The overall condition of the Great Barrier Reef’s inshore marine environment remains poor, the latest report card has shown.
The report assessed run-off and the condition of the reef between 2009 and 2014, finding that sediment, nutrients and pesticide loads had decreased, however Queensland was far from meeting its targets.
Industries trying to reduce run-off will need to improve to meet targets only 14 per cent of the sugarcane industry met best practice for nutrient loads.
However, grains industries met their pesticides target.
Queensland Environment Minister Steven Miles, who released the report on Monday, said there was more bad news than good in the report.
“If one of my kids came home with a report card like this, I’d be a bit disappointed,” he said.
“What is most disturbing is these results are far from our targets, and progress to these targets flatlined in the period 2013-2014.”
“We saw a stalling of progress.
“[Of] most concern during this period, we saw a loss of riparian vegetation, a loss of trees on the riverbanks leading into the reef during a period when our goal was an increase the number of trees.”
Overall loss of wetlands continued between 2009 and 2013, although the rate of loss was lower than the previous periods.
And overall forest loss in riverbank areas continued between 2009 and 2013, with an increased rate of loss compared to the previous periods.
Inshore seagrass showed signs of recovery in some regions, but remained in poor condition overall.
Inshore coral reefs also remained in poor condition, although there were modest improvements in juvenile coral density.
Sediment and pesticide run-off had reduced by 12 per cent and 30 per cent respectively, but the particulate phosphorus target was exceeded in the Wet Tropics.
In July, the United Nations World Heritage Committee decided against listing the Barrier Reef as “in danger”, opting instead to closely monitor it over the next four years.
Mr Miles said international concern about the reef was justified.
“[The report] does show that progress on meeting our targets had stalled, and that UNESCO’s interest was the right thing; that they were right to be concerned that progress had stalled, because now we know it had,” he said.
Report card a ‘clear fail for previous programs’
Roger Shaw, the chair of the independent science panel for the reef plan, said it “was a bit less than we’d expected”.
While there had been improvements to seagrass and coral, nutrients and sediments needed to be decreased.
“The reef needs a little bit more time between major episodic events like floods to recover,” Mr Shaw said.
“Given we’ve come through a few years of very strong discharge into the reef, the reef will take a little while to respond.”
Sean Hoobin from the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) said the report card was a “clear fail for previous programs”.
He said the State Government needed to enhance programs to get famers to change their habits.
“If we are going to avoid devastating crown-of-thorn [starfish] outbreaks owe need to completely overhaul current programs and massively increase investment,” he said.
Need for more farmers to ‘step up’ efforts: marine park authority
Russell Reichelt, the chairman of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA), welcomed the report card.
“It’s a sign that governments and the community along the Barrier Reef coast are being honest about what’s happening in this massive catchment,” he said.
He said water quality was the second largest risk to the Great Barrier Reef and showed there needed to be “a step up” for change.
“The resilience of the reef needs this program to accelerate but it’s a multi-decade task,” Mr Reichelt said.
“It took 100 years to get us into this state now we need several decades of sustained effort.
“The farmers to the 25 or so per cent that are at best practice congratulations.
“To the 75 per cent who can step up their efforts, please step up your efforts for the Great Barrier Reef and your rivers and farms as well.”
2015 ABC