Environmental Management

, Volume 34, Issue 2, pp 209–222

Local Government Conservation and Management of Native Vegetation in Urban Australia

  • Renae N. Stenhouse
Article

Abstract

Reflecting a worldwide trend of devolution of power and responsibilities to local authorities, metropolitan local governments in Australia now have a role in protecting and managing native vegetation (bushland). Reporting on questionnaire and interview results for Sydney, Melbourne, Perth, and Adelaide, this research examines the main disturbances in local government bushlands, local governments’ efforts in bushland conservation, and universality of issues and responses among the cities and between urban and urban–rural local authorities. A number of disturbances in bushlands are common among the cities, with weeds, development impacts, and urban run off perceived to be the most threatening. Management efforts focus on weed control, whereas other main disturbances are receiving less attention. Community involvement in management is prevalent, although regional coordination among local governments is limited. Local governments are willing to be involved in biodiversity conservation and their capacity would be enhanced with increased funding, staffing, and regional coordination.

Local government Disturbance Environmental management Biodiversity conservation Urban bushland 

Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    Australian Local Government Association (ALGA). 2000. National local government biodiversity strategy: Executive summary. Australian Local Government Association, Canberra.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) and Biological Diversity Advisory Council (BDAC). 1999. National local government biodiversity strategy. Australian Local Government Association, Canberra.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bagnall, R. G. 1979A Study of human impact on an urban forest remnant: Redwood Bush, Tawa, near Wellington, New ZealandNew Zealand Journal of Botany17117126Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bateson, P. 2000Incentives for sustainable land management: Community cost sharing to conserve biodiversity on private lands. A guide for local governmentEnvironment AustraliaCanberra/Environs Australia, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Binning, C., M. Young, and E. Cripps. 1999. Beyond roads, rates and rubbish: Opportunities for local government to conserve native vegetation. Research Report 1/99. National R&D Program on Rehabilitation, Management and Conservation of Remnant Vegetation, Environment Australia, Canberra.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bradley, J. 1971Bush regenerationMosman Parklands and Ashton Park AssociationSydney.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bradstock, R. A., Keith, D. A., Auld, T. D. 1995

    Fire and conservation: Imperatives and constraints on managing for diversity. Pages 323–334

    Bradstock, R. A.Auld, T. D.Keith, D. A.Kingsford, R. T.Lunney, D.Sivertsen, D. P. eds. Conserving biodiversity: Threats and solutionsSurrey Beatty & Sons in association with the NSW National Parks & Wildlife ServiceSydney.
    Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bruff, G. E., Wood, A. P. 2000Local sustainable development: Land-use planning’s contribution to modern local governmentJournal of Environmental Planning and Management43(4)519540Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brunner, H., Moro, D., Wallis, R., Andrasek, A. 1991Comparison of the diets of foxes, dogs and cats in an urban parkThe Victorian Naturalist108(2)3437Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buchanan, R. A. 1979. Edge disturbance in natural areas. Australian Parks and Recreation August:39–43.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Buchanan, R. A. 1989. Bush regeneration. Open Training and Education Network, TAFE NSW, Strathfield, NSW.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Commonwealth of Australia. 2003. Australia’s report to the UNCSD on the implementation of Agenda 21 1995 — Local government [online]; available from www.deh.gov.au/commitments/uncsd/csd1995/lgov.html (accessed 3 December 2003).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Commonwealth of Australia. 1996. National strategy for the conservation of Australia’s biological diversity. Department of the Environment, Sport and Territories, Canberra.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Commonwealth of Australia. 1998. Australia’s national report to the fourth conference of the parties to the convention on biological diversity. Environment Australia, Canberra.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Conacher, A., Conacher, J. 2000Environmental planning and management in AustraliaOxford University PressVictoria.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cripps, E., C. Binning, and M. Young. 1999. Opportunity denied: Review of the legislative ability of local governments to conserve native vegetation. Research Report2/99. National R&D Program on Rehabilitation, Management and Conservation of Remnant Vegetation. Environment Australia, Canberra.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Doremus, H. 2003A policy portfolio approach to biodiversity protection on private landsEnvironmental Science and Policy6217232Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Emilsson, S., Hjelm, O. 2002Implementation of standardized environmental management systems in Swedish local authorities: Reasons, expectations and some outcomesEnvironmental Science and Policy5443448Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Florg ¥rd, C. 2000Long-term changes in indigenous vegetation preserved in urban areasLandscape and Urban Planning52101116Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fox, M. D. 1990Interactions of native and introduced species in new habitatsProceedings of the Ecological Society of Australia16141147Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Grumbine, R. E. 1997Reflections on “what is ecosystem management?”Conservation Biology11(1)4147Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hitchmough, J. 1994

    The management of semi-natural and natural vegetation. Pages 391–422

    Hitchmough, J. D. eds. Urban landscape managementReed International Books Australia Pty LimitedMelbourne.
    Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    J ¶rby, S. A. 2002Local agenda 21 in four Swedish municipalities: A tool towards sustainabilityJournal of Environmental Planning and Management45(2)219244Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Loew, B. 2000Multiple species habitat conservation planning: goals and strategies of local governmentsEnvironmental Management26(Suppl. 1)S15S21Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Matlack, G. R. 1993Sociological edge effects: spatial distribution of human impacts in suburban forest fragmentsEnvironmental Management17(6)829835Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Perth Biodiversity Project2002Capacity of Perth’s local governments to conserve biodiversity: Survey analysis reportPerth Biodiversity ProjectWest Perth.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rose, S. 1997Integrating management of Pittosporum undulatum with other environmental weeds in Sydney’s urban bushlandPacific Conservation Biology3350365Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ruliffson, J. A., Haight, R. G., Gobster, P. H., Homans, F. R. 2003Metropolitan natural area protection to maximize public access and species representationEnvironmental Science and Policy6291299Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Skinner, M. W., Joseph, A. E., Kuhn, R. G. 2003Social and environmental regulation in rural China: Bringing the changing role of local government into focusGeoforum34267281Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stenhouse, R. N. 2004. “Fragmentation and internal disturbance of native vegetation reserves in the Perth Metropolitan Area, Western Australia.” Landscape and Urban Planning, 68 (4): 389–401Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    UNCED. 1992. Agenda 21: UN conference on environment and development. United Nations Commission on Environment and Development Secretariat, Geneva.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Renae N. Stenhouse
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Earth and Geographical Sciences, The University of Western AustraliaPerthAUSTRALIA 6009

Personalised recommendations