Northern Territory Second Reading Speeches

[Index] [Search] [Bill] [Help]

TERRITORY PARKS AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AMENDMENT BILL 2000

Mr Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.

These amendments to the Territory Parks and Wildlife Act provide: for the recognition of management of threatened species; principles for the management of wildlife and threats to it; better regulation of conservation through the sustainable use of wildlife; for the off-park conservation of habitats essential to the survival of species; improved mechanisms for involving the community in and devolving responsibility for conservation management; explicit recognition of the role Aboriginal tradition can play in conservation management; for the recognition of the possibility of native title rights and interests; and simplification of many of the existing provisions.

Central to the amendments is a system for the classification of wildlife so that it is possible to recognise and act upon the varying conservation status of our indigenous species. This will be done using the classification endorsed internationally by the world conservation union, the IUCN. However, the amendments are structured such that should this classification become antiquated, regulation can be used to quickly amend the classification according to some new international standard. I note that use of the classification will bring the Territory into line with the practice of other states and of the Commonwealth.

The classification will be used to class threatened species as critically endangered, endangered, vulnerable to extinction etc. However, a simple classing of species according to level of threat of extinction is not enough to ensure that species survive for future generations. The amendments include a set of management principles for wildlife in the Northern Territory. Adherence to these principles will ensure the maintenance of the Territory’s biological diversity into the future. The principles dictate goals for the management of species, biodiversity, habitats, vegetation and landscapes as well as dealing with the special needs of threatened species and threats posed by feral animals and prohibited entrants.

A good set of tools is needed to successfully implement the management principles for wildlife. These tools need to be sufficiently diverse to encompass the requirement for conservation at the level of landscapes, not simply in national parks and reserves. They need public support and their use needs to be publicly accountable, equitable of application and capable of delivering sound conservation management.

The set of tools in these amendments includes: management programs that are not to be implemented without public knowledge; cooperative management agreements that allow individuals or community groups to take responsibility for wildlife management using direction provided in management programs; declaration and management of habitats essential to the existence of wildlife; full recognition of Aboriginal tradition and its potential utility in wildlife management; and continuation of management agreements with landholders for conservation of private lands. These are underlain by simplified access to wildlife, simpler management of permit systems, and penalties that can be adjusted to the nature of an offence. Opportunities are provided for public input, and the rights of individuals are rightly guarded and guaranteed.

I will demonstrate how these amendments will work by making reference to three examples - firstly, conservation through the sustainable use of wildlife, secondly, recognition of the role of Aboriginal tradition in wildlife management and, thirdly, the role of the community in caring for essential habitats.

This government believes that conservation through the sustainable use of wildlife has a potentially significant role to play in ensuring the conservation of biodiversity. The Territory is the only state or territory to have produced a strategy that clearly enunciates the principles and role of sustainable use as a tool for conservation management. Sustainable use is not new. It began in pre-European times and continues to this day with both Aboriginal harvest and the government’s management programs for crocodiles, cycads and red-tailed black cockatoos. These will soon be supplemented with additional programs.

The amendments retain management programs for wildlife and establish clear guidelines as to what is required of such a project. A number of matters are required to be taken into consideration. These include the species’ conservation status, its abundance and distribution, its habitat and known responses to previous management. A management program is a public document approved by the Administrator and cannot be implemented until that approval has been given.

The future success of sustainable use is dependent on those involved being aware of, and taking responsibility for, the sound management of the resource they are using. These amendments will allow a community group or an individual – for example, waterfowl shooters, Aboriginal dugong hunters or a landholder - to enter into a cooperative management agreement to assume responsibility for implementing management programs in particular places. Clearly these agreements will need to be subject to terms, conditions and appropriate performance criteria.

Areas of habitat can be declared as essential if it is shown that these areas are critical for survival of a species at some stage of a life cycle, or in providing essential refuges. These essential habitats may also be the object of cooperative management, and have significant potential as part of management programs that must ensure sustainability.

The people who wish to become involved in sustainable use need to be treated equitably and not drowned in a mountain of bureacracy before they even start. To achieve this, the amendments simplify the existing permit system, establish clear conservation grounds for granting or not granting a permit, and people may appeal a decision made under this part of the act. A diversity of mechanisms is introduced to allow, where appropriate, for the payment of royalties to suit particular circumstances. This will further ease the barriers to participation in sustainable use.

Whether we like it or not, not all those involved in commercial use of wildlife will bother to get permits or abide with the conditions and terms of permits or cooperative arrangements. Permits only exist as a means of ensuring that activities are sustainable and property rights are appropriately acknowledged. There will always remain a need for enforcement of the law and for penalties that are just and act as deterrents. The amendments allow for penalties for non-compliance that can be minor or major as the situation demands. Maximum penalties are designed to encourage compliance, and corporate bodies will pay stiffer penalties than those facing individuals.

Enforcement must be intelligently and justly applied. The activities of conservation officers and honorary conservation officers will be subject to direction by the Director of the Parks and Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory, who will also be able to adjust the powers of those officers according to their training and needs. This has always been what happened, but now these responsibilities will be clearly stated in the act.

Commission staff will also have the capacity to do their job without masses of paperwork. At the moment only conservation officers are able to do things contrary to the act, even though other staff may be required to do so – for example, take from the wild - as part of their job. In the past this problem was solved with permits to cover the activities of all such staff. This will no longer be necessary.

Another such anomaly, which interestingly has not proved a significant problem, is that staff often need access to land to do their job, be it assessment for future parks and reserves, the management of endangered species, the monitoring of a sustainable use project or assessing feral animals. At the moment the only reason staff may enter land is to determine its suitability for reservation. This is unfortunate because it may send the wrong message to landholders when all that is to be done is the counting of populations of birds, frogs or a plant. I note that the existing provision has not been formally used in gaining access to land. Landholders in general are extremely co-operative. However, with an increasing emphasis on conservation through sustainable use, it is essential that staff have access in order to conduct monitoring, check monitoring or procedures being undertaken as part of a co-operative management arrangement and other similar activities.

Overall the amendments provide sound tools for the painless implementation of conservation through sustainable use, for the devolution of management responsibility of those doing the work and for ensuring compliance and enforcement. The amendments provide Aboriginal people with several opportunities to become involved in formal wildlife management. They are able to enter into co-operative management arrangements as above, they may enter into arrangements for the management of essential habitats and they have the opportunity to enter into arrangements to formalise their management according to Aboriginal tradition.

I have over the past few years received complaints from traditional owners that hunting and gathering is being undertaken in ways and by those who, while being Aboriginal, do not have that right according to tradition. These amendments allow groups of Aboriginals to seek formal recognition of their practices and the capacity for it to be reinforced or enforced in co-operation with the Parks and Wildlife Commission. One mechanism that is being proposed by a group of traditional owners is the issuing of permits to take wildlife according to traditional rights. These would be issued at the direction of the people themselves. No-one has ever actually recorded the outcomes of wildlife management according to Aboriginal tradition.

As with other forms of conservation through sustainable use, the outcomes would need to be monitored. Those groups that do not choose to be involved will not lose any of their traditional rights to hunt and gather. I stress that these are options not demands or directives. It is an opportunity for Aboriginal groups who may or may not wish to be involved, it is their choice.

I draw the attention of the House to clause 30 section 122(2). This clearly and unequivocally states that this act is subject to the Native Title Act of the Commonwealth. Declaration of essential habitats is critical to the long term conservation of the Territory’s biodiversity. Many species and some entire assemblages of wildlife such as patches of rainforest depend on the continued existence of one or a few often relatively small habitats. These include areas used for roosting and feeding by migrant waders during their travels between Northern Asia and Australia, areas used for breeding by sea birds, some water birds and bats, as well as patches of habitat that represent the last one or few habitats containing endangered species such as the palm, Ptychosperma bleeseri.

There is no way in which it is possible for all such habitats be included in the system of national parks. Indeed, the special conservation needs of these habitats was discussed in the recently approved NT Parks master plan. Nor is it possible for the officers of the Parks and Wildlife Commission to attend to the needs of all such habitats requiring some form of management. In the Territory, we remain fortunate in that many of these habitats are sufficiently remote and intact not to need management intervention at this stage. Essential habitats provide a significant opportunity for community groups to become involved in conservation management and for government to devolve the responsibility in a responsible way. It is already happening with groups such as those that have been involved in the management of Ptychosperma bleeseri over the years. These amendments will formalise these responsibilities through co-operative management agreements with public accountability and quality control provided through management programs and their associated monitoring.

There are two ways in which essential habitats may be declared. The first is by the Administrator on the recommendation of the minister. This is the way in which most such habitats will be declared. The Parks and Wildlife Commission will consult with landholders and other parties whose interests may be affected by a declaration of an essential habitat. The habitat must be one that is essential to the survival in that area or those areas of wildlife in general or a particular species of wildlife. Upon receiving a proposal from the director, the minister must seek submissions from the land owners or occupier, any other person who may have an interest in the land or any other interested party. The minister must consider these submissions and any other matter that comes to his/her attention and may make a recommendation to the Administrator.

The declaration must describe the land, the species of wildlife of concern, the reasons for the declaration, details of proposed management and state the land is to be used and enjoyed in a manner consistent with the objectives of the declaration. Alternatively, the minister may make such a declaration in circumstances where the minister believes that extinction will occur if the land is not protected. The declaration is made by a notice in the Gazette and the minister must immediately call for submissions as occurs with declarations undertaken by the Administrator.

Areas of essential habitat impose a restriction on the use and enjoyment of land for the purpose of section 191(b) of the Real Property Act. Landholders may receive just compensation for such restriction and this may be determined by an appropriate court. Lands held under freehold title cannot be declared as essential habitats. It is an offence to damage, remove a plant or kill an animal in an essential habitat or to take specified articles into or out of an essential habitat. Signs are to be erected designating the location of the habitats.

These three examples provide an overview of how these amendments will benefit conservation management in the Northern Territory. There are additional features. The Convention of Biological Diversity requires the provision of clear and effective means of providing access to biological resources and genetic resources. It also deals with matters associated with the conservation of sustainable use of bio-diversity or wildlife, it is more commonly known.

These amendments clearly conform to the requirements of that convention. Another example is co-operative management agreements that maybe made for the management of prohibited species. These agreements can also provide an non-coercive mechanism for the control of feral animals. There are a large number of minor amendments designed to complement the major initiatives discussed above. In total they provide for enhanced accountability, greater community participation, greater flexibility in conservation management and improved application of penalties, whilst ensuring that individual’s rights are not impinged upon.

There is one group of amendments in clause 14 concerning the by-laws. These will allow for the establishment and management of fossicking areas on parks and reserves. I commend the bill to honourable members.
Debate adjourned.

 

[Index] [Search] [Bill] [Help]