The wetlands were first drained in the mid-1920s": pic provided by Audienne Blyth |
Here is the transcript of the fully story submitted to The Weekend Australian. An edited version of the story was published today.
An internationally
significant wetland on Queensland's Sunshine Coast that was drained
after government authorities dismissed it as unimportant because the
area was created artificially was formerly a natural wetland.
Historical records
show that the Yandina Creek wetland, which was drained two weeks ago
leaving nesting protected waterbirds stranded, closely resembled the
area before it was developed for sugar cane plantations almost a
century ago.
The Weekend
Australian reported last week (see here) that the wetlands were drained by
farmers to replant cane that had not been grown on the properties
concerned for more than a decade. In that time, tidal water inundated
the low-lying area through broken floodgates on farm drains, creating
a 200ha wetland that was home to large numbers of birds including
federally protected species.
The federal and
Queensland governments, along with the local council, made no attempt
to block the drainage plans, with authorities dismissing the wetland
as being of no significance because it had been “highly modified”
by human activity.
The move sparked
debate about a key principle at the centre of environmental
decision-making in Australia: whether an environmentally significant
area deserves protection if it has been shaped by human activity.
Federal Environment
Minister Greg Hunt is under pressure to act under Commonwealth law to
order that the wetland be refilled before protected migratory
shorebirds return to Australia from their Asian breeding grounds in
the weeks ahead to spend the northern winter here.
Wildlife experts
claim the Abbott Government could be in breach of six international
agreements protecting shorebirds if it fails to act to protect the
wetland, which harboured species listed as endangered and critically
endangered.
Sunshine Coast
historian Carolyn Slade that it was clear from historic records that
the Yandina Creek wetland, before it was drained recently, resembled
closely the area as it appeared before first being drained to make
way for cane plantations in the mid-1920s.
“That entire area
in the vicinity of Yandina Creek was naturally tidal mudflats,
ti-tree swamps and other wetland,” Ms Slade said.
“Even as cane land
the area was extremely wet and muddy, with heavy machinery being
continually bogged. It is appalling that government used the excuse
of it being artificial to destroy the wetland. It wasn't artificial;
it had been returned to its natural state.”
Frances Wildolf, who
documented the history of the region in a book, An
Island Surrounded by Land, said the area was
natural wetland until a contractor, Harry Dobe, was hired to dig
drains
so cane could be
planted on newly drained farmland. The drains, two metres deep and a
metre wide, had to be dug by hand.
Australia has signed
agreements to protect migratory birds with Japan, China and South
Korea. Australia is also a signatory to the Ramsar Convention and two
other treaties requiring Canberra to act to “restore and enhance”
the habitat of migratory shorebirds. Twelve species of shorebird
numbering hundreds of birds had sought refuge in the Yandina Creek
wetland.
BirdLife Australia
spokeswoman Judith Hoyle said Mr Hunt should intervene to order that
the wetland be refilled, which can be done by the farmers opening
recently installed floodgates. If the minister considered that his
powers were insufficient, the Commonwealth should apply for a Federal
Court injunction. The farmers who drained the wetland declined to
comment.
Birgita Hansen, a
migratory shorebird expert with Federation University Australia, said
there was a sound case for refilling the wetland.
Migratory shorebirds
would begin returning to Australia this month. “I
understand that the predictions for the coming austral summer are a
return to El Nino conditions,” Dr Hansen said. “Therefore, if
action is left too late, the wetland may not refill.”
However, Mr Hunt
ruled out any move while a departmental investigation he has ordered
was under way.
“The department
has advised that no permission was sought, no application has been
received and no permission has been given in relation to the action
that was undertaken,” Mr Hunt said.
“I have written to
the Queensland Government seeking clarification on what steps and
investigations they have carried out as this is primarily a local and
state land planning matter. The advice from the department is
absolutely clear in that we are upholding all international
obligations.”
Queensland
Environment Minister Steven Miles, who had previously dismissed the
wetland as unimportant because it was artificial, visited the site
last week at the urging of local MP Peter Wellington, who holds the
balance of power in state parliament.
Reversing his
earlier position, Dr Miles said yesterday that several proposals to
protect the area would be further explored.
The Sunshine Coast
Council, which had also dismissed the wetland as unimportant,
signalled that it too was open to proposals. “If the Commonwealth
and state governments indicate they would consider partnering with
other stakeholders for the purchase of the land, the council would be
happy to be part of those negotiations,”said Councillor Steve
Robinson.
Mangroves in Yandina Creek Wetlands |
Mangroves on private land are protected under state law. The Department of Agriculture and Fisheries had previously investigated whether the recent drainage of the wetlands breached the Fisheries Act as an extensive area of mangroves had developed in the eastern portion of the wetlands. The department refused to reveal the outcome of its initial investigation, Now, following intervention by the Minister for Agricultural and Fisheries, Bill Byrne, a new investigation has been launched. We await the outcome with interest.
No comments:
Post a Comment