<
https://theconversation.com/why-an-intention-to-conserve-an-area-for-only-25-years-should-not-count-for-australias-target-of-protecting-30-of-land-227558>
"Protected areas have been the cornerstone of efforts to conserve nature for
more than a century. Most countries have some form of protected areas, national
parks being the best-known examples. A key element of protected areas is that
they are dedicated, through legal or other effective means, to long-term
conservation of nature.
Australia has taken an innovative and diverse approach to growing its protected
area estate. It includes Indigenous Protected Areas and privately protected
areas in the form of conservation covenants and land bought by land trusts. As
a result, the country’s protected area estate has grown from 7% in the
mid-1990s to 22% of the continent today.
Despite this progress, the Australian government has released new draft
guidelines for other forms of area-based conservation, with potentially
troubling implications. It suggests 25 years of “intention” to deliver
biodiversity outcomes is enough for that land to count for the 30% protected
area target.
Our newly published research has looked at what types of land use might qualify
in line with international guidelines. We found two problems with the proposal
to include 25-year plans for biodiversity outcomes.
First, such plans are non-binding, so protection can lapse at any time. Second,
they do not satisfy international and Australian principles of long-term
protection. Proceeding with this proposal would undermine the goal of long-term
conservation in this country."
Cheers,
*** Xanni ***
--
mailto:xanni@xanadu.net Andrew Pam
http://xanadu.com.au/ Chief Scientist, Xanadu
https://glasswings.com.au/ Partner, Glass Wings
https://sericyb.com.au/ Manager, Serious Cybernetics
