Passing the brumby bill is a backward step for environmental protection in Australia


Don Driscoll, Deakin University; Euan Ritchie, Deakin University, and Tim Doherty, Deakin University

Late on Wednesday night the so-called “brumby bill” was passed without amendment in the New South Wales Parliament. The controversial Coalition bill, supported by the Christian Democrats and the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party, means that feral horses must be kept in Kosciuszko National Park.

It also creates a community advisory panel, with no scientific experts appointed, to advise the minister on how to manage the horse population in the alpine ecosystem.

The NSW government has attracted accusations of a conflict of interest. Former Nationals member Peter Cochran, who now runs a commercial venture offering brumbie-spotting rides through the National Park (and who has donated extensively to Deputy Premier John Barilaro) reportedly commissioned lawyers to draft the bill. Peter Cochran, John Barilaro and Gladys Berejiklian have denied all accusations of conflict of interest and underhanded conduct.




Read more:
NSW’s no-cull brumby bill will consign feral horses to an even crueller fate


The bill has also been criticised by scientific bodies. In a letter to NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian this week, the Australian Academy of Science noted that the legislation removes consideration of scientific advice, and called for the bill to be withdrawn or substantially amended.

In a rare move, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature has also written to the NSW government, expressing concern over the potential degradation of this internationally significant national park.

Damage caused by feral horses in the Australian alps.
D Thompson and Stuart Rowland, Friends of Currango/Flickr

Out of step with other states

The NSW Labor Party does not support the bill and has pledged to repeal the legislation if elected next March. The legislation represents a radical change in NSW’s management of feral horses, coming after a 2016 draft strategy that recommenced reducing their population by 90% over 20 years.

NSW now stands in contrast to other Australian states. Last Saturday, Victoria launched its Feral Horse Strategic Action Plan. That plan aims to protect native species and ecosystems in national parks by removing or controlling feral horses and is a welcome step in the right direction. Victorian environment minister Lily D’Ambrosio called on the NSW and federal governments to support a unified approach to feral horse management in Australia’s alpine regions.

Is culling in or out?

The Victorian plan excludes aerial culling but will revisit horse control methods if the proposed trapping methods don’t reduce environmental impacts. Aerial culling is widely practised throughout Australia, including Western Australia, the Northern Territory, Queensland (where culling was used to improve road safety), and the Australian Capital Territory, which borders Kosciuszko National Park.

Barilaro argued against aerial culling when he presented the Brumby bill to parliament, calling it cruel and barbaric. He reiterated that the bill is meant to prevent lethal control in his response to Victoria’s announcement. But surprisingly, the draft legislation makes no mention of control methods, lethal or otherwise.




Read more:
Hold your horses – brumby fertility control isn’t that easy


The deputy premier also referred to the Guy Fawkes National Park horse cull in northern NSW in 2000 to support his argument against aerial culling. But an independent enquiry found that the cull was an appropriate humane response to the situation, where horses were starving to death and causing environmental damage after a fire. The RSPCA and independent reports show that aerial culling is an acceptable and humane way to manage horse numbers.

Further, the brumby bill now locks in the predictable outcome that thousands of horses are likely to starve to death in the next drought or after large fires. It is therefore puzzling that actions likely to increase horse suffering are not of great concern to many within the pro-brumby lobby.

Greater emphasis, instead, has been put on a cultural argument for protecting feral horses: for example, by claiming that feral horses made enormous contributions to Australia’s World War One effort. However, the cultural heritage report prepared for the NSW National Parks Service says “there is no definitive evidence that remount horses were directly taken from the brumby population of what is now Kosciusko National Park”.

The Sydney Olympics opening ceremony was also offered as evidence that brumbies are integral to Australian culture. However, Australian Stock horses, not brumbies, were showcased at the Sydney Olympics – a distinct breed, established by horse enthusiasts in the 1970s.

That said, it is true that horses in the snowy mountains do have local cultural value. But so too does the native fauna and flora threatened by feral horses, many of which only occur in Australia’s high country. This includes species such as the southern corroboree frog, alpine she-oak skink, broad-toothed rat, Raleigh sedge and mauve burr-daisy.

Can we compromise?

Is a compromise possible, in which both cultural and conservation goals can be accommodated? We think so. The feral horse population can be removed from the national parks and sensitive ecosystems. Brumby herds can thrive on extensive private property in the region, an approach already proven in South Australia’s Coffin Bay National Park.

The brumby bill was written and presented to parliament by groups with at best a perceived conflict of interest, and promoted by using inaccurate information about culling and heritage. It has been roundly criticised by leading national and international scientific bodies for not taking adequate account of science and the key role of national parks in conserving biodiversity.




Read more:
Essays On Air: The cultural meanings of wild horses


The ConversationThat this bill has now passed the NSW upper house is a further backward step for conservation goals and Australia’s international reputation for environmental protection, and sets a dangerous precedent by undermining prominent national and state environmental policy. It remains to be seen how this legislation aligns with the federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, given that it literally tramples over several matters of national environmental significance.

Don Driscoll, Professor in Terrestrial Ecology, Deakin University; Euan Ritchie, Associate Professor in Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life & Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, and Tim Doherty, Research Fellow, Deakin University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Advertisements

From Kilauea to Fuego: three things you should know about volcano risk


Heather Handley, Macquarie University

Recent photographs and video from the devastating eruption of Fuego volcano in Guatemala show people stood watching and filming hot, cloud-like flows of gas, ash and volcanic material (known as pyroclastic flows) travelling towards them down the slopes of the volcano.

From this it is clear that some people do not fully understand the risks of the volcanoes they live near.

Although each volcano is different, and each presents different risks to the people near to them, there are some generalisations that help us understand what these risks are likely to be.

Three points are clear: location matters, explosiveness can be predicted to an extent, and fast-moving pyroclastic flows of volcanic material are deadly.




Read more:
Fuego volcano: the deadly pyroclastic flows that have killed dozens in Guatemala


1. Location matters

The outer layer of the Earth, called the lithosphere (crust and upper mantle), is broken up into a number of rigid tectonic plates. Volcanoes typically occur where the plates move apart from one another, for example at underwater mid-ocean ridges, or collide together at subduction zones.

Australia sits in the middle of a tectonic plate – whereas New Zealand sits on a boundary between two tectonic plates. CLICK ON IMAGE TO ZOOM
from www.shutterstock.com

We also find volcanoes in the middle of tectonic plates – these are called “intraplate” volcanoes, such as the Hawaiian and Galápagos oceanic islands.

The magma (molten rock) that feeds volcanoes is generated in different ways in these settings, and different volcanic landforms result.

Hawaii is in the middle of a tectonic plate and volcanic activity there forms relatively low-profile, shield volcanoes. Typically, these volcanoes are built up by many fluid lava flows into broad, gently sloping domes, which resemble a warrior’s shield.

In contrast, Fuego is situated in a subduction zone environment (one plate going under another) where steep-sided, stratovolcanoes, or composite volcanoes are most common. These often symmetrical, conical volcanoes form from the build up of layers of lava and pyroclastic (fragmented volcanic) rocks.

2. Magma and gas affect explosiveness

The volcanic landforms and eruptive styles we see in different settings are largely a result of the differences in the composition of the magma (molten rock) erupted, its temperature and its gas content in these contrasting tectonic settings.

Large shield volcanoes in the middle of tectonic plates, such as Kilauea volcano in Hawaii, erupts high temperature, low silica lava. This is runnier (less viscous) than magma typically erupted at subduction zone volcanoes (like Fuego).




Read more:
Eruptions and lava flows on Kilauea: but what’s going on beneath Hawai’i’s volcano?


This means that any volatiles (dissolved gases such as water, carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide) in the Kilauea magma are able to escape more easily compared to in a stickier, higher silica, magma that characterises subduction zone volcanoes.

And so “Hawaiian-style” eruptions are characterised by lava fountaining and flows of hot fluid lava that normally travel slow enough for people to walk away from and evacuate. This is exactly what we have been seeing over the last month in Kilauea’s East Rift Zone.

In contrast, at subduction zone volcanoes – such as Fuego – the higher water content of the magma and the typically more silica-rich, sticky magmas erupt more explosively. It is harder for gas bubbles formed to escape as magma rises to the surface, which then take up more space and over pressure the system.

Subduction zone volcanoes can produce high columns of gas and ash reaching tens of kilometres into the atmosphere, and scalding hot, fast-moving, cloud-like currents of gas, ash and volcanic material. These pyroclastic flows, or “pyroclastic density currents”, race down the volcano at speeds over 80 km/hr.

Some news reports of eruptions at Fuego have incorrectly termed these pyroclastic flows “rivers of lava”. They are very different to lava flows and much more hazardous.

Clear and accurate communication of volcanic eruptions is crucial if those near the volcano are to understand the real risks.

3. Pyroclastic flows are deadly

Pyroclastic flows are extremely hazardous and deadly. They were responsible for deaths in Pompeii and Herculaneum from the AD79 eruption of Vesuvius in Italy.

Even the famous volcanologists Katia and Maurice Kraft underestimated the reach of a pyroclastic flow during an eruption at Unzen volcano on June 3, 1991, which killed them along with many others.




Read more:
Curious Kids: Do most volcanologists die from getting too close to volcanoes?


Historic subduction zone volcanic eruptions producing devastating pyroclastic flows include:

  • Vesuvius, Italy AD 79
  • Tambora, Indonesia (1815)
  • Krakatau (Krakatoa), Indonesia (1883)
  • Mt Pelée, Caribbean (1902)
  • Mt St Helens, USA (1980)
  • Mt Pinatubo, Philippines (1991)
  • Unzen, Japan (1991).

At Fuego, the loose, fragmented volcanic material (known as tephra) lying on the slopes after eruptions may be remobilised by rain to form volcanic mudflows known as lahars. These pose a significant current and future risk for the people surrounding Fuego compared to those living in Hawaii.

Pyroclastic density currents were the main cause of death from volcanic activity in the 20th Century, killing around 45,000 people, almost 50% of all volcanic deaths in that time period (total deaths from volcanic activity is estimated to be 91,724).

While eyes are diverted toward eruptions in Central America and the Pacific Ocean, Indonesia has raised the alert level on some of its volcanoes this week. It now has 21 volcanoes on alert levels 2-4 (yellow, orange and red) on a scale of 1-4.

The ConversationLocal authorities will be vital in managing and communicating the risks of these volcanoes, as well as around Fuego and Kilauea.

Heather Handley, Associate Professor in Volcanology and Geochemistry, Macquarie University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.