We have heard of plenty of examples where such disputes spill over into the public domain, like proposed property developments at sensitive coastal sites, or forestry versus conservation. All the while, sitting much more in the background, has been the obstruction of literally tens of thousands of hectares of proposed conservation reserves by the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR). Mineral-based objections to new national parks remain a major obstacle to completion of a comprehensive reserve system in NSW. Following is a commentary on the current outlook based on examples from around the State.

On the Kurnell Peninsula, situated on Crown land adjoining Botany Bay National Park, is one remnant tall sand dune with most of its original woodland vegetation still intact. The 36-metre dune is now a rarity on the peninsula. Around 40 million tonnes of sand have been removed from Kurnell since the onset of sandmining. This dune is on public land, and is the most ecologically intact of the peninsula. It has been National Estate listed for this reason.

A biodiversity study in 1997 found the woodland to contain plant associations now very restricted within the Sydney region, along with two bat species listed as threatened. Following a government planning study in 1979, this land was recommended for addition to the coastal reserve system. Objection by DMR has prevented this small but important extension to Botany Bay NP for the past 22 years. The department still advocates mining around 4 million tonnes, or 80% of the sand, from this patch of Crown land.

In the north-west of Sydney, the proposed Crescent Reach/Burruberongal Nature Reserve near the Hawkesbury River has been held up for some time, solely on DMR objections. These include potential sand extraction from wetlands and valley fills, both of which support rare vegetation types and threatened species.

As last covered in this Journal in October 1998, the Crown lands of the Genowlan Point and Mount Airly region in the northern Blue Mountains contain major expanses of spectacular sandstone formations and rare plants. This area adjoins Gardens of Stone NP, but has been denied any form of protection due to the underlying coal resource. Mining has commenced within a small portion of the Crown land, but the majority is unaffected and is still sought by environment groups for reservation.

In the far west of NSW, reserve creation has involved ongoing purchase of leasehold properties by NPWS. Acquisition naturally brings the lands in question under Service control. However, proceeding to gazettal of the areas as a reserve requires the consent of DMR. Large additions to Nombinnie NR (see map) and Sturt NP have been held back from formal reservation for some years now. While we might view these lands as already secured for conservation irrespective of the DMR obstruction, the impediment to gazettal is not trivial. The level of regional funding and staffing for management of NPWS estate is typically formulated according to the area of gazetted parks. In other words, the factor of large ungazetted blocks of land adds to the already stretched resources of the local park managers.

Recently a new dilemma has arisen in relation to DMR objections. Under the Federal program known as the national reserve system (NRS), additional finance for land purchases in poorly represented parts of the State has been provided to the NPWS over the past few years (see also NPJ Dec 2000). This top-up with Federal money can effectively triple the amount available for reserve establishment in these regions. One of the criteria for funding a purchase is that the area will be gazetted as a national park, nature reserve or equivalent within two years of purchase. Accordingly, areas with even slight mineral potential have missed out on acquisition due to DMR advice that it would not consent to reservation in the foreseeable future.

I personally know of two very significant properties offered to NPWS, one in the Barrier Ranges and the other in the Nandewar bioregion, where the purchase could not proceed under NRS funding. In short, conservation opportunities are being missed.

Superimposed onto the carve-up of public lands for conservation or forestry uses through eastern NSW (loosely termed the ‘forest process’) have been negotiations over high conservation value sites with known or potential mineral resources. In essence this worked as for individual reserve proposals via negotiation between the different State agencies, only regional in scale.

Conservationist involvement in the broader land-assessment process availed us of some of the statistics underlying exclusion of areas from the formal reserve system. For example, at Queens Lake State Forest, a long-standing community reserve proposal on the mid North Coast, some 3,158 hectares were disputed by DMR. Only 17% (542 ha) of this area is predicted to have heavy mineral sands deposits, which were the most likely reason for the objection. This represents 0.2% of all heavy-mineral sand potential in that region. There are, in fact, large areas of cleared land to the north of Queens Lake that have exploration titles and applications over them and could provide an identical resource. While these deliberations have been under way, logging of the area sought for national park has continued at high intensity.

For many other areas, what we hoped to be a small but significant first step towards protection was the establishment of ‘informal’ reserves under either State forest or Crown land tenure. The Crown land informal reserves will be managed by the NPWS as a type of surrogate national park. Mineral exploration and mining are permitted under this category, but a five-yearly review mechanism aims to upgrade them wherever possible to NPWS estate. The State forest informal reserves have been branded as ‘portable reserves’ because they may be modified or cancelled at any time, simply with the consent of four State Ministers. Logging is generally excluded, but mineral exploration and extraction is permitted.

It needs to be acknowledged that the most recent forest process outcome – the Southern region – opted for the NPWS managed Crown reserve category more widely, and in preference to State Forest informal reserves, than in the preceding north-east decision. This is hopefully a sign of improved negotiations between conservation and minerals representatives.