Freshwater ecosystems



Yüklə 0,87 Mb.
səhifə22/35
tarix27.12.2018
ölçüsü0,87 Mb.
#87393
1   ...   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   ...   35

6.6 South Australia:

6.6.1 Strategies for protecting freshwater biodiversity


A Wetlands Strategy is currently being prepared by the Department of Environment and Heritage. While the strategy has not yet reached the 'discussion draft' stage, the “no net loss” concept seems likely to be included in an objective or action statement, due to the serious decline of wetlands in South Australia over the last two centuries.
The strategy may recognise intrinsic values165, although the words used are unlikely to quote directly from the national biodiversity strategy166. It also seems unlikely that the SA strategy will recommend the establishment of a system of representative wetland reserves, due to the fact that many of the State's remaining wetlands are on private land, and there is a perception that such a commitment could raise major budgetary complications for the State government.
National Parks and Wildlife SA has a policy document titled "A Comprehensive, Adequate and Representative Reserve System Strategy for South Australia" 1997. This paper was presented to the Community Forums on the NRS at Perth in 1998 and in Adelaide in 1999. While not officially published, it guides the further development of the reserve system in South Australia. Two ecosystems / habitats have been identified for priority acquisition in South Australia: grassy ecosystems and wetlands167.
South Australian government applications for NRS NHT funds have emphasised wetland habitat since 1998. At least within the IBRA framework, SA’s representative reserves program has been expanding wetland reserves, and these reserves have representative values in the wider bioregional sense. Important recent acquisitions of land with wetland values include Mount Remarkable National Park, Caroona Creek, Carpenter Rocks and Lake St Clair168.
So, while SA has no formal commitment to develop representative freshwater reserves (unlike other Australian States), and (like other States) it has no comprehensive inventory of freshwater ecosystems which would facilitate the identification and selection of such reserves, it is important to note that its terrestrial representative reserve program targets wetlands as a priority in land acquisitions.
The development of a Biodiversity Strategy has been considered, but at this stage focus is on developing Regional Biodiversity Management Plans. One regional biodiversity plan has been published, and another four are in draft form, and will appear during 2001. These plans contain statements on threatening processes, and identify actions needed to ameliorate these threats. It seems more likely that the 'representative freshwater reserve' concept will get exposure in these regional plans, by way of recommendations, rather than in the politically more sensitive State strategies.
South Australia has a wetlands inventory, and this is being developed within a limited budget. There are no plans at present to establish a comprehensive inventory of freshwater ecosystems, including both flowing and still waters. The State is however, progressing the development of a broad-scale inventory of terrestrial ecosystems, within the IBRA framework, and this may ultimately be extended to cover freshwater ecosystems.
There are no requirements at present for local government, within the State's landuse planning framework, to take biodiversity inventories into account when considering development proposals or changes to landuse zoning169. The State has no threatened species legislation.
In the extreme south-east of the State, two small freshwater sites of national significance, Ewens Ponds and Piccaninnie Ponds, have, by my observation, suffered massive reduction in the groundwater flows which feed them170. Nevertheless, the SA Government is still encouraging further exploitation of these aquifers171.

6.6.2 South Australia's water management framework


South Australia has relatively modern water legislation: the Water Resources Act 1997. The primary focus of the Act is the management of water quantities and flows, although it recognises the need to manage water quality, and seeks to protect water-dependent ecosystems and their biodiversity.
The Act establishes hierarchical tiers of responsible authorities and planning instruments. The authorities are: the Minister for Water Resources, the Water Resources Council, Catchment Water Management Boards (currently six), and Water Resources Planning Committees. The planning instruments are: the Water Resources Act, the State Water Plan, Catchment Water Management Plans, and Water Allocation Plans. In addition, local government may establish controls through the preparation of a Local Water Management Plan.
These authorities and instruments must seek to advance the objectives of the Act, which include the protection of water dependent ecosystems and their biodiversity (WRA s.6(a)ii).
A commitment to establish a system of representative freshwater reserves, in my view, is essential to protect water-dependent ecosystems and their biodiversity. However, the current State Water Plan, recently revised172, does not contain this commitment, nor does it refer to Principle 8 in its brief discussion of the national biodiversity strategy.
The scope of the Water Resources Act covers both surface and groundwaters. Common law rights to water are removed, and replaced by wide riparian and landholder rights, which in turn can be constrained by the provisions of the planning instruments.
Section 17 of the Act places a duty on landholders whose land includes a watercourse or lake to take reasonable measures to prevent damage "to the ecosystems that depend on the watercourse or lake". Perhaps by oversight, this section does not place a similar duty on landholders to protect aquifer-dependent ecosystems.
Section 92 of the Act specifies the scope of a Water Management Plan. The Plan must include information on the health of the ecosystems that depend on water, and must assess the need for water of those ecosystems.
Catchment Water Management Boards have commissioned reports by consultants to fulfil these requirements. Surprisingly, the most recent report by the Onkaparinga Catchment Water Management Board excludes consideration of the water needs of fish, aquatic invertebrates, and aquatic flora, while considering the needs of terrestrial flora, birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles and some macro-invertebrates173. This, in my mind, raises some questions about the way the Act is being implemented.
It is also noteworthy that, in spite of the clear commitments in the Act to the protection of water-dependent ecosystems, the five goals of the Onkaparinga Board do not mention the protection of "ecosystems" or "biodiversity", referring only to the need for rehabilitation and management of watercourses.
On the matter of harvesting surface water flows outside watercourses, the SA Act provides for the minister to declare an area a "surface water prescribed area" where harvesting of surface flows requires a licence.


Yüklə 0,87 Mb.

Dostları ilə paylaş:
1   ...   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   ...   35




Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©muhaz.org 2024
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

gir | qeydiyyatdan keç
    Ana səhifə


yükləyin