• Change text size
• Skip to content

• About us
• Contact us

Environment home

• SoE
• About SoE reporting
• SoE 2011
• SoE 2006
  • SoE 2006 report
  • SoE2006 at a glance
  • Theme commentaries
  • Integrative commentaties
  • Current or emerging issues
  • Technical reports
  • Data Reporting System
• SoE 2001
  • Report
  • Key findings
  • Fact sheets
  • Theme reports
  • Technical papers
• SoE 1996
  • SoE 1996 report
  • Key findings brochure
  • Technical papers
• Publications

SoE themes

• Atmosphere
• Biodiversity
• Coasts & oceans
• Human settlements
• Inland waters
• Land
• Natural & cultural heritage
• Australian Antarctic Territory

Physical changes to natural habitats (continued)

Response

Legislative and social responses

Structural adjustment

The terms of trade for Australia's rural industries have been in decline for a century. In an attempt to address this, and for reasons of comparative advantage, Australia has been a leading proponent for the reduction in agricultural subsidies during the 1980s and 1990s throughout the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) rounds of negotiations that led to the establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO). During this period Australia adopted a strong policy of dismantling assistance programs to rural industries. At the same time, because of concern over sustainability and biodiversity, changes have taken place in wild harvest industries such as ocean fishing and native forest logging.

During this time overall primary industry sector profitability maintained growth levels of 3-4% in export earnings (ABARE 2001). However, national averages disguise the degree of polarisation and large proportion of farmers who have had negative incomes over this period (SCARM 1998).

Our inability to develop and implement a workable policy model to cope with the declining economic conditions of components of Australia's agricultural systems within historical land administration systems contributes to landscape degradation and social disadvantage. This is particularly so in the rangelands of rural Queensland and western New South Wales where leases and land administration have not been adjusted to allow for changing economic and social drivers (John Childs pers. comm., Kerin and Hyder Consulting 2000). It is also apparent that constitutional constraints are becoming a significant barrier to addressing socioeconomic decline within a sustainable natural resource management framework.

Tenures

Tenure can affect the way in which land is managed, and hence the condition of land. Nowhere is this more evident that in the pastoral rangelands, where substantial differences exist between State and Territory leases, and the Acts surrounding their administration. There are limited term leases and regular environmental assessments relating to lease renewal in South Australia and Western Australia. However, the perpetual leases and limitations on non-pastoral activities is enshrined by law in the Western Division of New South Wales (Kerin and Hyder Consulting 2000), over 50% of the Northern Territory and through much of western Queensland.

Over the last 15 years there have been significant adjustments to land tenure in parts of the northern and western rangelands, but little change within Queensland and New South Wales. A very thorough study on changes to land tenure in the Extensive Land-use Zone has recently been completed for the National Land and Water Resources Audit (1999) (see Figure 40).

Table 20 summarises the areal extent of these changes. The non-rangeland region of Australia excluded from this analysis was 13.7 million hectares, most of which is in freehold tenure (agricultural, horticultural, urban and peri-urban lands).

Table 20: Areas of Australian rangeland tenures based on the AUSLIG 1993 tenure classification.

Tenure	Area of tenure (million ha)
	1985	1995	1999
Unassigned Crown land (previously called 'vacant')	93.80	80.75	80.42
Assigned Crown land (stock routes, commons etc)	6.07	5.87	5.82
Pastoral leases (grazing, includes grazed mining leases)	284.41	269.88	266.17
Freehold land	53.21	52.50	52.50
Aboriginal leases (grazed)	4.66	15.22	15.95
Aboriginal land titles (not in commercial grazing) A	70.82	76.55	76.58
Conservation lands (non-gazetted)	18.41	22.52	24.50
National parks (gazetted)	8.02	14.34	15.70
Forested areas (State forests, reserves, multi-purpose)	1.94	3.28	3.28
Marine coastal reserves	2.53	3.32	3.32
Water reserves	9.81	37.60	35.60
Defence lands	12.97	12.96	12.96

^A This incorporates a variety of tenures including Crown-administered Aboriginal lands, leases, trusts, councils and local government jurisdictions.

Source: NLWRA (2001c).

The data show that the total area of conservation estate (including coastal reserves and water reserves such as wetlands, but excluding small forest reserves) has more than doubled from 34.8 to 79.12 million hectares, with most of the increase occurring in the period 1985-1995. Aboriginal lands have increased less in the past 15 years than is commonly supposed. The big increase in Aboriginal land titles occurred in the period 1965-1985. Twenty per cent of Aboriginal lands are grazed commercially. In the remainder change in ownership has often changed the land use but the effects on ecosystem function has not been documented. The Northern Territory and South Australia have the largest extent of Aboriginal titles, with 40% of the Northern Territory and 16% of South Australia being in Aboriginal titles. By contrast less than 200 000 hectares are in Aboriginal titles in New South Wales.

Land clearing legislation

Figure 41 shows the total changes in woody vegetation since European settlement. It shows that the most extensive clearance has occurred primarily in the Intensive Land-use Zone, where nearly two-thirds of original forests and woodlands have been cleared in South Australia, Victoria and New South Wales. In contrast, a third or less has been cleared in the ACT, Western Australia, Tasmania and Queensland. Clearance in the Northern Territory has been small (<10%).

The southern states, occupied earlier by Europeans and subjected to rapid early exploitation and its consequences, have, until recently, imposed greater legislative controls on clearing in the past two decades than has been the case in the north, where 'development' is still synonymous with agricultural activity. Historically, Land Acts have expressed the community's values, with mining and agricultural interests overriding other values, such as biodiversity conservation, tourism and recreation. This analysis is reflected in the approach to vegetation clearing legislation in Queensland, New South Wales and the Northern Territory. The situation is, however, changing and it is likely that clearing restrictions will be in place throughout Australia in the near future.

Table 21 shows that since 1996 there have been significant reductions in land clearing in most states. This reflects an almost total ban being imposed through legislation in Western Australia and South Australia, and substantially reduced permit approvals for clearing in Victoria and New South Wales. The situation in Queensland in particular, and the Northern Territory and Tasmania to a lesser extent, is still of environmental concern and has been the subject of recent controversy.

Table 21: Changes to land clearing regulations since 1996.

1996	2000
ACT
All vegetation protected in leasehold provisions; there is no freehold land	No change. The Nature Conservation Act 1980 protects all native vegetation on unleased land. The Land (Planning & Environment) Act 1991 requires an impact assessment for all proposals involving removal or destruction
New South Wales
State Environmental Planning Policy No 46-Protection and Management of Native Vegetation (1995) to control clearing on freehold land. Some controls in Western Lands Act and Soil Conservation Acts. SEPP46 amended in 1996 to include native grassland as well as woody vegetation in designated environments and vegetation types; but no overall restriction to native vegetation clearance	SEPP46 repealed 1 January 1998 by the Native Vegetation Conservation Act 1997. Native vegetation clearance generally prohibited; clearance allowed only where the development consent process under Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 has been satisfied. These controls are supported by the draft Native Vegetation Conservation Strategy for NSW being developed by the Native Vegetation Advisory Council, along with other guidelines and regional management planning processes
Northern Territory
Destruction of vegetation on Crown land must be licensed (1992), with some controls under the Pastoral Land Act, but no controls on private land	Clearing on Pastoral Leases (48%) is controlled under the Pastoral Land Act and is subject to approval by the Pastoral Land Board. Clearing will be in accordance with clearing plans and clearing guidelines approved by the Board. Clearing on land other than Pastoral Leases can be controlled under the Planning Act and will be subject to the approval of the appropriate consent authority under the Act. Clearing can be controlled under other natural resource management legislation for specific situations viz. The Soil conservation and Land Utilisation Act, the Water Act, and the Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act
Queensland
Local guidelines for leasehold land (Lands Act 1994) restricted clearing of some vegetation types	Vegetation Management Act proclaimed September 2000. This prevents the clearing of endangered regional ecosystems on freehold land. The Land Act amended to prevent clearing of endangered and of concern (vulnerable) regional ecosystems on leasehold land. Regulatory framework implemented for clearing of remnant vegetation
South Australia
Broadacre clearing effectively ceased, limited to small highly degraded areas since the introduction of the Native Vegetation Act 1991. Consent required for any native vegetation clearing other than that specifically exempted by the Regulations to the clearance legislation. Some (limited) incentive payments to encourage protection of very high conservation value areas. Protection of native vegetation available via a number of conservation programs	No changes to the Native Vegetation Act. Native vegetation fully protected; increase in measures designed to protect native vegetation (trusts and covenants), and promote tree planting. Review of the Native Vegetation Act and regulations to clarify clearance allowed under Regulations (exemptions), strengthen the enforcement provisions of the legislation and allow for an appeals mechanism. Approx 550 000 ha of native vegetation protected under heritage agreements
Tasmania
Few control measures other than local government and some provision for private reserves	No change
Victoria
Permits required for blocks larger than 0.4 ha, no compensation, but some heritage agreements, since 1989	Restricted clearance permits. Investment incentives to purchase native vegetation for preservation, and to promote plantations. Draft State Framework for Native Vegetation Management released. Planning amendments to give effect to Framework in 2001 and beyond
Western Australia
Permits required for any area >1 ha, no compensation, conditions for approval tightened in 1995. Technically some 800 properties still had conditional purchase leases requiring clearance	Since 1995 Notices of Intention to Clear in the south-western agricultural region have been assessed by four departments jointly. Less than 250 ha/year permitted, and only where there is no land degradation or biodiversity loss. Strong encouragement to invest in plantations and other tree planting

Planning and zoning implementation

The Australian Constitution's constraint on Commonwealth environmental powers remains. However, progressive changes in land-use planning have continued through the last five years as Australia continues to develop a 'case law' role for the Commonwealth in land-use planning. The Commonwealth Government has used its export licensing, treaty, corporations and funding powers to intervene within state jurisdictions. Examples include The Regional Forest Agreements, the Council of Australian Governments' water reform package, the National Action Plan for Salinity and more recently the developing role of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cwlth). Nevertheless confrontation between primary industries and environmental values remain politically sensitive, and are the focus of political action by special interest groups.

Education and community involvement

Many government agencies have been involved in improving the knowledge and understanding by Australians of environmental issues. This often involves collaborating with volunteer organisations and community networks (Alexandra et al. 1996). Many of the participants are school-aged children or people 20-40 years old. They are characteristically hungry for accurate information, and make considerable use of advanced technologies such as geographic information systems, the World Wide Web, global positioning systems, and data loggers.

Implications of changes to natural habitats

The diversity of responses to such issues as land clearing, water quality and land use planning across all jurisdictions in Australia clearly demonstrates a progression from the adversarial approach to one that has adopted ESD principles as 'mainline' daily operational mode.

Population expansion and movement will inevitably continue to put potential pressure on land systems in the future. The strategy of adopting a total catchment management approach, and of integrating economic development with cultural, aesthetic and environmental considerations, (now accepted by most governments in Australia) attempts to minimise environmental disruption in urban expansion and rural subdivision, in the same manner that adherence to stringent guidelines is doing in the mining industry.

• Next
• Contents
• Previous