EXPERT REACTION: New Threatened Species Action Plan aims for zero extinctions

This plan is a welcome opportunity to reset our approach to biodiversity conservation, providing the basis to move beyond ‘biodiversity as a battleground’ to more cooperative and inclusive conservation models. The plan justifiably focuses on key threats to threatened species: climate change, feral animals and invasive, exotic plants and diseases and key priority areas. Achieving the plan’s targets will depend on strong partnerships - with Indigenous peoples, local communities, state agencies, forest managers, farmers, mining companies and other industries. The right policies can support integrated conservation with productive uses and encourage private landowners to view threatened species as assets not liabilities.

The plan needs to be accompanied by a strong, long-term commitment to support active management of protected areas. There is no point in expanding these areas if we don’t manage key threats and provide suitable habitats within them. Indigenous leadership and technology can be integrated with western science to develop innovative, adaptive approaches that integrate multiple uses across these areas.

The Threatened Species Action Plan neglects mature tall forests. The Action Plan is passive management for the selected species and habitats. An active conservation mandate with climate change and industrial-scale impact is necessary.

For large owls and gliders dependent on mature tall forests, this plan does not address critical factors driving their extinction. The large owls and gliders will be gone forever if their habitat continues to be logged. 

The Threatened Species Action Plan is futile if forest conservation does not override all other forest use. Securing the immediate future for mature tall forest dependent species requires the EPBC Act mandated as primary above all other land management regulations.

The federal government's threatened species action plan 2022-2032 does include some important targets. Monitoring of threatened species trends has been inadequate in Australia, so finding and publishing monitoring methods that work best for each species is a welcome aim.

Increasing indigenous involvement in threatened species recovery actions is also really crucial and overdue. However, like the previous version, the new threatened species action plan focuses on a small minority of threatened species. Aim one 'The risk of extinction is reduced for all priority species' seems at odds with aim three 'New extinctions of plants and animals are prevented'.

Despite the limited scope and the title suggesting that species-level extinctions are the concern, some of the priority animals are also subspecies (at-risk populations of species that are not threatened).

Australia can afford to prevent extinction of all of our threatened species. The cost has been assessed at about a 5%  of the amount that we spend per year on pet dog and cat care, and we know how to prevent extinction in most cases- there is no need to limit ourselves to focus on 110 of the ~1900 threatened species in our jurisdiction.

The plan does not appear to be tackling the problem of inadequate funding. Australia spends much less on threatened species recovery than other wealthy countries do, and it shows in our failure to de-list any threatened species or to prevent recent extinctions. Conservation actions must be costed and funded adequately or we will not succeed in the critical action plan aim of 'new extinctions of plants and animals are prevented'.  

We welcome any additional funding for the protection of biodiversity and threatened species, and so the Threatened Species Action Plan is a great addition to existing programmes. Nonetheless, the protection of biodiversity has been underfunded in Australia for many years and we are part of the global biodiversity crisis. We need to realign away from just preventing extinctions to the widespread support and expansion of important habitat to enable the growth of threatened populations, and integrating new technologies to help survey large areas to improve management.

The Federal Government’s announcement of the ‘Threatened Species Action Plan: Towards Zero Extinctions’ is a welcome move in the direction that many Australians have been passionately hoping for.  The substantial targets are accompanied by encouraging statements of intent.

The success of the Plan will depend critically on sufficient resourcing to achieve targets that improve the outcomes for threatened species, rather than merely conducting actions.  So it is positive to see indicators of success such as ‘All priority species are on track for improved trajectory’ rather than ‘1000 km of fencing installed’. 

The level of resourcing is currently not apparent, but an initial solid investment of $224.5 million on the Saving Native Species program is indicated. More resources may be forthcoming - for perspective, Australians spend about five times as much annually on dog-grooming products.

The plan encompasses a number of critically important elements including commitment to inclusion of First Nations' perspectives and involvement.  It is also good to see some mention of the importance of genetic management of wildlife: this critical and cost-effective aspect of supporting health, resilience and adaptability of populations is overlooked in many plans and jurisdictions.  An outstanding exception to that is the Victorian’s Government’s visionary Genetic Risk Index.

While it is wonderful to see a plan to help threatened species, prevention is better than cure.  Australia permits and even subsidizes activities that directly create threatened species and further harm ones that are already threatened.  For example, the Plan lists Swift Parrot and Leadbeater’s Possum: both are profoundly negatively impacted by State-owned old-growth logging in their last remaining habitat.

Action to expand Australia’s protected area network is much needed for conserving our imperilled biodiversity. This report identifies expanding protected areas on land as a priority, and states that Australia’s marine protected area network is already sufficient. This is not true.

Australia has not met the 30% target for marine protected areas under any accepted definition, except for that of the previous government. Much of Australia’s marine parks area allows fishing, which significantly reduces their conservation value. For example, if we only consider no-fishing zones, then just 9% of commonwealth waters are protected. I applaud increased action on Australia’s threatened species and increasing protected areas. This action plan should be extended to marine waters as well.

It is very encouraging to see increased ambition, greater recognition and involvement of First Nations Peoples in managing and recovering threatened species and ecological communities, and a goal of zero extinctions, as part of the updated threatened species action plan. However, the plan as it stands falls well short of what’s needed to arrest and turn around Australia’s devastating and shameful conservation record and biodiversity decline and extinction crisis. This is deeply frustrating given our dependence on the environment, which powers our economy, and provides enormous social and cultural benefits. It is also a failure of stewardship. Frequent, detailed, and evidence-based calls from the ecological and conservation community for substantial changes from governments, state, territory and federal, simply aren’t being acted upon at the speed and extent required.

Preventing further biodiversity decline and extinction won’t be achieved by continuing with piecemeal funding allocations, environmental laws that are weak and often not enforced, and nor by continuing to support and approve destroying the homes of threatened species. If we want to genuinely turn things around, all levels of government will need to work together to prevent and correct the causes of environmental decline and species extinctions, which include extensive land clearing, invasive species, pollution, cessation of Indigenous cultural practices and environmental management, and an ongoing reliance on fossil fuels that drives climate change.

Australia’s remarkable, unique, and extraordinarily diverse species and ecosystems are betrayed when just 110 species and 20 places are named as priorities, and roughly $225 million is committed to their care as part of this plan. This is just a tiny fraction of what’s required to see widespread, substantial conservation improvement. It also perpetuates a misleading and false narrative that our governments don’t have enough resources to invest in the conservation of all species, ecosystems, and ecological communities. Yet, governments seemingly always have enough money for fossil fuel subsidies and tax cuts for the rich. This isn’t a budget issue, but rather a problem and contest of priorities and what governments value and choose to invest in most.

It’s great this government is taking its international obligations more seriously than the previous one. But Australians must understand that securing 30% of land and sea will not secure species unless there is far greater investment in the actual management of these places and that this won’t achieve much at all if land clearing, logging and inappropriate fishing continue unabated. 
 
It is also concerning that only 110 species are prioritised. There are over 1700 species on the Federal Endangered List, and the vast majority receive no attention. Species like the buff-breasted button-quail, a species that has not been seen by scientists for over a hundred years, don’t make the list and receive no funding. Unless all listed species get funding and attention, there will be extinctions and we will continue to sleepwalk deeper into the extinction crisis

The commitments announced by the Federal Government today for a Threatened Species Action Plan and to protect 30% of Australia’s land mass are very welcome initiatives. Australia is a world leader in extinctions and much needs to be done to reverse the trend.

The success of these commitments and plans will depend on:

• Additional funding being provided to deliver on the plan. We have estimated that approximately $2 billion per year is required to turn things around for our threatened species. To put this figure in context as a nation we spend upward of $30 billion per year on our pets.
• The willingness to use the plan to drive whole-of-government change. As an example, there is no point in giving money for koala conservation from one hand while approving koala habitat clearance for housing development on the other.
• Tightening of regulatory approaches to prevent land clearing. The State of the Environment Report revealed that 17 million hectares of threatened species habitat have been cleared in Australia since the last report – that’s the size of Tasmania

The new Threatened Species Action Plan is a big step forward for the Commonwealth. While it continues the tradition of focussing on particular species, it cuts across a wide range of species types beyond the most charismatic (insects, plants, amphibians, etc.). I am pleased to see that various high-diversity areas are also targeted, and the focus on Indigenous sovereignty and custodianship. I do, however, have a few concerns.

While careful thought has been given to priority areas, blanket statements of protection targets like 30% of Australia’s land mass can instil a false sense of security because today’s coverage of 22% belies the fact that most of that land area has low biodiversity value. I was also concerned that not enough attention is focused on private landholdings and the ineffectual anti-clearing legislation at most State levels.

Without massive buy-in from the States, better anti-clearing legislation with adequate enforcement, and financial disincentives for non-compliance, no amount of national legislation will stop the continuing loss of our land-based forest ecosystems where most of Australia’s terrestrial biodiversity is found.

It is encouraging to see that the Federal Government is making a commitment to prevent further extinctions. Unfortunately, the approach is more of a band-aid one dictated by the speed of native populations’ decline than a greater strategic one. Tackling individual species is effective in the short term, but species exist in ecosystems in which they are parts of myriads of interactions. The protection of entire ecosystems is key to protecting our biodiversity, ecosystem functions, and, therefore, our own future.

 The principal cause of extinction in Australia is habitat clearance, and while habitat clearance continues to occur, native populations are going to decline.  Weeds and other invasive species are also key issues, and it is good that the Plan is highlighting particular species, but I would like to see a more encompassing approach. The populations of species considered common are declining, some to alarming levels in particular areas. The lag time to extinction maybe decades. Many of our common species are taking a path to extinction now, and no one is looking. We must consider human population growth, which is a difficult issue that has been put in the too-hard basket by politicians.
 
The Minister has a tough job ahead, and it will take a significant effort from all levels of government, increased environmental education in schools, and the respect and promotion of scientific knowledge to reverse the grim trajectory of our planet.

The Threatened Species Action Plan is a welcome addition to the Labour Government’s recent actions in environmental conservation. The action plan seeks to address most of the drivers of extinction, by increasing conservation areas by 50 million hectares, improving Indigenous partnerships, and reducing the impact of non-native species. Federal environmental law has lacked objectives and science-based indicators and targets, and species recovery plans have traditionally been underfunded and underutilised.

However, in order to be effective, the goals of this plan need to be included in law, such as relevant State planning laws. Development decisions are currently made without this level of conservation scrutiny. For example, development can still happen if the effects of habitat clearing are ‘offset’, which means saving or rehabilitating another area of land outside of the development zone. In Australia, this offsets scheme has been very problematic and there is little evidence to suggest that offset zones are appropriate habitats for the threatened species at risk from the development in the first place. Additionally, the effects of resource extraction are a major driver of extinction in Australia. Without a moratorium or ban on new mines and mine expansions, this plan may have little practical effect.

 

Botanists across Australia will welcome this strong commitment by the Commonwealth Government to prevent new extinctions, and to the further protection and conservation of our threatened flora and fauna. I am greatly encouraged too by the recognition of education and community participation in these efforts. At Royal Botanic Gardens Victoria – as in all botanic gardens – we lead on-ground action to save particular plants, fungi and algae, but also have a critical role in changing behaviours and encouraging community action to address the key threats of climate change and loss of biodiversity.

It’s great to see the federal government committing to no additional species extinctions and reversing the decline of 110 priority species, but the plan does not outline how we will recover the other 1,743 species currently threatened with extinction. The government needs to make sure we have dedicated funding to develop and implement recovery plans for all threatened species. These recovery plans need to be short, time-bound, and costed. We need to reform and enforce the EPBC Act to stop further destruction.

While it is great to see the Australian Government initiating efforts to stem Australia’s extinction crisis, this will not counter a decade of undermining the conservation and environmental sectors at federal and state levels. For example, environmental departments and the CSIRO do not have sufficient staff and funding to monitor and investigate the many threats to Australia’s biodiversity, nor to research and implement solutions.

Therefore, we need a shift in priorities of attitudes and funding at federal and state levels to achieve zero extinction, especially with the increasingly severe impacts of climate change. Otherwise, the Threatened Species Action Plan will be nothing more than a document with good intentions.

Australia has around 1850 species listed under our threatened species legislation as at risk of extinction.  This government has set out a plan to act on just 6% of them.  It does not go far enough. The promise of $224M over an unspecified time horizon represents around 10% of what is needed each year to keep our 1850 threatened species from extinction. Australia is a wealthy country. Last year we spent 30.7 billion dollars on our cats and dogs. We can afford the 2 billion dollars a year needed to prevent any further extinctions of Australia’s unique threatened plants and animals

The Plan has picked up some of the recommendations we’ve been advocating, including a clear objective to prevent future extinctions, and aligning the plan with emerging commitments under the Global Biodiversity Framework.

However, it is still limited to a few priority species and places, and the need for significantly increased funding is not acknowledged. We need to keep up our efforts to ensure strong nature laws and broader landscape policy reform.
 
There are opportunities to ensure best practice conservation programs, which include measuring trajectory change, are established for the 22 priority birds. And priority places include a few areas we are focussed on as well, for example, Bruny, Kangaroo, Christmas and Norfolk Islands, the Mallee Birds ecological community, and remnants of wheat belt woodlands in WA.

Dendronephthya australis, an endangered soft coral primarily found in the central coast region of New South Wales (NSW), Australia, is in rapid decline. The largest known aggregations are located within the Port Stephens estuary, where mapping has shown that the aerial extent decreased by over 95% since 2011.

Without intervention to help this soft coral recover, at the current rate of decline, there is a high likelihood that the species could become extinct within the Port Stephens estuary in the next few years. Methods have been developed for aquaria-rearing of soft coral nubbins and the transplantation back into the wild.

In 2022, whilst working with D. australis nubbins in aquaria, a major breakthrough occurred with the first observations of sexual reproduction for this species. We now have some understanding of the life cycle of this unique and ecologically important temperate soft coral, including spawning; larval development; settlement; and metamorphosis.

These findings may just be the breakthrough this species needed, as it opens a world of new possibilities for future restoration work. This soft coral has been listed as a priority species within the Threatened Species Action Plan 2022-2032, providing vital focus and support for ongoing work to prevent its extinction.

Greater protection for all species is important to protect the health of our communities. Biodiversity protects health through:

1. Protecting our waterways from pollution and reducing the risk of flooding and landslides
2. Reducing the risk of emerging infectious diseases by reducing the chances of source species moving into urban areas where the risk of transmission to humans (either directly or via an intermediate species) is lower.
3. Protecting our food sources (agriculture) from pest species.
4. Improving our mental health by protecting spaces where people can interact with nature.