BULLTALE CREEK TRUST
Deniliquin NSW
_______________________________________________________________________
SUBMISSION : NATIONAL WILDLIFE CORRIDOR PLAN
The Bullatale Creek Water Trust represents the interests of landholders living west of
Tocumwal through to Deniliquin.
This submission is made after the formal closing date of the 20th April, but it is
understood that following a recent National Wildlife Corridor Advisory Group
consultation meeting in Deniliquin, that an extension of time has been granted.
The draft National Wildlife Corridor Plan sets a framework for conservation outcomes
across public and private land.
As such the long term intent and outcomes of the plan have significant implications for
those living in rural areas of regional Australia.
The Bullatale Trust does not support the proposed National Wildlife Corridor Plan as
proposed by the Advisory Committee. The proposed corridor is being implemented
without genuine community consultation.
The Trust rejects the inclusion of the Edward Wakool River system in the proposed
wildlife corridor on the basis that the Advisory committee has not provided sufficient
information, nor undertaken a genuine approach, to community consultation.
The Trust encourages the committee to revisit its approach to achieving the objectives of
the National Plan. A focus on the concept of community engagement and partnerships as
a founding principle for a plan development will be a far more engaging process to
develop voluntary initiatives to achieve wildlife corridor objects.
Community Consultation
There appears to have been limited rural consultation in regards to the national plan and
in particular, virtually none in relation to the inclusion of the Edward Wakool River
system.
The Trust understands that only one short consultation meeting was held in Deniliquin at
short notice, just prior to the submission closing date.
Feedback from the consultation meeting, indicated that a number of attendees had not
been in receipt of the plan prior to attending the meeting. Therefore attendees were
limited in their ability to be read or be aware of the full range of implications of the
proposed corridor zone.
The Trust was not invited to attend the National Wildlife Advisory Committees
consultation meeting held recently in Deniliquin. As a representative of landholders in the
1
Edward Wakool proposed corridor zone, we do not understand why the committee
consultation process was so limited in nature.
The Bullatale Creek Trust when aware a meeting was to be held in Deniliquin, was not
permitted to attend. We do not find this a satisfactory consultation process for such an
important issue.
The Deniliquin meeting was the first and only opportunity for some limited local
stakeholder groups to be aware of the proposed corridor zone on the Edward Wakool
River system.
We find such consultation methods at odds with the notion of voluntary partnerships as
promoted by the committee
The Deniliquin meeting was held at the end of the consultation process, just prior to the
closing of submissions. This has not enabled any meaningful consultation to be done.
Environmental Initiatives
A large number of Landholders along the Bullatale Creek have directly engaged in
voluntary conservation or other environmental initiatives. Such initiatives have involved
fencing of the creeks and including such things as coordinated fox baiting programs.
The Trust believes that landholders are willing to participate in a range of initiatives but
in the context that community engagement and partnerships occur in initial planning.
The Bullatale Creek experienced severe drought conditions during the Millenium drought
resulting in large numbers of Murray Cod deaths. The Trusts understands the mutual
environmental, social and economic benefits that the Bullatale Creek provides and is keen
to continue work, to ensure the creek remains in excellent health.
In this respect, monitoring the health of the creek has continued with the NSW State
Government and more recently fish monitoring partnerships has commenced with the
Murray Catchment Management Authority.
The Trust values these types of partnerships and is working towards expanding
opportunities to develop further understand of fish movements in the system.
The Trust is concerned that method proposed by the Advisory Committee to implement
an Act may detrimental to the voluntary programs, that are now occurring. We encourage
the Committee to consider the full implications of the Act. As an example of a negative
process that had adverse community reaction, in approximately 2002, the region was
subject zoning implications under early NSW Government Vegetation Plans.
The arbitrary use of 10 kms zoning circles around Superb Parrot nests located in adjacent
forests, then negatively impacted a parallel voluntary program, that was being developed
in conjunction with the NSW Government and an agricultural industry. Consequently
community rejection of the Superb Parrot environmental overlays adversely implicated
the voluntary program which then failed to proceed.
2
The Trust provide this example, to encourage greater recognition of historical actions that
have been detrimental to achieving voluntary programs.
We believe that the National Wildlife Corridor Advisory Committee will be making
recommendations that will be detrimental to building voluntary partnerships for
biodiversity or conservation outcomes.
National Wildlife Corridors Act
The Bullatale Creek Trust does not support the concept of a Wildlife Corridors Act as
currently proposed due to its potential future implications on private land and negative
social reactions, that are likely to result.
Further the Trust considers it important that extensive consultation should have
accompanied the committee deliberations, prior to the committing making
recommendations to Minister Burke to develop a Wildlife Corridor Act.
The National Wildlife Corridors Plan website contains two CSIRO papers that
accompany the Draft Plan.
These papers refer to issues that could have long term implications for private
landholders.
In particular, how the proposed corridors and the Act will influence Government
environmental planning or zone overlays and how these then relate to State and Local
Government Plans. The suggested expansion of the EPBC Act listing, also present
implications that have not been fully explained in the draft plan.
RECOMMENDATION:

The Committee reviews and implements a new approach to community
consultation

The Committee is transparent about the full implications of a Wildlife
Corridors Act

The Committee carefully considers any adverse human reactions that may
now arise to existing voluntary programs and relationships, should the
Advisory Committee proceed with its recommendations

The Committee does not proceed with its recommendations for a Wildlife
Corridors Act, instead focuses on working with communities under the
concept of ‘local inclusion in NRM policy planning and engagement.
Andrew Burge
Chairman
Bullatale Creek Water Trust
3
4