It’s a minute hard to regain your head around what Australia did final November. I live in a country,the United Kingdom, that covers 250000 km² – not a enormous country for sure, and but not tiny. Australia declared original marine protected areas that cover almost ten times that area – some 2.3 million km².
Well,as you might imagine, there have been some pretty colossal celebrations about this, and certainly among conservationists,but also among a public that widely supported the declaration.
I’m delighted that Australia has upped the ante for marine conservation everywhere in this way. This sort of move should excite and inspire, in much the same way that Australia’s Great Barrier Reef has already done.
They have shown us that large-scale conservation can be done, or can be done with full participation and broad support,and that it can be income-generating – helpful for people as well as nature.
But not everyone’s happy. Some – including Bob Pressey, a highly regarded conservation scientist in Australia – has called these original sites “residual protected areas.”He suggests that these sites are not in the best places either for averting threats or protecting diversity. He also says that they dont really have teeth, and it’s exact that,on declaration, the original parks required no instant changes “in the water” – that ongoing activities such as fishing, and even mineral extraction can carry on.
That’s worrying of course,and might lead to a sense that they aren’t going to do as much helpful as might be hoped. But it’s an critical first step.
Source: nature.org