The 2016 marine parks science statement: what it asked for and what followed

Between 2016 and 2018, Australia's Commonwealth marine parks were the subject of one of the largest scientific interventions in the country's conservation history. This page sets out what was published, by whom, and what happened afterwards.

Who the Ocean Science Council of Australia was

The Ocean Science Council of Australia was described by The Conversation as an internationally recognised independent group of university-based Australian marine researchers. Its members included Professor Jessica Meeuwig of the University of Western Australia and Professor David Booth, a professor of marine ecology who spoke publicly about the group's concerns in 2016.

The 2016 scientific analysis

In early 2016 the Council prepared a scientific analysis aimed at helping define what Australia's marine reserves should deliver. It was based on hundreds of peer-reviewed publications and on international consensus statements about ocean protection.

The analysis concluded that science-based decisions should prevent fishing, mining and other extractive activities on at least 30 percent of each marine habitat, and should improve the representation of marine national parks across bioregions and key ecological features such as the continental shelf and offshore reefs.

Reporting on the analysis in 2018, Mongabay noted its finding that under the plans then in draft form, fishing and mining could continue as though the marine park system had never been established. The analysis called this "the deliberate design of a system for poor conservation performance".

The statement in numbers

  • 1,286 researchers signed the statement, from 45 countries and jurisdictions.
  • It was published in September 2017, in response to the federal government's draft marine parks plans.
  • It called for a target of at least 30 percent of each marine habitat inside Marine National Park IUCN II zones.
  • That target was affirmed by the 2014 World Parks Congress in Sydney and by the IUCN Members Assembly at the 2016 World Conservation Congress in Hawaii.

What happened next

In October 2016, ABC News reported that the review panel had recommended removing an area almost twice the size of Tasmania from zones where mining and fishing are banned. Professor David Booth told the ABC that the marine national park no-take zones, which he described as the gold standard for marine biodiversity, had been eroded.

In March 2018 Mongabay reported that the revised plans opened large areas of the marine park network to fishing. Writing in The Guardian that same month, Jessica Meeuwig argued that the management plans were neither balanced nor evidence-based.

Why this record matters

The episode is still cited in debates about marine protection because of the size of the scientific consensus behind it. A target of 30 percent protection per habitat, rather than 30 percent of total area, remains the central technical point: protecting a large but unrepresentative area can leave individual habitats effectively unprotected.

About this page. This is an archival reference compiled from publicly reported sources. This website is not affiliated with, does not represent, and does not speak for the former Ocean Science Council of Australia. All factual claims above are attributed to the publications listed below.

Sources