Scientists don’t come with more credibility than Professor Richard Kingsford – a regular on the news, the science show Catalyst and not known for holding his punches. Even when he was a senior research scientist working for the NSW Government you could count on Richard to make sure the truth was told. Now he is Professor of Environmental Science at the University of NSW. Since no-one seemed to have the brains to ask our most high profile river and wetland scientist to drive down the road to Canberra a few weeks back I thought I would ask him myself.  

Here’s what he had to say….

There was an ‘environmental ambition’ to get excited about from the 2020 Summit. “By 2020 the health of Australia’s ecological systems will be improved.” What followed gave little confidence that this was achievable over the next 12 years. The Summit failed to identify a yawning gap and served up a blatant contradiction. The status of biodiversity in Australia continues to plumb new depths with increasing numbers of species and ecological communities tipping over the rare threshold to threatened. And yet the word “biodiversity” appears only once in the 40 page initial report from the Summit and then only in an introductory sentence referring to the risk of losing it, mainly, it appears through climate change. No mention of how we might stop biodiversity loss. Not even a passing reference to national parks, habitat management or threatened species management – the key policy responses. Thankfully, the Rudd Government has independently announced $180 million for the national reserve system. Habitat loss caused by the effects of agriculture through clearing of land and diversion of water remain the most serious global issues for conservation of biodiversity, despite what you may think about the climate change bandwagon.

And here’s the contradiction. Agricultural practices and developments that fail to reduce or impose their ecological footprint on the environment will affect biodiversity and ecosystems. The Summit themes on the environment and agriculture were always on a collision course. And there it is in black and white.  In the environment section, Australia will become “a global leader in tropical water system conservation and sustainability”. Compare this to the agricultural section, under a section headed “Incentives for Sustainability” – sustainability has to be the most abused and misused word in natural resource discourse. For rural industries, the emphasis was on “the potential of north and north-west Australia with particular reference to agriculture” with future soil and hydrological surveys informing “production opportunities”.  Agricultural development for crops in Australia and around the world often takes two steps: first clear the land and then, if the crop needs water, divert it from the nearest river or groundwater system for irrigation. Both have wrought large scale destruction of ecosystems and biodiversity. So, tropical river sustainability must surely evaporate when agricultural development progresses in the north. And any ambitions of improving our ecosystems by 2020 will be just a mirage.