Bass Coast Post
  • Home
    • Recent articles
  • News
    • Point of view
    • View from the chamber
  • Writers
    • Anne Davie
    • Anne Heath Mennell
    • Bob Middleton
    • Carolyn Landon
    • Catherine Watson
    • Christine Grayden
    • Dick Wettenhall
    • Ed Thexton
    • Etsuko Yasunaga
    • Frank Coldebella
    • Gayle Marien
    • Geoff Ellis
    • Gill Heal
    • Harry Freeman
    • Ian Burns
    • Joan Woods
    • John Coldebella
    • Jordan Crugnale
    • Julie Statkus
    • Kit Sleeman
    • Laura Brearley >
      • Coastal Connections
    • Lauren Burns
    • Liane Arno
    • Linda Cuttriss
    • Linda Gordon
    • Lisa Schonberg
    • Liz Low
    • Marian Quigley
    • Mark Robertson
    • Mary Whelan
    • Meryl Brown Tobin
    • Michael Whelan
    • Mikhaela Barlow
    • Miriam Strickland
    • Natasha Williams-Novak
    • Neil Daly
    • Patsy Hunt
    • Pauline Wilkinson
    • Phil Wright
    • Sally McNiece
    • Terri Allen
    • Tim Shannon
    • Zoe Geyer
  • Features
    • Features 2022
  • Arts
  • Local history
  • Environment
  • Bass Coast Prize
  • Community
    • Diary
    • Courses
    • Groups
  • Contact us

Time to walk with nature

4/5/2021

3 Comments

 
PictureWe have to start undoing the damage we have done to the environment,
writes Neil Daly. Photo: Vanessa Wong
By Neil Daly

IN The Cyan Way, I suggested that, with the onset of climate change and the potential inundation of low-lying areas along the eastern arm of Western Port, some of these areas will probably return to their original coastal status and become carbon sinks once more.
​

Prior to the draining of the Koo Wee Rup swamp, the wetlands and coastal saltmarshes provided a means of controlling and filtering water flowing into Western Port and moderated the effect of waves and storm surges on the foreshore vegetation. This natural ecosystem balanced the competing needs of the flora and fauna of this region and Western Port’s fragile marine ecosystem.

However, once the draining took place and the eastern arm of Western Port’s coastal wetlands became farming and stock grazing areas, there have been various attempts to keep the sea at bay, including the construction of soil and concrete rubble levees and planting mangroves. But as nature continues to undermine these remedial activities, is it time to set new goals and learn to coexist with nature?

If the answer is yes, here, for example, are two government sponsored climate change initiatives that have links to the discussion and may help set a new course.

The first is the Land Restoration Fund sponsored by the Queensland government.

The LRF is designed to help restore natural environments and improve the health of coastal and wetland ecosystems and, in this case, the quality of water flowing into The Great Barrier Reef. “The LRF supports land owners and land managers, farmers, and First Nations peoples to generate new, regular income streams through carbon farming projects whilst providing valuable co-benefits such as healthier waterways, increased habitat for threatened species, and more resilient landscapes.”
​
A video on YouTube gives a summary of the project.

The second is a pilot project sponsored by the Federal government. Under the banner of the Agriculture Stewardship Package, the project known as the Agriculture Biodiversity Stewardship Carbon and Biodiversity Pilot trials “arrangements to reward farmers for improving on-farm biodiversity together with carbon projects under the Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF).”

The program will be run insix Natural Resource Management regions including North Central in Victoria.

Carbon Farmers of Australia said of these projects: “We now live in a world of ‘carbon consciousness’. This means FARMERS (of the world) have opportunities to not only MITIGATE (i.e. lessen the effects of climate change via sequestration in Vegetation and Soils and be rewarded in the Carbon Markets), but also they can now be rewarded in the ‘co-benefits’ or ‘biodiversity’ markets (i.e. other market-based instruments not directly related to the Carbon benefits BUT related to the same piece of land). BINGO! One piece of land, two markets. Potentially one piece of land and several different carbon farming projects too.”

I was heartened by the Carbon Farmers’ comments for they confirmed some of what I’d said in The Cyan Way: with the imminent loss of some farming land and the expansion of wetland environments in the Lang Lang area, this could be compensated by the uptake of regenerative farming activities and carbon sequestration opportunities.

In time then, if new goals are taken up, the Lang Lang region and other low-lying areas of the eastern arm of Western Port could once more become important ecosystems and look and work something like this: “Secret World of Saltmarshes”.
*****
Am I “trespassing on private property” with my call to consider the inundation issue? Maybe.
 
However, the fact is that under the Marine and Coastal Act 2018, “the marine and coastal environment includes all private and public land and waters between the outer limit of Victorian coastal water and five kilometres inland of the high-water mark of the sea, including:
 
(a) The land (whether or not covered by water) to a depth of 200 metres below the surface of that land.
(b) Any water covering the land referred to in paragraph (a) above from time to time.
(c) The biodiversity associated with the land and water referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b).
The definition includes bays, inlets and estuaries, and the Gippsland Lakes.”
​

With the Act in mind and looking at the two environment projects designed to redress some of the environmental problems we have created, now is the time to get in step with nature.
While it may be challenging to try and rectify our past environmental indiscretions, it may not be too difficult, for as Charles Massy says in his book Call of the Reed Warbler, “All that remains is to swallow our hubris and walk humbly before the wonder of nature’s extraordinary co-evolved systems.” 
3 Comments
Anne Heath Mennell
7/5/2021 03:13:56 pm

Thank you, Neil. Another informative, well-researched article which manages to be hopeful about these new initiatives. Very welcome in these times of doom and gloom.

I was fascinated by what you said about the Marine and Coastal Act, 2018. If what you say is true, surely this should be ammunition in the fight against the expansion of sand-mining in the Waterline area? Or is it just another example of rules, regs and legislation being full of loopholes or just ignored?

Reply
Muddy Feet
18/5/2021 02:57:40 am

Thank You.
your article ticks the boxes for brilliant people to advance their future farming dreams through innovation and lateral thinking. We have an exciting and outstanding opportunity to address the issues associated with climate change and global warming as well as reinforcing our commitment to the future sustainability of this magnificent country Australia through the preservation and restoration of our unique flora and fauna.

Seize the day, contact your local mp and ask what other Government initiatives are planned to support the Marine and Coastal environment and Australia's desire to be a world leader in environmental sustainability.

Have a great day
Muddy Feet

Reply
Julia Stockigt link
21/5/2021 12:37:43 pm

Thank you for another great article Neil.
I have heard the Koo Wee Rup wetlands compared to Kakadu National Park in size, and the biodiversity they supported.
Draining the area was considered an effective solution to the problem of accessibility, at a time when ecological systems were not understood or recognised for their intrinsic value, and the exploitation of places like Westernport Bay was equated with their management.
Westernport’s catchment was deeply impacted, and the Bay itself was degraded by industry.

A 1972 article by D.Mercer from Monash states that 360ha of mudflats and mangroves was reclaimed in the vicinity of the Lysaghts Steel Plant.
‘Lysaghts, (now BlueScope Hastings), had been granted permission to dispose of 38million cubic metres of slag from the steelworks into the bay— sufficient to cover the 10 sq kms to an average depth of 9m’ adding that the bulldozing of mangrove beds and dredging of a large turning basin to accommodate commercial shipping for the steelworks was carried out ‘without any real knowledge of the likely ecological or hydrological effects on the Bay.’
The article also includes the formation of Westernport Peninsula Protection Council, or WPPC, ‘whose aim is to secure public support to counteract socially undesirable expansion of industry in the Westernport area.’
https://docs.google.com/file/d/1rduLfly2gQGfvhz2i5pTfkw6BlEq5Ta2/edit?usp=docslist_api&filetype=msword

Unfortunately an attitude favouring unlimited port expansion in the 1960s and 70s is still promoted by the Port of Hastings Development Authority.
During the public hearing for the AGL EES last year, the PoHDA representative actually claimed that ‘there is no limit’ to the amount of commercial shipping that Westernport could support, repeating more than five times in his evidence that ‘the Port of Hastings is open for business’.

The rejection of the AGL proposal was a great outcome for Westernport, but AGL’s strategic withdrawal of their EPBC, and EPA Works Approval applications, one day before those bodies were due to release their comments means that these reports about the project and its impacts on Westernport will never see the light of day.

But Environment Minister Sussan Ley has just announced that submissions from the public are requested suggesting places for federal EPBC listing due to their significance on biodiversity and endangered species.
Westernport is already federally listed as a Matter of National Environmental Significance due to its Ramsar accreditation, but as we know this does not guarantee its protection.
There are many local groups that want to see Westernport given stronger protections. Perhaps this is a chance for Westernport to be placed beyond the reach of inappropriate industrial developments forever.

http://environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/threatened-species-strategy-2021-2031#action

* a new focus on ‘priority places’ to expand the new Strategy’s influence across our land and seascapes. The new priority places will include sites where threat mitigation and habitat protection efforts will benefit multiple threatened species and ecological communities.

* two high level objectives to improve the trajectory of priority threatened species and improve the condition of priority places by 2031
* six prioritisation principles to select priority species and places, based on risk of extinction, multiple benefits, feasibility and effectiveness, importance to people, uniqueness and representativeness

The new Strategy has introduced new elements:
* broadening the priority species to include reptiles, frogs, insects and fish, as well as including marine, freshwater and terrestrial species...

Reply



Leave a Reply.