Coastal Wetlands: A Legal Perspective
What comes to mind when one encounters areas of salt marsh or mangrove? For much of Australian settlement history they were seen as dump lands, habitats for mosquitoes, smelly and muddy or “crap” places; yet they had some value. Mangroves provided resources for timber, as input in soap manufacture and for biota like crabs and oysters. During the middle of the 20th century, science started to reveal secrets of these tidal ecosystems in different parts of the world, and I have enjoyed being a participant in research studies of some of these systems. Today a new perspective has emerged with the realisation that wetlands in coastal regions are contributing to the debates around the store of carbon: “blue carbon”. And from this perspective research on the carbon cycle and the management of these wetland systems as carbon sinks under conditions of climate change and sea level rise has grown astronomically.
It has been a particular privilege to witness the journey of some internationally established wetland scientists in Australia. In particular I wish to pay tribute to the work of Colin Woodroffe, Neil Saintilan and Kerrylee Rogers. They have spent years researching how tidal wetlands respond to sea level rise. With their other colleagues and students they continue to demonstrate how salt marshes and mangroves are crucial for carbon sequestration. But in this blog I wish to take another perspective albeit in a limited way, namely the management of coastal wetlands under law.
Legal protection has long been seen as a way to ensure the continued viability of wetlands. The most prominent of efforts that recognises wetland importance at a global scale is the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitats, known as the Ramsar Convention, 1975. This has been ratified by 172 countries including Australia. One outcome has been the listing of wetlands of international importance. Another is the establishment of agreements with other countries with which we share flyways: Japan, China, Republic of Korea. There is a Ramsar Secretariat that reports on changes in conditions of natural wetlands. Sadly there has been a global decline over the last 50 years of at least 35% of natural wetlands and an increasing extinction risk of wetland-dependent species.
I have recently been alerted to issues of wetland protection in reading a stimulating paper by two legal geographers from the School of Geosciences at Sydney University (A. McDonald and J. Gillespie, 2024. “Beyond the selective regulation of wetlands: towards a rights of wetlands”. Australian Geographer, 55, 329-344). They challenge the conventional ways of current wetland regulation and protection through emphasising the importance of managing all essential elements of wetland ecosystems. They argue for “a ‘rights of wetlands’ involving a more holistic approach to regulate the management of these key ecosystems”. This perspective derives ideas from “rights of nature” (RoN) concept in seeing a need to “re-conceive environmental protection laws and actions to give voice to wetlands as ecosystems, rather than as habitat spaces for individual species”. Such a view can be found in the call to think about rivers as “living beings”. The current situation at the Towra Point Nature Reserve (TPNR) in Botany Bay (Kamay) provides background for what the authors call for a “recalibration of regulatory efforts for wetland conservation”.
McDonald and Gillespie discuss in some detail the history, environmental significance and management issues for this Ramsar site. It covers 682 hectares of mangroves and salt marshes. They note how Australia translates its Ramsar obligations into a domestic context through the federal EPBC Act while recognising other statutory instruments and agreements that should contribute to the protection and management of a site such as TPNR. The area falls under the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974. Reports to the Ramsar Secretariat have noted ecological deterioration including a 50% decline in abundance of shorebirds over 5 consecutive years. The authors point to problems in implementing and updating Plans of Management by the NPWS. Central to their concerns is the separation of humans from nature with limited accessibility and community engagement. It Is a highly connected system located within an urbanised and industrialised setting impacted and modified making it less interesting for nature conservation. Negative human perceptions of wetlands as encountered in this study are seen as a factor to adequately regulate them. There is a degree of “inattention that marks them for inevitable degradation”. The focus has been more on iconic species protection rather than an approach which would “generate positive human-nature connections” and view wetlands as worthy of regulatory protection “in all its modified and messy form”.
My intertest in Ramsar wetlands stems in part from concerns as to how the serious is the Australian Government in fulfilling its obligations under the convention. Management of sites in Moreton Bay, Coorong-Lower Lakes and the Gippsland Lakes have raised issues about how different agencies of state and federal governments have taken the obligations seriously. But my attention has recently been drawn to sites in the lower Hunter River estuary visited by a number of participants during the 2023 National Coastal Conference held in Newcastle. Peter Nelson, William Glamore and more recently Pam Dean Jones have made me more aware of community engagement in the management of these wetlands. What is happening here seems to be very different from what was reported in the TPNR study.
Hunter estuary wetlands consists of two parts: Kooragang Nature Reserve within the Hunter Wetlands National Park, and the Hunter Wetlands Centre (HWC). Together they constitute an array of wetland types subject to varying degrees of human disturbance within the broader regional context of urban and industrial development. What is distinctive about the Hunter wetlands is how different government and non-government entities have come together to plan and invest in the integrated management of the sites. NSW Hunter-Central Rivers Local Land Services (LLS), as a regional delivery partner, has procured federal Natural Heritage Trust funding to undertake several projects. One high profile project is “Securing the sanctuaries of Ramsar and priority wetlands for migratory and marine species”. In addition, Newcastle City Council has received a federal Urban Rivers grant to assist the Hunter Wetlands Centre manage the potential impacts of saltwater incursion into wetland areas.
Managing the Hunter wetlands has involved the recognition that they are to be used for recreation and nature-based activities as well as for the promotion of wetland conservation. Documentation of changes in the ecological character is central to management hence the interest in climate change impacts. In addition to the work of the HWC, other partners in the LLS project include Birdlife Australia, NPWS, University of Newcastle, and the local indigenous land councils. Improving community knowledge about wetlands, as well as increasing First Nations participation in management aims at enhancing understanding of both natural and cultural values.
In summary, from this snapshot of two NSW Ramsar areas it is clear there are differences in the way such areas are managed and funded. I would like to see the Hunter model replicated nationally. But this would require stronger federal government direction and investment along with passionate local area interest in protecting and enhancing wetland values.
Bruce Thom
Words by Prof Bruce Thom. Please respect the author’s thoughts and reference appropriately: (c) ACS, 2025. For correspondence about this blog post please email admin@australiancoastalsociety.org.au
#275