Exclusive: Levy that allows almost 16,000 houses to be built on Norfolk Broads will not cover cost of mitigating environmental damage, critics say
A new levy on developers to allow almost 16,000 homes to be built in the environmentally protected Norfolk Broads has been cut by tens of thousands of pounds per house, the Guardian can reveal.
Ministers say the government’s environmental delivery plans (EDPs) were created to unblock housing growth across the country and are a “win-win” for development and nature.
Australian aerospace company Southern Launch, the operator of the Koonibba Test Range, has proposed a new coastal rocket-launch facility for Whalers Way on SA’s Eyre Peninsula. Over in Western Australia, the state government has thrown its support behind plans to build a spaceport across multiple sites.
That raises the question: how can we explore space without harming ecosystems on Earth?
When rockets and nature collide
Rocket-launch facilities are typically built in coastal or desert areas away from human populations. This is to protect people from excess noise, falling debris and uncontrolled explosions from failed launches.
Given Australia’s coastal areas are home to a spectacular array of plants and animals, this creates a potential conflict between rocket launches and nearby nature. The proposed Whalers Way facility, for instance, would be built in a nature reserve that is home to more than 700 native species, including two endangered birds and the endangered Australian sea lion.
This conflict is not unique to Australia. A recent international study found more than 60% of the world’s rocket-launch facilities are located in or close to nature reserves, threatening global conservation efforts.
Building and operating coastal rocket-launch facilities can harm wildlife in various ways, including by:
creating extreme noise, with the sound of a rocket launch being loud enough to cause physical trauma to the ears, lungs and brains of nearby animals, and physiological stress to nesting birds and their eggs
releasing chemicals, contained in rocket propellants or falling debris, which can contaminate the site
A company seeking to operate a rocket-launch facility must apply for a licence, as well as permits for each launch or series of launches. Prospective operators must also receive approval under relevant federal and state environmental law.
As with other types of development, environmental groups and local residents can comment on proposals for new space facilities. The proposed Whalers Way facility would be located in a Heritage Agreement reserve, a place protected for nature in perpetuity under SA law. This has sparked widespread community opposition. Further, a ruling from the Native Vegetation Council has called the future of the project into question.
This represents a win for local residents and wildlife. However, the ruling could still be overturned by the SA government.
Never before have humans built so many commercial launch facilities and sent so many rockets into space.
As this technology rapidly advances, so must our research.
Given modern rockets are much louder than cars or aeroplanes, existing information on how vehicle noise affects wildlife is not particularly relevant to rocket launches.
We urgently need new research to measure the noise and blast waves experienced by animals close to rocket launches. Studies should examine how these sounds – including those at frequencies humans can’t hear – affect the behaviour, survival and reproductive success of local species.
Research should also investigate the long-term impacts on wildlife, such as whether regular rocket launches lead to declining populations or even local extinction.
Crucially, governments must assess which sites are most suitable for new launch facilities. Whalers Way, as pointed out by local residents and conservationists, does not fall into this category. But other places, such as Koonibba or cleared coastal sites west of Ceduna, could allow Australia to grow its space ambitions while protecting precious wildlife.
Kirsten Parris has previously received funding from the Australian Research Council and the National Environmental Science Program.
Hugh Possingham receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is employed by the University of Queensland and Accounting for Nature. He sits on the Native Vegetation Council of South Australia, chairs the Advisory Council of the Environment Institute at Adelaide University, is president (pro bono) of BirdLife Australia, and an advisor (pro bono) to numerous not-for-profits and governments on environmental matters.
Conservation groups have welcomed an 11th-hour decision to protect “precious and important habitat” on South Australia’s Eyre peninsula from plans for a rocket launching facility.
The Whalers Way “orbital launch complex”, which could see as many as 42 rockets a year take off from conservation land, had already been approved under federal and state planning and environment laws.
Almost 11,000 kilometres. That’s how far one white shark swam while travelling from South Africa to Western Australia, before turning around and returning home.
In the waters off southern Australia, school sharks can cover up to 3,000 kilometres while crossing the Tasman Sea to New Zealand.
Many shark and ray species embark on mammoth migrations. But to protect these species, we need to know not only how far an animal moves, but whether it crosses national borders.
Our new study analysed 30 years of shark and ray movement studies. We uncovered major gaps in our understanding of where these species go during their migrations.
Many reasons to move
Sharks and rays move for many reasons. These species may travel to find food or give birth to young. They may also migrate to waters where the temperature or salinity levels suit them better.
Body size and maturity also affect how far animals travel – older, larger animals generally travel further. Depth, ocean currents and access to suitable habitat can shape the paths taken by sharks and rays.
These factors influence each species differently. Some species are confined to particular estuaries, while others can cross entire ocean basins.
Whale sharks, for instance, gather seasonally at Ningaloo Reef in WA where they attract tourists and researchers from across the country. But they do not stay at Ningaloo. Tracking studies show some of these sharks travel thousands of kilometres beyond Australian waters, including into Indonesia.
However, national protections cannot address pressures animals may encounter after leaving Australian waters, such as accidental capture and vessel strikes, where cargo vessels or other boats collide with whale sharks.
Whale sharks can travel incredible distances while migrating.Diego Bezerra et al.
What we studied
Our new study analysed three decades of studies that used various methods to understand shark and ray movements. These included satellite and acoustic tracking as well as catching, marking and recapturing individual animals.
We identified 29 shark and ray species that are known to migrate across international borders. But only five species – namely white sharks, whale sharks, shortfin makos, blue sharks and school sharks – had studies showing movements between Australian waters and those of other countries. These included Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, New Zealand, Micronesia, New Caledonia and South Africa.
Worryingly, we found 18 species had no published information about their movements. This lack of research means we simply don’t know if these species travel long distances or cross boundaries. What’s more, nearly two thirds of the threatened species we examined had no published studies about their movement patterns.
A United Nations treaty, the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, gives countries guidance on collectively conserving sharks and rays that migrate across borders.
To fulfil its commitments under the Convention, Australia should focus on three key areas.
Shared expertise
We must strengthen our conservation ties with our closest neighbours including Indonesia, Timor-Leste and Papua New Guinea to the north, and the wider Pacific to the east.
Tracking animals over long periods can be costly and difficult to maintain, particularly in remote areas. Given Australia already has a relatively well funded marine science sector, we should share our tracking technology and expertise with neighbouring countries.
Conducting more research into shark and ray movements is key to identifying where cooperation may be most effective and what it would look like in practice. Researchers must prioritise the 18 species whose movements we know little about.
In particular, Australia and New Zealand should support coordinated research around the Lord Howe Rise in the Tasman Sea. Authorities are currently considering whether to establish this region as a protected area, under the new High Seas Biodiversity Treaty.
Australia must also rethink how it classifies shark and ray species. For example, while the UN convention lists hammerhead sharks as migratory, Australia does not. This may be to appease commercial and recreational fishers who target or incidentally catch these sharks. Australia’s species categories should be based on science.
Strategic tracking
Instead of simply tracking more sharks, we must track them strategically. By combining movement data with oceanographic information – including about ocean currents, salinity and temperature – researchers can identify likely movement pathways linking countries and important shark and ray habitats.
This will help governments decide where to invest in additional tracking technology like acoustic receivers and satellite tags. It will also allow researchers to build a more complete picture of how sharks and rays travel.
Sharks have been moving across oceans for millions of years. It’s time our research and conservation efforts caught up with them.
Daniel Dunn receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the World Wildlife Fund for Nature, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and the Waitt Foundation. He is affiliated with the Global Ocean Biodiversity Initiative and the Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science at the University of Queensland.
Ross Dwyer receives funding from Australia's Integrated Marine Observing System (IMOS) and the Queensland government's threatened species grants program for research on threatened sharks and rays.
Diego Bezerra does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
A small but positive increase in the number of dugongs spotted in coastal areas in south-east Queensland has researchers feeling cautiously optimistic about the vulnerable marine mammal achieving population revival.
