Dec 6, 2012

Massive new marine reserves, but are they phoney?

The recent creation of massive marine reserves will barely help Australia's environment because of where they've been placed. Bob Pressey, an expert in coral reefs at James Cook University, takes a deeper look.

“Australia’s precious marine environments have been permanently protected with the proclamation of the world’s biggest network of marine reserves.”

That’s how the federal government describes the recent creation of marine reserves covering 2.3 million square kilometres of ocean, a decision which made the news worldwide. But is it accurate?

Free Trial

Proudly annoying those in power since 2000.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions


Leave a comment

5 thoughts on “Massive new marine reserves, but are they phoney?

  1. Bo Gainsbourg

    Interesting analysis, so what’s the strategy for fixing it Prof? Just waiting till later or taking more time is no guarantee the political situation will be any more favourable, and its not more time that’s needed, as you point out we have the information now, its political will. What’s your answer?

  2. 81dvl

    The timing of this relatively meaningless declaration of marine reserves, was blatantly to offset the shit-storm that was developing re new mining ports inside of the reef in Qld.

    Allowing the de-classification of the reef (a ‘wonder’ of the world) is the proof of the sincerity.

    This is govt. sanctioned three-card-trick is wilfully, ecologically culpable and the “Marine Reserve” initiatives move is insultingly patronising.

    Surely everyone saw this coming!?

  3. Mark Duffett

    “scientists can only speculate on (the Montara oil spill) effects on species”

    Er, no. They can actually go and gather relevant data, analyse it, and draw conclusions as to whether there have been any. That’s generally how science works. It seems that Pressey could equally have written ‘There is no evidence of any effects on species’.

  4. JackAubrey

    I understood that this was meant to be a system representative of all major marine ecosystems (at least those that exist in Commonwealth waters). The lack of biodiversity data for these offshore areas is truly striking compared to areas like the Great Barrier Reef which has had hundred of millions of dollars of research and monitoring over the past thirty years. This system is clearly going to be inadequate on that comparison but it does appear to meet the representativeness criterion. With the current (improving and reasonably well managed) state of Australia’s offshore fisheries, I don’t really understand why the relatively low impact on commercial or recreational fisheries should be used as a measure of biodiversity conservation effectiveness. Perhaps some of the funding that goes to the reef (which we are told is doomed anyway) should be redirected to these offshore areas.

  5. AR

    MarkDuffer – is there any topic on which you do NOT ooze rabble soothing bromides? Nukes, fossil fuels,probablky a big fan of GM, insecticides & Agent Orange too…?

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details