our Country program and funds from ‘Closing the Gap’ policy1 as part of a holistic approach to improve Indigenous health and well-being and secure critical habitat protection. This long term critical habitat strategy should be guided by local traditional knowledge and implemented through increasing on-ground capacity, particularly in terms of investing in more Sea Rangers and the expansion of Sea Country Indigenous Protected Areas. 1

Department of Families, Housing, Community Services, and Indigenous Affairs. 2009. Closing the Gap between Indigenous and Non Indigenous Australians. Available online: http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/about/publicationsarticles/corp/ BudgetPAES/budget09_10/indigenous/Documents/ClosingTheGap/appendix_b.htm. Accessed April 2010.


5

2

2. Utilise the Commonwealth marine bioregional planning process to identify and protect critical habitats for threatened marine species. The marine bioregional planning process currently being implemented in Commonwealth waters provides an unrivalled opportunity to ensure that critical habitats of threatened species are identified and protected as areas of high conservation value within Australia’s National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (NRSMPA). The Minister for the Environment should require that critical habitat areas identified during the process are included within the Areas for Further Assessment and are highly protected marine reserves (IUCN protected area categories I or II) in the NRSMPA (see recommendation 7). Critical habitat identified in existing recovery plans for all listed marine species should be integrated into the marine bioregional planning process and protected.

6


3 Southern right whale © WWF-Canon / Michel Gunther

3. Develop a wide range of implementing provisions to strengthen critical habitat protection across all jurisdictions. One of the tools currently available is to list critical habitat on the EPBC Act Critical Habitat Register (‘the Register’) (see explanation in Box 2). As it currently stands, listing on the Register is not mandatory, is underutilised and insufficient to protect a species, particularly when the critical habitat occurs outside Commonwealth jurisdiction. (See recommendation 5 for suggestions to improve the listing process for the Register). To improve the effectiveness of critical habitat protection through the EPBC Act the Minister should be required to secure the conservation of identified critical habitat through targeted protective measures which could include declaring conservation zones, marine protected areas, indigenous protected areas, negotiating conservation agreements or other regulatory tools as appropriate (see Box 1). The Minister should also be required to negotiate critical habitat protection with state and territory governments outside Commonwealth jurisdiction. This should be implemented as an immediate matter of policy, while an obligation to pursue targeted protective measures for critical habitats exists through amendments to the EPBC Act. For example, the strategy to be pursued for the critical habitats of a particular species should be detailed in the Conservation Advice that has to be issued for the species at the point of listing on the EPBC Act.

Box 1: Examples of conservation and regulatory tools available to strengthen critical habitat protection: • Provisions under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 such as: – Conservation agreements – Covenants – Conservation zones – Designated protection under Strategic Environment Assessments for particular regions and industry sectors – Indigenous Protected Areas – Conditions on Wildlife Trade Operations for Fisheries • Marine bioregional planning processes such as the Australia’s National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (NRSMPA); • Spatial and temporal closures for specific uses such as fisheries and mining; • Strengthening of legislation for environment, mining, fisheries, shipping and petroleum.


7

4 8

4. Clarify the definition of critical habitat to specifically include climate refugia. The lack of protection for future critical habitats presents a major problem for Australia’s threatened species under climate change. The Federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett announced in November 2009 that $250,000 will be directed to the identification of climate refugia for threatened species2. These are places where threatened species are predicted to find secure and suitable habitat as the climate changes3 – they will be critical for species to adapt to climate change. Once identified, the EPBC Act should be used to ensure they are strictly protected through listings on the critical habitat Register, conservation agreements, covenants and other planning and accreditation instruments under the Act and described in recommendation 3. Firstly, however, the definition of critical habitat in the Act must be amended to include climate refugia. The Threatened Species Scientific Committee’s (TSSC) proposed definition as outlined in section 5.18 of the Hawke Review4 goes some way towards addressing this issue, but needs to be taken further in the Federal Government’s response to include the recommendations shown here.

2

The Hon Peter Garrett, MP ‘Action to Protect Our Biodiversity from Climate Change’. Media Release http:// www.environment.gov.au/minister/garrett/2008/pubs/mr20080330.pdf. Accessed November 13th 2009.

3

Morton, S.R; Short.J; Barker, R.D. 1995. Refugia for biological diversity in arid and semi arid Australia. Biodiversity Series Paper No.4 Department of Environment, Sport and Territories. Definition of refuge: ‘In evolutionary terms, a refuge is a region in which certain organisms persist during a period in which most of the original geographic range becomes uninhabitable because of climatic change. However, the term refuge may be used in other ways, particularly to mean a region to which species retract for short periods (i.e. for a number of years at the most) when large parts of their preferred habitats become uninhabitable because of drought or other effects. Yet another type of refuge comprises regions to which threatened species have retreated because of environmental changes set in train by European settlement’

4

Hawke, Allan, 2009. The Australian Environment Act – Report of the Independent Review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Section 5.18 ‘Further, the definition of critical habitat needs to be reviewed to provide greater flexibility, particularly in instances where information may be limited. The TSSC has proposed an alternative definition: That geography/place necessary for the persistence of viable populations given plausible futures of impinging factors’. Available online http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/ review/publications/pubs/final-report-00-title.pdf. Accessed January 2010.


Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins © Guido J.Parra

5

5. A mandatory inclusion of critical habitats on the EPBC Act Critical Habitat Register. • All critical habitat already identified in recovery plans should be listed on the register within 12 months and protected through available legislative tools, without the need for amendments to the EPBC Act; • Critical habitat should be placed on the Register concurrently with the listing of new threatened species or ecological communities on the EPBC Act. Critical habitat identification and protection should form part of the ‘conservation advice’ now given at point of listing or at least be placed on the Register within 12 months of the listing of the species; • In the future, critical habitat identified in recovery plans should automatically be listed on the EPBC Register and this should be required through an amendment to the EPBC Act; • Where critical habitat is listed under state or territory legislation, a mechanism should be introduced which ensures the automatic listing on the Commonwealth register of all such critical habitat.

Currently, critical habitats for listed species are required to be identified in recovery plans. However, amendments to the EPBC Act in 2006 removed obligatory recovery plan preparation, but did introduce a requirement for ‘conservation advice’ at the point of listing which sets out ‘information about what could appropriately be done to stop the decline of, or support the recovery of, the species or community’ (section 266B). The Hawke Review recommends the identification of critical habitat for listed threatened species at the time of their listing on the EPBC Act and this should be supported. Conservation advice should be required to include the identification of critical habitats and recommendations for their protection. This would allow all known critical habitat to be promptly protected using a range of conservation measures. The EPBC Act could then be used to ensure these places are strictly protected within 12 months through listings on the Register, conservation agreements and other planning and accreditation instruments under the Act.

Where critical habitat is listed under state or territory legislation, a mechanism should be introduced which ensures the automatic listing on the Commonwealth register of all such critical habitat. This coordination of data would enable easy identification of a species’ critical habitat at the both state/territory and federal levels for the benefit of conservation. Finally, amendments to the Act required give detailed guidance as to how habitats on the Register are to be protected (obligations to pursue conservation agreements or other appropriate protective measures). We welcome the steps the Hawke Review has made towards expeditious identification of critical habitats, but believe further steps are needed to ensure critical habitat is protected effectively as detailed in recommendation 3.

Given the lengths of time given to the Threatened Species Scientific Committee to process threatened species and ecological community nominations, it is not unreasonable to require the automatic listing of known critical habitats on the Register at the point the species and community is listed. For critically endangered and endangered species, the habitat already occupied at the very minimum, is critical to persistence. As a matter of policy, critical habitat identified in future recovery plans and conservation advice should be listed on the EPBC Act register. Amendment of the EPBC Act is needed to require automatic listing on the Register of ‘habitats critical to the survival of threatened species’ concurrent with Ministerial approval of recovery plans and conservation advices.


9

6

6. Strengthen legislative provisions to ensure no actions detrimental to critical habitat are approved. • A mandatory level of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for critical habitat should be required for any referral or proposal involving potential negative impacts on critical habitat listed on the Register or identified in recovery plans or conservation advice; • The Minister should be prohibited from approving actions that cause detrimental impacts on critical habitat (including critical habitat identified in recovery plans, conservation advice and listed on the Register); • Consideration should be given to an amendment to the EPBC Act to designate critical habitat as a Matter of National Environmental Significance (MNES) in its own right. It should be made clear through Administrative Guidelines that detrimental impacts on critical habitat will be considered ‘significant impact’ and will not be approved. The EPBC Act should be amended to ensure that it is not possible to obtain approval to cause ‘significant impact’ to a critical habitat for a listed threatened species or ecological community. Serious consideration should also be given to treating critical habitat as a Matter of National Environmental Significance (MNES) in its own right. If critical habitats were listed, the significant impact thresholds in the EIA processes of the Act would apply to the individual sites and thus deliver stricter habitat protection than is achieved through assessment of species as matters of NES alone. Listing of critical habitat on the register and also declaring it a MNES should also be mandatory at time of listing of the species or within a reasonable time period after listing such as 12 months. The Act should then be amended to make it clear that both the species and its critical habitat are both MNES.

10


Dugong © Andrey Nekrasov / WWF Canon

7

7. Ensure critical habitat in the marine environment is highly protected across all jurisdictions. Identified critical habitat in the marine environment should be highly protected. For example, critical habitat should be designated IUCN category I or II 5 either permanently or seasonally, where appropriate. This consideration should be incorporated into the marine bioregional planning, protected area planning and fisheries assessment processes currently underway. Where critical habitats cross jurisdictional boundaries, the Federal Government should seek to develop collaborative fisheries and marine bioregional planning arrangements that achieve full protection. Any actions proposed in critical habitat areas should be subject to assessment and approval processes as a Matter of National Environmental Significance.

5

IUCN.2008. Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. Edited by Nigel Dudley. Available online: http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/PAPS-016.pdf.

Loggerhead turtle © WWF-Canon / Isaac Vega


11

8

8. Establish a national network of whale and dolphin sanctuaries across Australia’s Commonwealth, state and territorial waters. • Ensure critical habitat assessments are undertaken as part of this process and include species currently classified as ‘data deficient’ and/or ‘migratory’ such as the snubfin dolphin and Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin. The Federal government should establish ‘a national network of whale and dolphin sanctuaries’6 pursuant to EPBC Act sect 228A. Sanctuaries should automatically be considered for high protection (eg. IUCN I or II) permanent (or seasonal where appropriate) and be integrated into the current state and Commonwealth bioregional planning and fisheries assessment processes underway. Critical habitat assessments should be made and sanctuaries designated for those species that are currently listed as ‘data deficient’ and/or ‘migratory’ under the EPBC Act. Particular consideration should be given to species such as the IndoPacific humpback dolphin (Sousa Chinensis) and snubfin dolphin (Orcaella heinsohni) where known threats to their habitats could cause the local extinction of key populations 7.

12


9

9. Develop critical habitat maps. Bringing information together in a visual format will assist with the protection of critical habitat areas by promoting awareness of critical habitat locations to a wide variety of stakeholders. This can provide certainty to extractive interests, tourism, Indigenous groups and conservation interests alike.

10

Critical habitat maps also make it possible to group species and to identify, through a layering process, critical habitat areas for suites of species. This would ensure that the most appropriate conservation tools can be deployed to protect these areas. By way of example and using a combination of existing recovery plans and the latest available scientific data, WWF and HSI have developed critical habitat maps for a selected number of key threatened marine species (see section 12, Table 1). These maps are presented as a model for a more systematic approach. They provide a good first approximation of where the critical habitat areas are for each species and where protection should be implemented. These initial maps are intended to provide a starting point for action and a foundation for a longer-term government strategy to protect critical habitat areas (see section 12).

10. Implement periodic reporting and evaluation processes.

Clearly, ongoing research will be necessary to further identify and refine critical habitats for key marine species. Recognising that Indigenous people have specific legal and cultural responsibility and rights to marine areas, resources to help facilitate incorporate indigenous knowledge, regarding threatened species distribution, abundance and critical habitat areas is also key to the identification and refinement of critical habitat (see recommendation 1).

Regular reporting mechanisms need to be introduced to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the critical habitat strategy for marine species. One suggested mechanism is through the Register, ensuring that it is continually kept up-to-date listing any implementation activities underway to protect a particular species’ critical habitat. It is important that any reporting mechanism is structured to permit periodic evaluation of the effectiveness of the range of tools used to protect critical habitats. This will also require dedicated staff within the Department of Environment Water Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) to monitor progress.

As new distributional information comes to light from a range of sources and for future critical habitats under climate change, these maps can be readily revised by state and federal governments and updated to ensure that conservation effort is optimal in the face of climate change.

6

7

Kelvin Thomson, MP. ‘Labour’s Plans to Protect Whales and Dolphins’ Media Release. 2004. Available online http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/library/partypol/9PYD6/upload_binary/9pyd63. pdf;fileType=application/pdf. Accessed November 14th 2009.

The Great Barrier Reef © Viewfinder

Corkeron, P.J. and H.Marsh. 2006. Population sizes, site fidelity and residence patterns of Australian Snubfin and Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins: Implications for conservation. Biological Conservation 129: 167pp.

Snubfin dolphin © Guido J. Parra


13

4

BACKGROUND

Australia’s marine domain covers some 14.6 million square kilometres and is the third largest marine jurisdiction in the world 8. Australia’s northern tropical waters are internationally recognised as a hotspot for biodiversity9. The temperate southern waters are characterised by extraordinary levels of endemism, approximately 90% of all the echinoderms and molluscs in that region found nowhere else on earth10. Six of the world’s seven marine turtles11, 45 of the 86 known species of whales, dolphins and porpoises12 and more than a quarter of the world’s sharks, skates and rays13 are all found in Australian waters. Our terrestrial biodiversity is equally impressive, shaped by 45 million years of evolution separated from the rest of the world 14, 91% of flowering plants, 85% of terrestrial mammals and 90% of reptiles and frogs are unique to Australia14. And yet, Australia’s record in protecting these species is one of the worst and we are now facing an extinction crisis15 16. The EPBC Acts lists 27 mammalian taxa that have already gone extinct in Australia17, and a further 1743 of Australia’s animal and plant species are now listed as extinct or threatened with extinction18.

In the context of the recent announcement by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) of the global extinction crisis19, this is an extremely poor record. Australia has much to do to redress the balance, particularly in the marine environment where information on key species, habitat protection and conservation is even further behind our terrestrial efforts. Currently, less than 5% of Australia’s waters protect Australia’s marine life from extractive threats including fishing and mining. The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park has a network of marine sanctuaries with 34% of the region protected, the rest of Australia’s waters have very little protection in place20. Whilst we still may know so little about just how much of an impact we are having on our marine environment, it is likely to be significant. It is absolutely vital that we do not follow in the footsteps of our terrestrial record, we learn from the mistakes of the past, and adopt a proactive approach to conserving our unique and rich marine environment for future generations.

Whale shark

© Javier Ordóñez / WWF

8

Geoscience Australia. ‘Setting Australia’s Limits’. Aus Geo News March 2009. Available online. http://www.ga.gov.au/ausgeonews/ausgeonews200903/limits.jsp. Accessed November 14th 2009.

12

Department of the Environment, Water Heritage and the Arts ‘Whales, Dolphins and Porpoises’. Available on line http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/species/ cetaceans/species.html. Accessed 5th December 2009.

17

Department of the Environment, Water Heritage and the Arts ‘EPBC Act list of Threatened Fauna’ Available online. http://www.environment.gov.au/cgibin/sprat/ public/publicthreatenedlist.pl?wanted=fauna. Accessed 22 April 2010.

9

Gerald R. Allen. 2007. Conservation hotspots of biodiversity and endemism for Indo-Pacific coral reef fishes: Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems: Vol 18 No. 5: 541-556

13

Last PR & Stevens JD. 2009. Sharks and Rays of Australia. Second Edition. CSIRO PUBLISHING, 656 pp.

18

14

10

Wilson, B.R. and Allen, G.R. 1987. Major components and distribution of marine fauna. In: Dyne, G.R. and Walton, D.W. (eds) Fauna of Australia Vol 1A: General Articles, AGPS, Canberra. Ponder, W., Hutchings, P. and Chapman, R. (2002). Overview of the Conservation of Australian Marine Invertebrates.Canberra: Environment Australia.

Steffen, W. 2009. Australia’s Biodiversity and Climate Change. CSIRO Publishing.

Department of the Environment, Water Heritage and the Arts ‘EPBC Act list of Threatened Flora’ Available online http://www.environment.gov.au/cgibin/sprat/ public/publicthreatenedlist.pl?wanted=flora

19

15

Biodiversity 2010. The Boobook declaration. Available online http://www. boobook.org.au/declaration.htm. Accessed January 2010.

IUCN. ‘Extinction crisis continues apace’ Media release November 2009. Available online. http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/species/red_ list/?4143/Extinction-crisis-continues-apace. Accessed November 14th 2009.

16

Department of the Environment, Water Heritage and the Arts. Assessment of Australia’s Terrestrial Biodiversity 2008. Available online http://www. environment.gov.au/biodiversity/publications/terrestrial-assessment/index.html. Accessed January 2010

20

Save Our Marine Life Collaboration. 2009. Protecting Western Australia’s big blue backyard. Available online: www.saveourmarinelife.org.au. Accessed January 2010.

11

Environment Australia. 2003. Recovery Plan for Marine Turtles in Australia. Marine Species Section Approvals and Wildlife Division, Environment Australia in consultation with the Marine Turtle Recovery Team.

14


5

WHAT IS CRITICAL HABITAT?

Critical habitat is defined in the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999 (hereafter ‘EPBC Act’) as ‘habitats that are critical to the survival of the species or community concerned and the actions needed to protect those habitats’ (Section 270(d) of the EPBC Act), where survival means the long term security or persistence of the species, that is, that it recovers to the point it is no longer endangered or threatened with extinction21. Critical habitat can be described as areas or spatial environments that are vital for the day to day survival of individuals of the species and help to maintain a healthy population growth rate. However, critical habitat should not simply be defined as areas of high animal density. Less densely occupied areas may be more critical to survival, depending on behaviour and population structure, and whether threats in these areas have an impact on the population22.

21

The meaning in the US ESA is similar, critical habitat is that habitat necessary for the species to recover to the point it is no longer in need of listing.

22

Proceedings of the First International Conference on Marine Mammal Protected Areas, March 30 – April 3, 2009, Maui, Hawaii, USA (In Press)

23

The US Endangered Species Act (ESA) defines critical habitat as “(i) the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species… on which are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which may require special management considerations or protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species … essential for the conservation of the species.” (ESA sect 3(5)(A)). And where “(3) The terms “conserve,” “conserving,” and “conservation” mean to use and the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to this Act are no longer necessary” (ESA sect 3(3)) that is, have recovered.

Specifically, critical habitat areas include: •

Areas where the species is currently known to breed, feed, rest and raise young;

•

Areas where the species may not presently occur which are critical if the species is to recover from its presently endangered state and to persist in the long term despite environmental change23;

•

Areas of migration, such as movement or migratory corridors which may be critical to long-term population viability 24.

Scientists will typically assess both the physical and biological habitat features needed for the life and successful reproduction of the threatened species. It is when these geographic area(s) are considered essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species that it is defined as ‘critical habitat’ and provisions for special management and protection take place25.

24

25

Protection of critical habitat is a wise use of conservation resources. Many of these species are recognised as keystone species, apex predators or indicator species and each plays an integral role in maintaining the health of the marine ecosystem, which in turn helps to support the livelihoods of millions of people. Given the mobile nature of some of these species and the vast area of Australia’s marine domain, it becomes difficult to protect all species across their entire range. Conservation efforts for species recovery risk being undermined if the species’ critical habitats are degraded or destroyed. By protecting the critical habitat of key threatened species, a much wider range of biodiversity is also protected.

Turtle tracks

© Averil Bones

Reeves, R. (2008) Critical or important habitats for cetaceans: what to protect, First International Conference on Marine Mammal Protected Areas, March 30 – April 3, 2009, Maui, Hawaii, USA (In Press); Stern JS, (2009) Migration and Movement Patterns in Perrin W, Wursig B and Thewissen JGM (eds) Encyclopaedia of Marine Mammals, Elsevier, L London US. Fish & Wildlife Service. ‘Critical Habitat. What is it?’ Available online http:// endangered.fws.gov. Accessed February 17th 2010.


15

6

IDENTIFYING AND PROTECTING CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT

Australia is home to wide range of marine species including whales, dolphins, turtles and sharks26. Identifying and defining the critical habitat of these species can be more variable than landbased critical habitat, especially in terms of feeding areas which are dependent on upwelling or other oceanographic conditions27. For example, a clear understanding of the spatial (area) and temporal (time) scale is required to effectively protect highly mobile threatened marine species28. For instance, at a scale of days and tens of kilometres blue whales aggregate at upwellings and krill swarms to feed. At scales of months and hundred to thousands of kilometres, blue whales move between coastal regions to exploit seasonal krill29. Foraging or migrating animals are reliant on ephemeral resource blooms or oceanographic conditions at specific places and within specific timeframes, tied to a predictable seasonal cycle. Their energy budgets and important behavioural activities are closely tuned to the timing and spatial abundances of these resources30. It is these large areas and large scales that are critical 31, particularly in the face of climate change. 26

Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. EPBC Act list of Threatened Marine Fauna. Available online http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/ sprat/public/publicthreatenedlist.pl?wanted=fauna. Accessed 20th October 2009.

27

Hoyt, E. (2005) Marine Protected Areas for Whales, Dolphins and Porpoises: A worldwide handbook for cetacean habitat conservation. Earthscan, London.

28

Balance, LT, (2009) Cetacean Ecology in Perrin W, Wursig B and Thewissen JGM (eds) Encyclopaedia of Marine Mammals, Elsevier, London; Acevedo-Gutierrez A, (2009) Habitat Use, in Perrin W, Wursig B and Thewissen JGM (eds) Encyclopaedia of Marine Mammals, Elsevier, London; Markowitz, Mark, Harlin, April F. and Wursig, Bernd. Habitat use by dusky dolphins in the Marlborough Sounds: Implications for aquaculture and fisheries management, (Kaikoura, New Zealand: Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Science, Marine Mammal Research Program). Marsh, H (1997), ‘Going, Going, Dugong’, Nature Australia, 51-57.

29

Gill, Peter C. (2002), ‘A Blue Whale (Balaenoptera musculus) Feeding Ground in a Southern Australian Coastal Upwelling Zone’, Journal of Cetacean Resources Management, 4 (2), 179-84; Hucke-Gaete, Rodrigo (2004), ‘Blue Whale Ecology and Conservation in Coastal Productive Areas off Chile’, (WDCS)

16


However, these variables are amenable to management measures such as dynamic protected areas or otherwise protected through temporally and spatially explicit measures32. For example, several complete or seasonal area closures are currently in place in New Zealand in order to reduce the level of interaction between Hector’s dolphins and inshore set nets. The Banks Peninsula Marine Mammal Sanctuary (1170km2) in the South Island only allows limited recreational set netting between 1 March and 31 October. Recreational set netting is otherwise prohibited, and there is no commercial set netting allowed within the Sanctuary33.

A core protection zone (Zone 1) was defined within the 200 metre isobath, to provide full ecosystem protection and a complete restriction on extractive activities. Zone 2 imposes strict protection for the canyon head and sides, feeder canyons and the continental slope. Zone 3 includes adjacent sandbanks which are prone to regular natural disturbance 34 35.

In 2004, a large deepwater canyon off the Canadian coast (The Gully) was declared a marine protected area to protect deep sea corals and a wide variety of whale species, including critical habitat for the at-risk northern bottlenose whale. A variety of spatially explicit management measures were adopted to protect these species from a wide range of increasing human disturbances (fisheries, oil and gas production, chemical and noise pollution).

Protecting these known feeding, breeding and resting areas in the above ways helps to build species resilience to the wide range of threats they face on a day-to-day basis. Marine species in general are threatened by a whole host of anthropogenic impacts including the exploitation of the ocean’s natural resources, habitat loss and degradation, noise and chemical pollution, tourism, coastal development and climate change36. Habitat loss and degradation has and continues to be one of the major factors contributing to Australia’s extinction record and severe population declines have been recorded where threats or impacts occur in marine critical habitat areas37.

30

34

Fisheries and Ocean Canada. ‘The Gully Marine Protected Area.’ May 2004. Available online http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/media/back-fiche/2004/hq-ac61a-eng. htm. Accessed February 15th 2010.

35

Hooker, S, Whitehead, H., Gowans, S. 1998. Marine Protected Area Design and Spatial and Temporal Distribution of Cetaceans in a Submarine Canyon. Conservation Biology. Pg 592-602.

36

Salm, R.V., & Clark, J.R. 2000. Marine and Coastal Protected Areas: A Guide for Planners and Managers. 3rd edn, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, 370pp . Myers, R.A. & Worm, B. 2003. Rapid worldwide depletion of predatory fish communities. Nature. 423: 280-283.

37

Williams, R, Lusseau, D and Hammond P. (2009) The role of social aggregations and protected areas in killer whale conservation: The mixed blessing of critical habitat, Biological Conservation, Volume 142, Issue 4, Pages 709-719

Stern JS, (2009) Migration and Movement Patterns in Perrin W, Wursig B and Thewissen JGM (eds) Encyclopaedia of Marine Mammals, Elsevier, London; Lusseau, D and Higham, J. E. S. (2004), ‘Managing the impacts of dolphin-based tourism through the definition of critical habitats: the case of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops spp.) in Doubtful Sound, New Zealand ‘, Tourism Management, 25 (6), 657-67.

31

Basketta, ML, Michelib, F and Levin, SA (2007), ‘Designing marine reserves for interacting species: Insights from theory ‘, Biological Conservation, 137 (2), 16379; Michael C. Jamesa, Scott A. Sherrill-Mixa, Kathleen Martin and Ransom A. Myers (2006), ‘Canadian waters provide critical foraging habitat for leatherback sea turtles’, Biological Conservation, 133 (3), 347-57.

32

Reeves, R. (2008) Critical or important habitats for cetaceans: what to protect, First International Conference on Marine Mammal Protected Areas, March 30 – April 3, 2009, Maui, Hawaii, USA (In Press)

33

Rowe, S.J. 2007. A review of methodologies for mitigating incidental catch of protected marine mammals. DOC Research & Development Series 183. Published by Science & Technical Publishing. Department of Conservation.

Hawksbill turtle © Martin Harvey


17

18


7

HOW HAS CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION AND PROTECTION WORKED IN THE PAST?

The identification and designation of critical habitat hasn’t always been straightforward. In some cases it has been hindered by the confusion and rigidity over what constitutes critical habitat and the challenges of balancing biodiversity conservation with other social values38. However, this should not be an excuse for inaction, particularly given the empirical evidence that clearly shows that species with identified critical habitats are more likely to be recovering and less likely to be declining than species that lack critical habitat designation39. In the United States 493 critical habitats have been identified for 1351 species listed under the United States Endangered Species Act. A quantified analysis of the effectiveness of the Endangered Species Act showed that species with critical habitat protected for two or more years were more than twice as likely to have an improving population trend in the late 1990s, and less than half as likely to be declining in the early 1990’s.39 Critical habitat is a broad conservation tool that has been implemented in diverse ways. In the past, it has been most successful as a regulatory power to impose specific management regimes in both the terrestrial and marine environment. For example, Suckling and Taylor (2005) have identified a number of examples in the United States where the designation of critical habitat has afforded greater protection of threatened species. In the case of the desert tortoise (Gopherous agasizii), before the designation of critical habitat, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) chose not to remove cattle from the habitat. After the designation, recovery management was required and BLM agreed to prohibit grazing. As a result, significant portions

Olive Ridley turtle © WWF-Canon / Carlos Drews

of the species recovery plan were finally implemented, but only due to the regulatory link to critical habitat. Subsequently a member of the desert tortoise recovery team stated that more had been done to protect the tortoise and its habitat in a single year than in all the years since the species was listed 40. The US Fisheries Wildlife Services biologists and the US courts have often focussed management decisions around critical habitat. For example judges have ordered the cessation of groundfish trawling in critical habitat for Stellar sea lion’s and of lobster fishing in critical habitat for the Hawaiian monk seal 40. Time/area fishery closures implemented to protect the Harbour porpoise habitat in the Gulf of Maine, Bay of Fundy region have contributed to a 77% reduction in incidental bycatch rates 41. The benefit of establishing no take reserves to help the recovery of shark species is also becoming increasingly clear. In the Northern Great Barrier Reef, grey reef sharks were 30 times more abundant in no entry zones than on fished reefs 42. Critical habitats for the eastern population of the grey nurse shark have been identified and protected in state and Commonwealth waters off the New South Wales and Queensland coasts. These key areas were identified in grey nurse recovery plan43 and since then the implementation of marine protected areas and fishing restrictions has helped protect this critically endangered species. However, in Australia, the critical habitats of very few other threatened marine species have received the same concerted effort and the critical habitat sites for the grey nurse shark are yet to be listed on the EPBC Register (see section 7).

38

CSIRO Submission 08/329 Comments on the Interim Report for the Independent Review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act)

39

Taylor, M., Suckling, L., Rachlinski, J.2005 The Effectiveness of the Endangered Species Act; A Quantitative Analysis. Bioscience. Vol 55. No.4 Pg 360367

40

Suckling, K.F. and M. Taylor. 2005. Critical habitat and recovery. in Gobel D, Scott M J, Davis FW (eds). The Endangered Species Act at Thirty: renewing the conservation commitment Vol. 1. Island Press, Washington DC. pp. 75-89.

41

Rowe, S.J. 2007. A review of methodologies for mitigating incidental catch of protected marine mammals. DOC Research & Development Series 183. Published by Science & Technical Publishing. Department of Conservation.

42

Laurence J. McCook.,Tony Ayling, Mike Cappod, J. Howard Choate, Richard D. Evans, Debora M. De Freitas, Michelle Heupel, Terry P. Hughes, Geoffrey P. Jones, Bruce Mapston, Helene Marsh, Moren, Mills Fergus J. Molloya, C. Roland Pitcherh, Robert L. Pressey b, Garry R. Russ, Stephen Sutton, Hugh Sweatmand, Renae Tobin, David R. Wachenfeld, and David H. Williamson, Adaptive management of the Great Barrier Reef: A globally significant demonstration of the benefits of networks of marine reserves. Available online www.pnas.org/cgi/ doi/10.1073/pnas.0909335107. Accessed online February 15th 2010.

43

Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. ‘Recovery Plan for the Grey Nurse Shark (Carcharias taurus) Available online http://www.environment.gov.au/ coasts/publications/grey-nurse-plan/index.html. Accessed November 23rd 2009.


19

8

CRITICAL HABITAT PROTECTION AS A CLIMATE ADAPTATION STRATEGY A recent CSIRO assessment found that the National Reserve System is a key adaptation response to climate change for threatened species: “Protecting habitat is probably the best way to conserve species under climate change”. But the study also notes that a small scattering of protected areas will not be enough: “the question of adequacy is much more challenging. In general, larger areas and more populations of species would probably be required to ensure the same viability for species as could be expected without climate change.”44

Australian sea lions © Peter Shaughnessy, SA Museum

“ Protecting habitat is probably the best way to conserve species under climate change”. – Dunlop and Brown, CSIRO 2008.

20


The identification and protection of current and future critical habitats for threatened species must become an essential part of an effective response to climate change as well as other marine threats. For example, the scientific evidence is mounting both globally and within Australian waters to show just how vulnerable marine turtles are to predicted climate change45. Increasing sand temperatures are causing a feminising of marine turtles populations, with some beaches in Malaysia shifting into a totally female producing temperature range46. In Australia, at Mon Repos Conservation Park, extraordinarily high nesting temperatures have caused the death of eggs and hatchlings46. These observations have made it imperative for scientists to be able identify and predict future turtle nesting sites, for which conservation and management could become essential.

In order to predict important future turtle nesting sites, scientists in Australia are working to better understand the driving forces behind the selection of nesting sites and to quantify the relationship between environmental variables and sea turtle distribution. Garcon et al (2009) have developed the Relative Exposure Index (REI) for five different marine turtle species within the Great Barrier Reef. The Relative Exposure Index looks at sea turtle nesting site distribution and the exposure of coastal areas to wind and wind generated-waves. The use of the REI alongside further research into the role of other climatic and/or oceanographic processes in determining sea turtle distribution will make it possible for scientists and managers to identify and protect those key nesting sites that may persist even in the face of a shifting climate47. In Australia, opportunities exist to increase habitat protection for cooler nesting beaches that support functional turtle rookeries47. A range of conservation management tools can then be used to mitigate against the impacts of climate change, such as increasing vegetation cover, using artificial shading and reducing other human threats in the area. The benefits of adopting this multifaceted approach to critical habitat protection is reflected in the recent reports that indicate loggerhead turtle nesting success at Mon Repos Conservation Park is the best it has been for 28 years 48.

“ The question of adequacy is much more challenging. In general, larger areas and more populations of species would probably be required to ensure the same viability for species as could be expected without climate change.” – Dunlop and Brown, CSIRO 2008.

Grey nurse shark © Peter Le Gras

44

Dunlop M, Brown P, 2008. Implications of climate change for Australia’s National Reserve System: A preliminary assessment. Report to the Department of Climate Change, and the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, March 2008. Department of Climate Change, Canberra.

45

Hamann, M., Limpus, C.J. and Read, M.A.(2007) Chapter 15 Vulnerability of marine reptiles in the Great Barrier Reef to climate change. In Climate Change and the Great Barrier Reef, eds. Johnson JE and Marshall PA. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority and Australian Greenhouse Office, Australia

46

Limpus, Colin. 2006. Turtles: A Case Study. In United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and Convention on Migratory Species (CMS). 2006. Migratory species and climate change. Impacts of a Changing Environment on Wild Animals. Pg 34 -39 Available online http://www.cms.int/publications/pdf/ CMS_CimateChange.pdf. Accessed March 30th 2010.

47

Garcon, J.S., Grech, A. Moloney, J., Hamann, M. 2009. Relative Exposure Index: an important factor in sea turtle nesting distribution. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems. Available online www.interscience.wiley.com.DOI : 10.1002/aqc.1057. Accessed March 30th 2010.

48

Jackson Vernon.Turtle nesting season, ‘best in 28 years’. ABC News 30th March 2010. Available online http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/03/30/2859806. htm. Accessed 12th April 2010.


21

9

INTERNATIONAL AND NATIONAL OBLIGATIONS TO PROTECT CRITICAL HABITAT

9.1 International obligations

9.2 National obligations

Australia has already made significant international commitments to conserve and restore the critical habitat of marine species, but these are yet to be implemented under domestic law.

The previous Government recognised the importance of critical habitat protection by including a Register for critical habitats as a provision in the EPBC Act in 1999.

The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS), to which Australia has been a party since 1991, sets out specific commitments49.

In 2007 the Australian Labor Party, as part of their election commitments, committed to ‘establish a national network of whale and dolphin sanctuaries’52.

Australia is also a Party to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and therefore is committed to the CBD Global Biodiversity Challenge that seeks to “achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national levels as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to the benefit of all life on Earth.”50 This target was subsequently endorsed by the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) and the United Nations General Assembly and was incorporated as a new target under the Millennium Development Goals.

In March 2008 Minister Garrett announced funding for a study to identify climate change refuges for Australia’s native plants and animals, the results of which are yet to be released53. This and many other ongoing initiatives provide key opportunities for the implementation of a long term strategy to identify and protect critical habitat.

At the First International Conference on Marine Mammal Protected Areas (April, 2009), it was clearly resolved that in order to protect whales, dolphins and porpoises globally, an urgent worldwide effort must be made to define and protect cetacean critical habitat51.

In 2009 the Australian Labor Party committed to ‘promote the conservation of key ecosystem health indicator species such as whales, dugongs, turtles and sharks both in Australian waters and across the world’s oceans,’ 54 building on a previous commitment from 200755.

10 CRITICAL HABITAT PROTECTION IN AUSTRALIA Australia’s performance with regards to protection for critical habitat under the EPBC Act is very poor. The identification of critical habitat, whilst better in the terrestrial environment is still inadequate in the marine environment. Hundreds of ‘habitats that are critical to the survival’ of many species and ecological communities have been identified by scientists in the field and in recovery plans, but only five have been listed on the EPBC Act Register of Critical Habitats (‘the Register’) and none are listed for the ecological communities. This means that most habitats critical for the survival and recovery of threatened species or ecological communities are not being afforded the highest level of protection, or any level of formal protection in cases where critical habitat occurs outside of conservation reserves56. In Australia, Indigenous people can also provide invaluable traditional knowledge regarding threatened species distribution, abundance and critical habitat areas. They also have significant legal and cultural responsibilities and rights to marine areas, and should therefore be involved in all aspects of any decisions about the protection and management of their Sea Country.

Box 2. What is the Critical Habitat Register? Section 207A of the EPBC Act requires the Minister to keep a Register of Critical Habitats but it is at the Federal Government’s discretion whether critical habitats identified through recovery plans or other processes are also listed on the register.

22


“ Why can’t we get ahead of the decline and take genuine preventative action, rather than consign ourselves to a palliative role and what in some ways is merely the efficient administration of a biodiversity hospice?” – The Hon Peter Garrett Leatherback turtle

49

Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals, 1979, Bonn, Germany - Australia is committed “to conserve and, where feasible and appropriate, restore those habitats of [Appendix I listed] species … and to the extent feasible and appropriate, to prevent, reduce or control factors that are endangering or are likely to further endanger the species” (CMS Art III.4a&c). For Appendix II listed species Australia is committed to the “conservation and, where required and feasible, restoration of the habitats of importance in maintaining a favourable conservation status, and protection of such habitats from disturbances” (CMS Art V.5e); “maintenance of a network of suitable habitats appropriately disposed in relation to the migration routes”; (CMS Art V.5f); and “… the provision of new habitats favourable to the migratory species or reintroduction of the migratory species into favourable habitats” (CMS Art V.5g)

50

Report of the Sixth Ordinary Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (UNEP/CBD/COP/6/20) (2002) The Hague, Netherlands.

51

Proceedings of the First International Conference on Marine Mammal Protected Areas, March 30 – April 3, 2009, Maui, Hawaii, USA (In Press)

52

Australian Labor Party Election 07 FACT SHEET Climate Change and Environment Federal Labor’s Commitment to Environmental Protection.

53

The Hon Peter Garrett, MP. ‘Action to Protect our Biodiversity from Climate Change. Media Release March 2008. Available online http://www. environment.gov.au/minister/garrett/2008/pubs/mr20080330.pdf. Accessed November 15th 2009.

54

Australian Labor Party National Platform, 45th National Conference of the ALP, 2009, Chapter 9 point number 96.

55

Australian Labor Party National Platform, 44th National Conference of the ALP, 2007, Chapter 9 point number 125.

56

CSIRO.2009.Comments on the Interim Report for the Independent Review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). CSIRO Submission 08/329 – Supplementary. Available online www.environment.gov.au/epbc/review/comments/pubs/049-csiro.rt. Accessed online November 23rd 2009.

57

Australian National Audit Office 2007 The Conservation and Protection of National Threatened Species and Ecological Communities. Report No.31 2006–07 On page 80 states “TSSC has commented that it has been reluctant to recommend an extensive list of critical habitat as it is very resource intensive and would not necessarily provide any greater protection for threatened species and ecological communities than the listing process itself.”

58

The Hon Peter Garrett, MP. Opening address – 10th International Congress of Ecology. Available online http://www.environment.gov.au/minister/ garrett/2009/sp20090817.html. Accessed November 23rd 2009.

© WWF / James Stevenson

Currently, albatrosses are the only marine species whose critical habitats have been listed on the Register. Whilst information on the breeding, feeding and resting habitats for most marine species is limited, it certainly is not irrelevant. Data deficiency should not be used as a rationale for delaying the listing of critical habitat. Marine biologists and ecologists continue to make significant discoveries every year. Australia has an opportunity to act now using existing knowledge and ensure the future survival of our marine species. A recent audit revealed that the Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) has resisted critical habitat listings apparently seeing little additional value for the effort 57. However, published recovery plans already identify critical habitats, undermining the TSSC claim that it is too resource intensive.

In the US and Canada, the identification of critical habitat is a mandatory part of the recovery planning of listed species and ecological communities. In Australia, habitat protection within recovery plans is still generally given too low a priority and is not meaningfully integrated across other planning processes such as marine bioregional planning. As Minister Garrett recently lamented: “Why can’t we get ahead of the decline and take genuine preventative action, rather than consign ourselves to a palliative role and what in some ways is merely the efficient administration of a biodiversity hospice?” 58 Strengthening and implementing critical habitat protection, is one of the key ways to take ‘genuine preventative action’ and it is paramount that the government recognises the tools it already does have at its disposal and proactively starts to address the extinction crisis, instead of consistently applying the band aid and responding to each crisis as it arises.


23

10.1 Recommendations of the Hawke Review 2009 The Federal Government recently commissioned an independent review into the EPBC Act 1999, the ‘Hawke Review’59. This made a number of recommendations with respect to critical habitat and those of particular relevance to this report are: Recommendation 6 (1) and (2) of the Hawke Review suggests the greater use of strategic assessments and bioregional plans, to strengthen the process for creating the plans undertaken so that they are more substantial and robust (1) and to create a ‘call in’ power for plans, policies and programs that are likely to impact Matters of National Environmental Significance (2). The greater use of strategic assessments could improve critical habitat protection measures as they are able to better account for cumulative effects of actions rather than the piecemeal consideration of impacts project by project. The Federal Government’s response should support these recommendations and extend the ‘call in’ power to critical habitat. Recommendation 8 of the Hawke Review concerns the adoption of an ‘ecosystems of national significance’ (ENS) trigger to ensure further protection for species in light of the impacts of climate change. This recommendation is very important and the Federal Government’s response should also support this approach. However, in terms of critical habitat protection, an ENS trigger only considers critical habitat where a number of threatened species occur together in the ecosystem rather than for individual species. The ENS, even if implemented would leave critical habitats unprotected for species where a less than a ‘significant’ number fell within the ecosystem.

24


11 CONCLUSION Recommendation 12 (1) of the Hawke Review states that the EPBC Act should be amended to ‘require the identification of Critical Habitat for listed threatened species at the time of listing’. This recommendation is testament to the empirical evidence that shows species listing and the designation of critical habitat is a proven and effective method of recovery action. The Federal Government’s response to the Hawke Review should support this approach. Recommendation 12 (2) of the Hawke Review recommends the discontinuation of the critical habitat Register. This recommendation runs counter to evidence described in this report that the specific designation and protection of critical habitat makes a significant additional contribution to threatened species recovery beyond species listing and recovery plans alone. It is clear that both the ENS and the Register must be utilised to ensure the long-term recovery and survival of Australia’s threatened species. Maintaining a central, co-ordinated repository of information (the Register), will not only be more efficient in terms of time and resources for governments and stakeholders but is a vital tool to ensure a comprehensive approach to critical habitat in the recovery of threatened species.

59

Hawke, Allan, 2009. The Australian Environment Act – Report of the Independent Review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/review/publications/pubs/final-report-00title.pdf . Accessed January 2010.

Opportunities exist for the Government to take immediate steps toward strengthening critical habitat protection in the marine environment. These include ensuring the recommendations identified in this document are included as part of the Federal Government’s response to the Hawke Review, ensuring critical habitat is identified and protected through the current marine bioregional planning process, developing critical habitat maps and establishing a network of whale and dolphin sanctuaries across Australia. Longer term approaches require amendments to the EPBC Act, and strengthening implementing provisions to increase critical habitat protection. Overall, a holistic approach towards critical habitat identification and protection is clearly required. This will ensure the most effective protection for threatened marine species and help restore biodiversity. In addition, it will allow for the most efficient use of existing conservation resources and provide additional benefits for the economy, such as increased revenue from tourism.

Great white shark © WWF-Canon / Jêrome Mallefet


25

12 CRITICAL HABITAT MAPS

Critical habitat maps have been developed for a selected number of key threatened marine species (see Table 1) as an indicative model of a more systematic approach to critical habitat protection. WWF and HSI have produced these maps as a first approximation of what these maps could look like, and as a readily revisable starting point for inclusion within a longer-term government strategy. Data was drawn from recovery plans and other publicly available information sources. Further research would be required from all available sources in order to further refine these maps.

Table 1: Examples of key marine species and their status Marine Fauna

Name

Species Name

Global IUCN Listing

EPBC Act Listing

Whales

Southern right whale

Eubalaena australis

Least Concern

Endangered

Blue whale

Balaenoptera musculus

Endangered

Endangered

Humpback whale

Megaptera novaeangliae

Least Concern

Vulnerable

Leatherback

Dermochelys coriacea

Critically Endangered

Endangered

Hawksbill

Eretmochelys imbricata

Critically Endangered

Vulnerable

Olive Ridley

Lepidochelys olivacea

Vulnerable

Endangered

Green

Chelonia mydas

Endangered

Vulnerable

Loggerhead

Caretta carretta

Endangered

Endangered

Flatback

Natator depressus

Data deficient

Vulnerable

Great white

Carcharodon carcharias

Vulnerable

Vulnerable

Grey nurse

Carcharias taurus

Vulnerable

Critically Endangered (Eastern population)

Whale shark

Rhincodon typus

Vulnerable

Vulnerable

Sea Lions

Australian sea lion

Neophoca cinerea

Endangered

Vulnerable

Dolphins

Snubfin dolphin

Orcaella heinsohni

Near Threatened

Migratory

Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin

Sousa chinensis

Near Threatened

Migratory

Dugong

Dugong dugon

Vulnerable

Migratory

Turtles

Sharks

Snubfin dolphin tail © WWF-Australia / Tammie Matson

Sirenia

26



27

28



29

30



31

32



33

34



35

36



37

38



39

40



41

42


13 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many thanks to Margi Prideaux and the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS) for her contribution. Many thanks to colleagues from Humane Society International and WWF-Australia who have reviewed this document, including: Nicola Beynon, Michael Kennedy, Richard Leck, Gilly Llewellyn, Michael Roache, Martin Taylor and Tanya Vernes. Many thanks also for the ongoing support of PriceWaterhouseCoopers to the WWF-Australia Tropical Seas program.

Mangrove Regrowth © WWF-Canon / Jurgen Freund


43

This report was written by:

For general enquiries:

WWF-Australia Brisbane office Level 3, 129 Margaret Street Brisbane QLD 4000 Tel: +61 7 3003 1480 Fax: +61 7 3229 4431

WWF-Australia Head office Level 13, 235 Jones St Ultimo NSW 2007 Tel: +612 9281 5515 Fax: +612 9281 1060 www.wwf.org.au

Humane Society International PO Box 439 Avalon NSW 2107 Tel: +612 9973 1728 Fax: +612 9973 1729 www.hsi.org.au

© WWF-Australia. Humane Society International. All rights reserved. © 1986 Panda symbol WWF® WWF is a registered trademark.