Freshwater ecosystems

3. International and national context

3.1 The cornerstone: good management of utilised ecosystems and protected reserves

A cornerstone of biodiversity protection (articulated by the documents discussed in this section) is the tenet that, where ecosystems are subject to significant modification by humans (through harvesting, pollution, resource extraction, or the introduction of new species, for example) it is necessary to set aside representative examples of these ecosystems to provide biodiversity “banks”, and benchmarks against which human management of the ecosystems can be measured in the long term.
The “mirror” of this tenet states that actions should also be taken in managed ecosystems to minimise impact by protecting natural values (including biodiversity) as far as practicable. Threatening processes need to be identified and managed.
Where reserves are created to protect representative ecosystems, such reserves should be ecologically viable. Consideration of the issue of viability has led to what have become known as the CAR principles, or JANIS criteria: such reserves need to be comprehensive, adequate and representative. (1997 JANIS Report²⁸ )
Ecosystems may be broadly classified as terrestrial, marine, and freshwater. At the terrestrial level, the above cornerstone was one of the foundations for the protection of terrestrial biodiversity through the Commonwealth-initiated Regional Forest Agreements (RFAs) where an attempt has been made (in programs agreed on by the Commonwealth with individual States) to establish terrestrial reserves protecting 15% of each major forest ecosystem²⁹ (measured by the extent of that ecosystem at the time of European arrival in Australia two centuries ago).
For the purposes of the RFA program, major vegetation communities are taken as delineating (or surrogates for) significant terrestrial ecosystems. The use of vegetation communities in this way has been replaced by the hierarchical use of biogeographic regions³⁰, sub-regions (or provinces) and regional ecosystems³¹. This hierarchy continues into ecosystems, floristic communities, species and genotypes³².
In the case of marine and freshwater ecosystems, definitions of significant ecosystems need to incorporate physical and geomorphological characteristics³³, within a bioregionalisation framework. The issue of definition is discussed briefly below.
Outside the RFA reserves, most States have developed Forest Strategies and/or Forest Codes of Practice with respect to forest management which attempt to incorporate measures to protect biodiversity to as far as practical within areas set aside for commercial forestry. For example, the Tasmanian Code of Forest Practice sets buffer zones around streams, and encourages the development of habitat corridors³⁴.
While it is important to note that the RFA reserve system has some significant failings, and is subject to criticism from both conservationists and foresters, it does provide a system of representative reserves which protect important examples of many forest ecosystems. At present, there is simply no equivalent system to protect freshwater ecosystems, and the marine equivalent³⁵ is developing painfully slowly.

3.2 The development of a national biodiversity strategy

Australia made a commitment to the development of systems of representative ecological reserves at least as far back as 1982, when Australian representatives at the United Nations supported the World Charter for Nature, a resolution of the General Assembly of the UN in October of that year. The reservation of representative examples of all ecosystems – terrestrial, marine and freshwater – was an important tenet of the Charter.
A decade later, the Australian Government ratified the international Convention on Biological Diversity 1992 on 18/6/93. This convention emerged from the Rio 1992 global environmental summit (the “Earth Summit”) and, among other things, laid the groundwork for the development of international and national systems of “protected areas”.
The commitments made by the Australian government in 1982 (and reinforced in 1992) to establish systems of reserves to protect representative ecosystems were expanded and re-enforced by the National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity 1996, which listed this goal amongst its key objectives (Principle 8, page 6).
Principle 8
Central to the conservation of Australia’s biological diversity is the establishment of a comprehensive, representative and adequate system of ecologically viable protected areas *, integrated with sympathetic management of all other areas, including agricultural and resource production systems.

* The use of the term “protected area” is derived from the international Convention on Biological Diversity, and applies equally to terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems³⁶.

The “reserves” aspect of this principle has been applied to Australia’s terrestrial ecosystems, principally through State conservation reserves, Regional Forest Agreements (RFAs), and funding from the National Reserve System (NRS) component of the Natural Heritage Trust program. As a result, most terrestrial forest ecosystems have a reasonable degree of protection, with many approaching the RFA’s 15% target³⁷.
Funds from the NRS program have been used to acquire some wetland areas, but this has not been done on a systematic basis targeted at the development of 'comprehensive, adequate and representative freshwater reserves. Nevertheless, the NRS Program has been successful in acquiring several major wetlands, particularly in NSW - as part of the terrestrial reserve program.
The principle is currently being applied to non-forest terrestrial ecosystems (such as grassy ecosystems) and to Australia’s marine ecosystems through the National Oceans Policy, State marine reserve programs, and Commonwealth and State programs aimed at managing threatening processes in the marine environment.
However, with respect to freshwater ecosystems, the principle has either not been systematically applied by State governments, or attempts to apply the principle have not been effective. Western Australia, Queensland, Victoria, the Northern Territory, the Australian Capital Territory, and New South Wales have all, at one time or another, made policy statements committing to the development of systems of representative freshwater reserves. So far, only Victoria has funded a program designed to put such a system in place. Unfortunately the Victorian program did not achieve its full objectives, and is in need of review.
The National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity (referred to below in shortened form as “the national biodiversity strategy”) was developed to provide a framework for Australia’s programs carried out in recognition of both international responsibilities (articulated in the Convention on Biological Diversity) and ongoing national responsibilities and programs (within the framework established by the Australian Constitution).
Other international commitments are being implemented through the listing of large, especially important areas in the World Heritage Register, and the development of areas managed as Biosphere Reserves under the UNESCO Biosphere Reserves Program. At this stage Macquarie Island is Australia’s only formal biosphere reserve, although 12 areas have been nominated for reservation.
In the marine area, these commitments find their most recent expression in: ANZECC (1998) and ANZECC (1999).
While considerable success has been achieved in protecting biodiversity at the terrestrial level, freshwater and marine ecosystem protection is lagging seriously behind. In Victoria, the Environment Conservation Council’s (ECC) figures show that at present only 0.05% of Victoria’s marine areas are currently protected. The ECC has recommended this be expanded to 6%. (ECC 1999)³⁸.