The tiger quoll lost 82 per cent of its total referred habitat to projects deemed unlikely to have significant environmental impact. Image, Adobe via UQ.
A University of Queensland finding says that the federal environmental laws are failing to mitigate against Australia’s extinction crisis.
UQ PhD candidate Natalya Maitz led a collaborative project which analysed potential habitat loss in Queensland and New South Wales and found the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation 1999 (EPBC Act) is not protecting threatened species.
‘The system designed to classify development projects according to their environmental impact is more or less worthless,’ said Ms Maitz.
‘There’s no statistically significant difference between the amount of threatened habitat destroyed under projects deemed “significant” or “not significant” by the national biodiversity regulator.’
Significant impact
Ms Maitz says that Under the EPBC Act, individuals or organisations looking to commence projects with a potentially ‘significant impact’ on protected species must seek further federal review and approval.
Developments deemed unlikely to have a significant impact don’t require further commonwealth approval.
‘But as the law is currently applied, significant impact projects are clearing just as much species habitat as projects considered low risk.
‘If the legislation were effectively protecting threatened habitats, we would expect less environmentally sensitive habitat cleared under the projects classified as unlikely to have a big impact.’
A global deforestation hotspot
The research examined vegetation cleared for projects in areas that provided habitat for threatened species, migratory species and threatened ecological communities in Queensland and New South Wales – a global deforestation hotspot.
Co-author, Dr Martin Taylor, said that the regulator’s ‘significant’ classification appeared to have no consistent, quantitative basis in decision-making by the regulator.
‘Neither the Act itself, nor the regulator, have been able to provide clear, scientifically robust thresholds for what constitutes a significant impact, such as x hectares of habitat for species y destroyed,’ said Dr Taylor.
‘Numerous species have lost a majority of their referred habitat to projects deemed non-significant.
‘For example, the tiger quoll lost 82 per cent of its total referred habitat to projects considered unlikely to have a significant impact, while the grey-headed flying-fox lost 72 per cent.
Species well on their way to extinction
‘These species are well on their way to extinction, and the government will not achieve its zero extinctions goal unless these threats are stopped.’
Dr Taylor said the research highlights what appears to be inconsistencies in the referral decision-making process, a concern raised in the 2020 Independent Review of the EPBC Act by Graeme Samuel.
‘These findings emphasise the importance of considering cumulative impacts and the need to develop scientifically robust thresholds that are applied rigorously and consistently – factors that need to be considered when drafting the upcoming reforms in order to give Australia’s irreplaceable biodiversity a fighting chance.’
The Australian Government announced that major reforms will be made to the legislation.
The research is published in Conservation Science and Practice.
When will the animals and plants understand that they can’t continually be, “threatening our way of life”.
The habitat loss. If only we could talk & walk with the animals. Lead on, quoll.
The number one threatening process is climate change.
Environmental laws will achieve nothing if they don’t force people to cut their carbon footprint – and they won’t while people like Peter Garrett and Bob Brown are flying around lecturing people about protecting the environment
This is a concerning finding – it’s alarming to see that the federal environmental laws are not doing enough to help protect threatened species. It’s clear that something needs to be done to better enforce the EPBC Act and ensure that development projects with potentially significant impacts are given the proper consideration and review.