Reef Rescue Program

_{26 November, 2008}

MOTION: REEF RESCUE PROGRAM
Ms JARRATT (Whitsunday—ALP) (6.00 pm): The Great Barrier Reef is a global icon, a one of a
kind and a World Heritage treasure. It is the largest living organic collective visible from earth’s orbit. It is
the world’s largest coral reef ecosystem, lining almost 2,100 kilometres of the Australian coastline. As was
reported in Professor Ross Garnaut’s review, it is home to a wide variety of marine organisms including six
species of marine turtles, 24 species of seabirds, more than 30 species of marine mammals, 350 coral
species, 4,000 species of molluscs and 1,500 fish species—and we are the custodians of this treasure.
We will not be able to just go onto eBay and buy another one if this one disappears. We are playing
for keeps. The reef is valuable not just because of its enormous biodiversity. It is also valuable because of
its rarity. This is the very reason that millions of people come every year to see it and to experience it. The
Great Barrier Reef is worth more than $3.5 billion annually to the state’s economy based on tourism alone.
So who in their right mind would not do what was humanly possible to mitigate the impact of a large and
persistent threat to its future survival?
The threat to the reef comes on a number of fronts, most especially from climate change, which is
already responsible for ocean acidification and warming. We risk resigning the reef to irreparable damage
if we do not act to build up its resilience to the effects of water pollution including high levels of nutrients,
sediments and pesticides from land based activity. During the development of the reef water quality plan, a
panel of scientists found there were clear indications that major land use practices in the reef catchments
have led to accelerated erosion and greatly increased the delivery of nutrients over pre-1850 levels. In
other words, the quality of the water in the reef lagoon has deteriorated as a direct impact of European
settlement. The sources of this impact, although varied, were found to include extensive grazing practices
in drier catchments and overgrazing in general, urban development, agricultural production, water use
practices, extensive vegetation clearing and wetland drainage on coastal plains.
We already have legislation that deals with impacts emanating from urban development, and
significant penalties apply for developers who do not comply with strict measures to mitigate silt run-off and
other potential threats to water quality. I agree that these measures are not always policed as well as they
should be, but the fact remains that urban development is regulated to control run-off.
We are also aware that mining can cause a threat to water quality. This government has a track
record of action in protecting the reef lagoon from the threat of mine related water pollution. I am referring
to the decisive action taken by this government in relation to the mining of oil shale on the McFarlane
deposit near Proserpine. As members are aware, the Premier weighed up the risk that oil shale mining
might have for the adjacent Great Barrier Reef and as a consequence placed a 20-year moratorium on
further development on that site.
But what regulates the impacts of farming and grazing? Well, over the years both the state and
federal governments have worked hard to implement an incentive based approach to achieving best
practice in rural industries. We all know about the various programs funded under NHT 1 and 2, and we
are certainly aware of money made available for improvements through programs like the sugar rescue
package. In addition to these, there have been programs funded by the state government like the rural
Speech by Jan Jarratt extracted from Hansard of Wednesday, 26 November 2008
File name: jarr2008_11_26_104.fm Page : 2 of 2
water use efficiency scheme. All of these programs have aimed to increase the take-up of best practice in
an attempt to increase on-farm profit and decrease unwanted impacts from land based activity.
I will be the first to say that many landholders have taken advantage of these opportunities. I have
seen many of my local cane growers implement methods such as laser levelling, centre pivot irrigation,
minimum tillage, legume fallow and stormwater management in a genuine effort to reduce environmental
impacts. One of the most widely adopted practices has been green cutting and trash blanketing, which has
been a bit of a quiet revolution within the industry. The problem is, though, that not all the growers are
adopting all or even any of these best practices, which means that those who are taking the time, making
the effort and, yes, spending the hard-earned money to do their bit are being let down by the rest. I support
the Premier’s intention of developing a regulatory framework to bring the recalcitrants to the table. I
encourage the peak bodies representing the relative primary industry sectors to come to the table and be
part of the solution. We do not have another hundred years to think about how to save the reef. We will
either be the generation that saves the reef or fails the reef, and I know what side I am on.
Time expired.

More Hansard