Mr BAYLEY (Clark) – Honourable Speaker, I move –
That the House take note of the following matter: threatened species.
This is a critically important issue and we look forward to the debate. All of our species in Tasmania are iconic and emblematic, but threatened species are particularly so. They get a notoriety and romanticism around them that is really important and welcome because people love our species. Whether it be the orange bellied parrot, the swift parrot, the Tassie devil, the red or spotted handfish in our fauna species, or from a flora perspective the Miena cider gum, the Morrisby gum, or indeed our vegetation communities. Across our forests, across our woodlands and across our grasslands, we have threatened vegetation communities and they are critically important.
Globally, we are in the sixth mass extinction crisis as we speak. It is a crisis called the Holocene extinction and it is worth noting that it is the first that is anthropogenic, that is seen to be influenced by and under way because it is at the direct hand of humans. This is because of the prevalence of invasive species, because of the scourge of habitat loss and because of, in some cases, over-hunting and overfishing.
Of course, Tasmania is no exception when it comes to threatened species and we have a sorry legacy when it comes to extinctions driven by government policy. Whether it be the thylacine, whether it be the Tasmanian emu, whether it be the Lake Pedder earthworm or the smooth handfish, we have serious and significant extinctions on our watch, as colonisers of this island, that have been at our hands. It continues to impact on species. Whether it be logging impacting on the swift parrot or the masked owl; whether it be land clearing impacting on species like the New Holland mouse; whether it’s agriculture and the Maugean skate; or industrial development like Robbins Island impacting on the Tasmanian devil, the orange bellied parrot and a plethora of migratory shore birds, it is still government policy that is driving extinction and threatening processes here in Tasmania. That is because of profound indifference.
In the State of the Environment Report released in late 2024, the first two statutory cycles painted a very devastating picture when it came to threatened species. The report states that 31 per cent of Tasmania vascular flora species are threatened or possibly threatened; 36 per cent of endemic flora species are threatened or possibly threatened; the number of endangered and vulnerable species under the Threatened Species Protection Act increased from 189 in 2008 to 230 in 2020; and 16.5 per cent of Tasmania’s vertebrate fauna are listed as threatened species.
There is a serious risk that iconic, endemic Tasmanian species will go extinct in the near future. It is a serious concern, and we say that the strategy of captive breeding, while valuable and necessary when species get to these dire straits, is no substitute for protecting their habitat in the first place. It’s no substitute, because we need to be protecting these species in the wild on the first place. It is no substitute, because we need viable habitat to release these species into.
The government’s response to the State of the Environment Report, from our perspective, was woeful. It rejected outright some of the proposals, such as the need for more marine protected areas, or the need for more terrestrial reserve areas on public land. It continues to ignore key threatening processes. We have situations where there are signed-up recovery plans, like this one for the swift parrot, which identifies native forest logging as a key threatening process:
The loss of potential breeding habitat in Tasmania via clearance for conversion to agriculture, native forest logging and intensive native forest silver cultural practices continues to reduce the amount of available swift parrot nesting and foraging habitat.
It happens, and this government consistently doesn’t take the action that is needed.
Recently, the government has released the draft threatened species report. It’s out for consultation until 1 May. While it’s welcome that the government has finally done this, there are some deeply concerning issues in here. It says it needs to protect and restore nature. We agree with that, but we consistently see this government failing to do so. It says we need to partner and engage. with other stakeholders. That is true. But in many cases the government is the only stakeholder that can take action. We need to take action urgently, because our threatened species are a serious concern.
