The draft decision not to place the Great Barrier Reef on Unesco’s ‘in danger’ list is a coup for Australia.
The government has lobbied intensely to avoid the ignominy of a ‘world heritage in danger’ listing that would undermine tourism at a site that attracts two million visitors each year. Having its ability to protect the natural wonder questioned by the UN would have been a further stain on the environmental credibility of a country now viewed in some quarters as a global vandal.
It is likely that Unesco’s world heritage committee will adopt the draft – submitted by Unesco adviser, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) – when it meets in Bonn in June. The reprieve for Australia comes with strict conditions about the implementation of measures to protect the reef system.
But experts have told the Guardian that even though the reef was not officially listed as in danger the threat to its survival remains severe and the measures Unesco required of Australia would be inadequate to save it.
In recent years the Unesco committee has notified Australia of its alarm at the continuing impacts on the reef of climate change, water pollution, dredging for port facilities (including the massive expansion at Abbot Point coal port) and fishing. In response to their concerns the Australian government submitted its Reef 2050 Long-Term Sustainability Plan (LTSP) in March.
On Friday the IUCN issued a cautious approval of the plan, noting its “effective implementation … supported by clear oversight and accountability, research, monitoring and adequate and sustained financing, is essential to respond to the current and potential threats to the property”.
The plan rules out the dumping of dredging spoil – which will be dragged from the seabed to create channels for coal transport ships – within the reef’s marine park.
But Dr Nick Graham, a reef expert at James Cook University, said there was evidence that dredging alone would damage the reef by stirring up sediment which would settle widely on the reef, causing disease. As the impacts of the planned expansion of the Abbot Point coal port begin to manifest on the coral, he said Unesco may again consider listing the reef as in danger.
“Dredging at that sort of scale is not compatible with a healthy reef and it’s not just the dredging, it’s the increased numbers of ships that are going to be moving through the Great Barrier Reef as a result,” Graham said.
The primary long-term threat to the Great Barrier Reef, and coral reefs worldwide, is climate change. A major coral bleaching event, associated with increased ocean temperatures, has been underway since the middle of last year and is predicted to continue into next year. In the face of these existential threats to the ecosystem, it is essential that Australia does everything it can to reduce local pressures, including sediment from dredging, said Graham.
Mark Eakin, coordinator of the US government’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa) Coral Reef Watch programme, said conservation measures in the Australian plan were a step forward. But any plan that enshrined and expedited the extraction and burning of coal would only fuel the greatest threat to the reef.
“The Abbot Point expansion with a major increase in coal exports is antithetical to the need to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere,” he said.
Hundreds of miles inland from where the reef fringes the Queensland coastline, 27bn tonnes of coal lies beneath the ground in the Galilee Basin. Australia’s right-wing government has pushed hard to open the region up to vast new mines. The expansion of Abbot Point to become the world’s biggest coal port is a key part of leveraging the mineral wealth and revitalising Australia’s flagging mining boom.
“I think that the pressure that the original proposal to list it at risk has brought on the Australian government has resulted in some very important changes. The one thing that’s unfortunate that it hasn’t done is to influence their current major push to extract and export as much coal as possible,” said Eakin.
Despite the shortcomings of the plan, campaigners and experts expressed relief that the Unesco committee had not formally listed the site as ‘in danger’. Graham said he didn’t think such a move would have helped the conservation of the reef. Campaigners were similarly cautious about calling for a listing.
“We never called for an ‘in danger’ listing as we want it protected and if it had been on the danger list it might have led to complacency,” said Felicity Wishart, reef campaign director for the Australian Marine Conservation Society.
WWF-Australia chief executive Dermot O’Gorman said: “Unesco has made the right decision. The future world heritage status of the reef should rightly be determined based on the actual condition of its precious corals and marine life – as assessed by scientists.”
Greenpeace campaigner Shani Tager said, however, that the organisation had hoped the reef would be listed as in danger because it would send an even stronger message to the government.
Experts and campaigners agreed that the key detail of the Unesco draft decision was the acknowledgement of serious ongoing decline to the reef system and the strict continued monitoring demanded by the committee.
Tager said: “I think we’re seeing that Unesco is very concerned about the future of the reef. The Long Term Sustainability Plan is not enough as we don’t think you can have a safe expansion of coal ports in particular. Unesco has recognised the difficulties of the reef and the continued monitoring of it is good news.”
Threats to the reef
Pollution
Run-off from agricultural fertilisers and manure have raised nutrient levels in the southern two-thirds of the marine park to dangerous concentrations that disrupt the ecosystem’s ability to take up nutrients. The Australian government’s plan aims for an 80% reduction in run-off pollution by 2025. Experts have said the lag between improved practices and environmental benefits is likely to mean that the nutrient cycle will continue to be affected for some decades.
Climate Change
Warming driven by greenhouse gas emissions is heating up the seas around Australia. 15 of the 20 warmest years on record have been recorded in the past 20 years. In the summer of 2012/13 the hottest sea surface temperatures for the Australian region were recorded. By 2100, average sea temperatures off north-eastern Australia could be 2.5% warmer than at present. Corals subjected to sharp increases in temperature are at risk of bleaching and death.
Coal and shipping
The reef’s region is already highly industrialised. Between 2011 and 2013 ports within or adjacent to the region accounted for 76% of the total through output for all Queensland ports – most of this traffic was related to the coal industry. High concentrations of coal dust have been detected in the park.
Between 2001 and 2013, 28m cubic metres of dredge material were dumped in the Great Barrier Reef world heritage site. The expansion of the Abbot Point port will require large-scale dredging that will now be dumped onshore.
Fishing
Fishing has been well controlled by the Park Authority, with an outstanding 30% of the site protected by a no-take zone. However the IUCN noted continuing concern over some residual impacts. These include the accidental capture through entanglement of turtles, dolphins and dugongs in commercial fishing nets.