The Inadequacy of Private Land Native Forestry Regulation in NSW
|
 |
|
Post a Comment
|
|
|
|
|
CONTRIBUTORS:
|
|
|
PROCEEDINGS TITLE:
|
|
|
YEAR:
|
2001
|
|
PUB TYPE:
|
Conference Paper in Proceedings
|
|
PAGES:
|
148 -
162
|
|
SUBJECT(S):
|
forestry regulation, environmental law, Australia
|
|
DISCIPLINE:
|
Law
|
|
HTTP:
|
|
|
LANGUAGE:
|
English
|
|
PUB ID:
|
103-396-292
(Last edited on
2003/11/05 23:41:20 US/Mountain)
|
|
SPONSOR(S):
|
|
|
ABSTRACT:
Forestry operations on private land have assumed greater importance of late in NSW, with a considerable percentage of total sawlog production in Northern NSW coming from private native forests. The issue of private native forestry (PNF) is also important because private forests are home to much threatened biodiversity and some under-protected forest ecosystem types, and as they make up a significant proportion of the total area of native forests in NSW.
In debates over approaches to biodiversity conservation policy on private land it is often said that, despite some of the practical difficulties surrounding the application of the regulatory approach, it is necessary to maintain a regulatory safety net. Yet much less frequently is an examination made of the adequacy of this safety net.
In response, this paper examines the implementation of certain provisions of NSW environmental laws, particularly the Native Vegetation Conservation Act 1997 and the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 in relation to forestry operations on privately owned land. Reference is made to the regulatory framework applicable to PNF in Tasmania and other jurisdictions. The paper poses the broad question: Is the present legal framework for regulating the environmental impacts of private land native forestry adequate, and is the existing framework adequately implemented and enforced ?
The research findings to date are that the regulatory framework in NSW is highly fragmented and complex, with responsibility for administration spread across a large number of agencies a situation which appears to be detrimental to the effective oversight of PNF operations. The findings regarding implementation are that often PNF is not adequately regulated under the Native Vegetation Conservation Act 1997. Frequently it is not regulated by local government under Local Environment Plans. Where neither of these controls apply, research revealed that the safety net mechanism of licensing under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 is infrequently applied.
However, in spite of these shortcomings, the paper argues that regulation remains an essential plank of the policy strategy for management of the environmental impacts of PNF. A case is made that problems come from inadequate attention to implementation and enforcement of the legal framework, rather than from inherent and generic defects in the approach of regulation itself.
|
|
|
|
STATISTICS
|
|
Click on # to view
|
|
Citations
|
|
0
|
|
References
|
|
0
|
|
Comments
|
|
0
|
|
Quality
|
|
0/0.00
|
|
Interest
|
|
0/0.00
|
|
View(er)s
|
|
2/121
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Prev |
Next |
|