TThhee NNaattuurree CCooaasstt M
Maarriinnee GGrroouupp IInncc
((NNCCM
G
)
MG)
The Department of Premier and Cabinet
Sydney NSW
yoursayonmarineparks@dpc.nsw.gov.au
25 June 2012
SCIENTIFIC AUDIT OF MARINE PARKS IN NEW SOUTH WALES
Our members welcomed the government’s appointment of a well-qualified and diverse group of
experts to do a scientific audit of marine parks. The Audit was thorough and made good
recommendations. We are therefore disappointed that, rather than moving decisively to implement
the Audit’s recommendations, the government has called for yet more comment. Given that
everyone who wishes to have a say must by now already have done so, and that the debate has now
been going on for years, the only result will be further delay, divisiveness and uncertainty. We are
concerned that marine parks will continue to be a political football. Having called for decision-making
to be based on good science, surely it is time for the government to act on the recommendations of
its own scientific Audit Panel
The two principal recommendations of the Audit are sensible. They should result in better
management of the whole NSW land-sea interface and marine ecosystems, reduce risks such as
pollution and ensure research is improved and well-targeted.
We are generally supportive of the Audit’s other recommendations. We agree that there are multiple
threats to the coastal environment and there must be an emphasis on the protection of biodiversity.
We strongly support the recommendation that
...the current system of marine parks be maintained and mechanisms be found for enhancing the
protection of biodiversity in the identified gaps, namely within the Hawkesbury and Twofold Shelf
marine bioregions.
We agree that the establishment of marine parks is itself crucial to the implementation of the kind of
effective research programs that will promote the protection of biodiversity. We also agree that any
changes in the direction of a return to greater biodiversity are likely to be long term and so a steady
and consistent approach is required.
The Nature Coast Marine Group agrees with the Panel that the contentious debate focused on
fishing and no-take zones is a “diversion” and that
science in the Marine Estate would be better served if the debate was a scientific one....
the debate should be whether and to what degree no-take zones improve the conservation of
biodiversity and provide marine ecosystems that are better buffered to withstand the threats they
face from multiple sources. ...
no-take zones are important in the context of biodiversity conservation where the aim is to preserve
habitats free from extractive human impacts. In addition they provide reference sites that contribute
to better science. (p 44)
T
Thhee N
Naattuurree CCooaasstt M
Maarriinnee G
Grroouupp IInncc
The Secretary, PO Box 1010, Moruya NSW 2537
Website www.ncmg.org.au
Email info@ncmg.org.au
We also agree with the Audit Panel’s arguments (pp28-29) against shifting the boundaries of zones.
CONCLUSION
It is widely understood that there are multiple threats to the health of New South Wales’ coastal
waters, including coastal development and its associated habitat loss and pollution, climate change
and overfishing. Protection of marine biodiversity is central to the health of the oceans and a robust
system of marine parks is a crucial component of this. It is important that the unproductive debates
of the past few years be put behind us so that everyone can move forward with certainty and with
greater community harmony. The Report of the Independent Scientific Audit of Marine Parks in New
South Wales provides an opportunity for the government to take decisive action in support of the
marine environment. We urge the government to move ahead and implement the Audit’s
recommendations.
Yours sincerely
Nick Blackman
Secretary
Emailed Friday 22 June 2012
T
Thhee N
Naattuurree CCooaasstt M
Maarriinnee G
Grroouupp IInncc
The Secretary, PO Box 1010, Moruya NSW 2537
Website www.ncmg.org.au
Email info@ncmg.org.au