Search

Australia has a heritage conservation problem. Can farming and Aboriginal heritage protection co-exist?

Rio Tinto’s destruction of the 46,000 year old Juukan Gorge rock shelters has led to recommendations by the Parliamentary Inquiry on <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportjnt/024757/toc_pdf/AWayForward.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">how Australia can better conserve Aboriginal heritage sites</a>. Around the time the recommendations were made, Queensland’s Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act faced an important test when a pastoralist who cleared 500 hectares of bushland at Kingvale Station in Cape York <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/qld-country-hour/scott-harris-cleared-of-breaching-cultural-heritage-act/13592850">was charged</a> with failing to protect Aboriginal cultural heritage. The charges were eventually <a href="https://www.northqueenslandregister.com.au/story/7474626/cultural-heritage-charges-against-scott-harris-dismissed/">dismissed</a> but the prosecution, the first of its kind in Queensland, highlights weaknesses in the law. Like related legislation in other Australian states and territories, Queensland’s law requires landholders to conserve Aboriginal heritage sites or risk prosecution. But the law has been criticised by many Aboriginal people and heritage specialists for allowing destructive development by removing any ability for government to independently assess how proposed clearing would affect Aboriginal heritage. Under the “duty of care” provisions in the Act, Aboriginal heritage must be protected even if it is not known to landholders. However, as the Kingvale clearing case heard, if Aboriginal heritage is not known, how can it be shown to have been lost? <h2>What we learned from the Kingvale clearing case</h2> In 2013, the former Newman government in Queensland removed protection for the environment by introducing the Vegetation Management Act which enabled clearing of what they deemed as “high value agricultural projects” in Cape York. The World Wildlife Foundation argued this would see large areas of forest and bushland destroyed. Advocates for the new Act <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2013-05-22/veg-law-pass/4705890">argued</a> primary producers are “acutely aware of their responsibility to care for the environment”. In opening up new areas of Cape York to clearing, this legislation posed new threats to heritage sites. In this context the landholder of Kingvale decided he did not need to assess cultural heritage when clearing 500 hectares. At the conclusion of the hearing into this case, Judge Julie Dick of the Cairns District Court instructed the jury to return <a href="https://www.cairnspost.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=CPWEB_WRE170_a_GGL&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cairnspost.com.au%2Fnews%2Fcairns%2Fcape-york-grazier-cleared-of-criminal-land-clearing-charges%2Fnews-story%2F1d124158e58936a302f1ee5d159ad841&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium">a not-guilty verdict</a>, exonerating the landholder, as the offence could not be proved beyond reasonable doubt. The landholder’s legal team noted in the media if their defendant had been found guilty, every landholder (including freeholders) who had cleared land, built a fence or firebreak, ploughed a paddock, or built a road or airstrip since 2003 would potentially be guilty of a criminal offence. The defendant argued the ramifications of the legal case were significant <blockquote> for the rest of Queensland […] anyone who mowed a lawn or cut down a tree since 2003 would be automatically liable. </blockquote> In our view, this is hyperbole. <a href="https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/pdf/inforce/2016-09-27/act-2003-079">Section 21 of the Act</a> makes explicit a person’s right to enjoy the normal and allowed use of their land to the extent they don’t harm Aboriginal heritage. Further, a person doesn’t commit an offence if they take into account the nature of the activity and the likelihood of it causing harm. Mowing the lawn is quite different to clearing 500 hectares of native vegetation. The setting of this activity is also important. Kingvale Station is located 100 kilometres west of the national heritage listed Quinkan Country. Heritage studies in similar landscapes across Cape York have identified scarred trees, artefact scatters, stone arrangements and cultural burial places. Based on our heritage experience across Queensland, it would be surprising not to find Aboriginal heritage sites at Kingvale. To reduce heritage risks, we assess the potential impacts of an activity, and talk with relevant Aboriginal groups about their sites and heritage values. Archaeologists and anthropologists also develop models to predict where unknown sites are likely to be found. <img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/431020/original/file-20211109-23-aylfq7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="" /> Recorded archaeological sites across Cape York. The distribution pattern reflects several key heritage surveys. It is expected that cultural sites would be found across the cape, including within the 500 hectares cleared at Kingvale. Image by Kelsey M. Lowe. <h2>Can farming and the conservation of Aboriginal heritage co-exist?</h2> The best way to conserve heritage is for Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australians to work together to identify, document, and protect places. An important example is the discovery of human remains from a mortuary tree west of St George, southern Queensland. The site was discovered during fence clearing by the landholder, who contacted the police. We worked with the landholder who has supported the Kooma nations people to conserve the mortuary tree and enable it to remain on country. <iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qKJs23hwLXA?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe> Courtesy of Tony Miscamble, NGH Consulting. A further example from Mithaka Country saw a spectacular stone arrangement discovered by a pastoral station manager, who notified the native title holders. All are now engaging with researchers to <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=TAWEB_WRE170_a_GGL&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.com.au%2Fnation%2Fstones-point-way-to-indigenous-silk-road%2Fnews-story%2F8318b531d82263beab4afd089fd8d559&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium">investigate the site’s history</a>. Dozens of other examples around the state illustrate collaborative approaches to heritage conservation. But more effective legislation is urgently needed in response to Kingvale’s failed prosecution. <img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430631/original/file-20211107-10010-f752su.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="" /> A spectacular stone arrangement from Mithaka country. Image courtesy of Lyndon Mechielsen <h2>How can we improve cultural heritage protection?</h2> The Juukan Gorge case highlighted how Australia has a problem protecting its Aboriginal cultural heritage. The final report of the parliamentary inquiry into the disaster made several <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportjnt/024757/toc_pdf/AWayForward.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">recommendations</a> that could help pave a way forward. Instances like Kingvale emphasise more work needs to be done. The Queensland government needs to act now to address the glaring problem with its heritage legislation. Heritage management investment will also help. Victoria provides an example of how to improve Aboriginal heritage management. A standout action is the roll-out of a Certificate IV in Aboriginal cultural heritage management, with over 500 Aboriginal graduates to date. This program is decentralising heritage management and empowering Aboriginal people across Victoria, building a level of professionalism rarely seen in other states. Establishing treaties and agreements similar to those in Canada and New Zealand could go a long way to enable First Nations people in Australia to authoritatively protect their respective cultural heritage sites. Heritage conservation will remain challenging, particularly in resource-rich states like Queensland. But we can do better. Judge Dick’s ruling, while frustrating for the effort to conserve heritage, is crucial as it highlights weaknesses in the law. This trial, along with the Juukan Gorge incident, may represent a critical tipping point in the struggle to protect Aboriginal cultural heritage in Queensland and across Australia.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/170956/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michael-westaway-118240">Michael Westaway</a>, Australian Research Council Future Fellow, Archaeology, School of Social Science, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805">The University of Queensland</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/joshua-gorringe-1237694">Joshua Gorringe</a>, General Manager Mithaka Aboriginal Corporation, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/indigenous-knowledge-4846">Indigenous Knowledge</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kelsey-m-lowe-1287335">Kelsey M. Lowe</a>, Senior Research Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805">The University of Queensland</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/richard-martin-595866">Richard Martin</a>, Senior lecturer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805">The University of Queensland</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ross-mitchell-1288513">Ross Mitchell</a>, Common Law holder and director of Kooma Aboriginal Corporation Native Title PBC, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/indigenous-knowledge-4846">Indigenous Knowledge</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-has-a-heritage-conservation-problem-can-farming-and-aboriginal-heritage-protection-co-exist-170956">original article</a>. Image: Dave Hunt/AAP Image

Domestic Travel

How do conservation efforts stack up?

<div class="copy"> Conservation initiatives are cropping up all over the planet to address escalating environmental threats and crumbling biodiversity – but what makes them reach a scale that has tangible impacts? Helping them go viral is one answer found by an international study led by Imperial College London, <a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0384-1" target="_blank">published </a>in the journal Nature Sustainability. <h2>Conservation initiatives needed to head off extinction crisis</h2> The team saw that while an enormous amount of research on our “<a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/nature/what-is-a-mass-extinction-and-are-we-in-one-now/" target="_blank">sixth extinction crisis</a>” has identified threats to biodiversity and the consequences thereof, relatively little research has evaluated the adoption of conservation efforts including policies, programs and projects. “Conservation initiatives like managing fishing resources and offsetting land for nature are critical for protecting biodiversity and the valuable ecosystems that help provide us with clean water and air,” says lead author Morena Mills. To evaluate their success, Mills and colleagues investigated 22 diverse schemes from around the world, ranging from locally managed marine areas and community resource management initiatives to government programs, NGOs and international World Heritage sites. The resulting database spanned terrestrial and marine ecosystems of flora and fauna managed by low- and high-income regions on local, national and international levels, from which the researchers modelled the factors that drove the spread of each initiative. <h3>What helps conservation initiatives gain traction?</h3> Of those tested, they found that 83% of successful schemes followed a ‘slow-fast-slow’ model – they were taken up slowly at first, then grew quickly as early adopters connect with other potential adopters. “We found that most of these initiatives spread like a disease, where they depend on a potential adopter catching the conservation ‘bug’ from an existing one,” explains Mills. The authors write that this insight is important because it suggests “a slow initial uptake rate is therefore not sufficient grounds for abandoning an initiative”. Once they reached a saturation point where all potential adopters had taken it up or refused it, the rate slowed down again. Successful schemes that followed this model include resource management systems within the local waters of communities across the Solomon Islands and Fiji. However, the time between initial and later adoption of protected areas from one country to the next in such scenarios was as long as 54 years, and there seemed to be “a trade-off between the speed of uptake and the final proportion of adopters”. The other effective models had a ‘fast-slow’ pattern, like one in Samoa where quicker adoption upfront was likely to have been made possible by the government, which supplied boats and aquaculture resources to help get communities on board. Others include international environmental treaties like natural World Heritage areas and the <a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/ecological-sciences/" target="_blank">Man and the Biosphere Reserves</a>, or wildlife management areas powered by NGOs and/or governments. These initiatives are more strongly driven and regulated and don’t rely on interactions among adopters to scale up. <h3>Making conservation initiatives of the future more effective</h3> Overall, however, more than half of the schemes were taken up by less than a third of potential adopters. Ideally, they would have both fast uptake and large-scale adoption, the authors write. “In our study we did not find any initiatives that were taken up relatively quickly and by a large proportion of the potential pool of adopters,” says Mills. “We are seeking to understand more about how local context facilitates or hinders spread, to help initiatives that benefit both nature and people reach scale.” They also found many initiatives that were never implemented effectively or were abandoned. “Given the long time scales required for ecological recovery,” they write, “it is important to consider the dynamics of ongoing action, as well as adoption.” “The persistence of biodiversity and ecosystem services depends on the adoption of effective conservation initiatives at a pace and scale that match or exceed environmental threats.” Although further research is needed, their findings could help inform these efforts. “We hope our insights into biodiversity conservation initiatives spread will allow practitioners to design them so that they reach scale,” Mills says, “which is critical for enabling them to make a tangible, lasting impact.”  <img id="cosmos-post-tracker" style="opacity: 0; height: 1px!important; width: 1px!important; border: 0!important; position: absolute!important; z-index: -1!important;" src="https://syndication.cosmosmagazine.com/?id=26860&title=How+do+conservation+efforts+stack+up%3F" alt="" width="1" height="1" /> </div> <div id="contributors"> <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/earth/sustainability/does-conservation-work/">This article</a> was originally published on <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com">Cosmos Magazine</a> and was written by <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/contributor/natalie-parletta">Natalie Parletta</a>. Natalie Parletta is a freelance science writer based in Adelaide and an adjunct senior research fellow with the University of South Australia. Image: Mark Kolbe/Getty Images </div>

Travel Tips

Britney Spears’ father steps down as conservator

After a long-running legal battle over Britney Spears’ conservatorship that has captured the global public’s attention, her father, Jamie, has agreed to step down as her conservator. Mr Spears has been the conservator of his daughter since 2008, meaning he has legally had control over her assets and financial decisions for the last 13 years. However, the singer’s lawyer said Mr Spears would now be stepping down from the role. “We are pleased that Mr Spears and his lawyer have today conceded in a filing that he must be removed,” Britney’s lawyer, Mathew Rosengart, said in a statement. Mr Rosengart described the decision as “a major victory for Britney Spears and another step towards justice”. According to celebrity website TMZ, though the court filing said there were no grounds for removing Mr Spears as conservator, “he does not believe that a public battle with his daughter over his continuing service as her conservator would be in her best interests”. “Mr Spears intends to work with the court and his daughter’s new attorney to prepare for an orderly transition to a new conservator,” the court filing said. The pop star and her father have been in court several times recently, including when Ms Spears launched another legal bid to remove her father from the conservator role last month. She has spoken out on social media about the court-appointed conservatorship, which was initially a temporary measure following a mental breakdown in 2008, calling it abusive and humiliating. Image: Twitter

Relationships

The first step to conserving the Great Barrier Reef is understanding what lives there

Look at this photo of two coral skeletons below. You’d be forgiven for thinking they’re the same species, or at least closely related, but looks can be deceiving. These two species diverged tens of millions of years ago, probably earlier than our human lineage split from baboons and macaques. Scientists have traditionally used morphology (size, shape and colour) to identify species and infer their evolutionary history. But most species were first described in the <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/027073a0">19th century</a>, and based solely on features of the coral skeleton visible under a microscope. Morphology remains important for species recognition. The problem is we don’t know whether a particular morphological feature reflects species ancestry, or evolved independently. Our new study <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1055790320302165">examined</a> the traditional ideas of coral species and their evolutionary relationships using “<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1755-0998.12736">phylogenomics</a>” – comparing thousands of DNA sequences across coral species. Our results revealed the diversity and distributions of corals are vastly different to what we previously thought. It shows we still don’t know many fundamental aspects about the corals on Great Barrier Reef. And after three mass bleaching events in five years, not having a handle on the basics could mean <a href="http://elibrary.gbrmpa.gov.au/jspui/bitstream/11017/3569/4/Draft-restoration-adaptation-policy.pdf">our attempts to intervene</a> and help coral survive climate change may have unexpected consequences. How do we know which species is which? Despite being one of the <a href="https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00146.x">best-studied</a> marine ecosystems on Earth, there are fundamental knowledge gaps around the Great Barrier Reef, including: <ol> <li>how many coral species live there?</li> <li>how do we identify them?</li> <li>where are they found across the vast Great Barrier Reef ecosystem?</li> </ol> Finding the answers to these questions starts with accurate “taxonomy” – the science of naming and classifying living things. Identifying species based on how similar they look may seem straightforward. As Darwin famously said, closely related species often share morphological features because they inherited them from a common ancestor. However, this can be misleading if two unrelated species independently acquire similar features. This process, called convergent evolution, often occurs when different species are faced with similar ecological challenges. A <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/phenomena/2015/02/06/why-an-ichthyosaur-looks-like-a-dolphin/">classic example</a> of convergent evolution is dolphins and the prehistoric ichthyosaurs. These animals are unrelated, but share many similarities since they both occupy a similar ecological niche. At the other end of the spectrum, morphology can vary considerably within a single species. An alien taxonomist visiting Earth could be forgiven for describing the Chihuahua and the Irish Wolfhound as two distinct species. Bringing coral taxonomy into the 21st century We used molecular phylogenetics, a field of research that uses variations in DNA sequences to reconstruct genealogies. From corals to humans, molecular phylogenetics has revolutionised our understanding of the origins and evolution of life on Earth. Molecular approaches have <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-31305-4_4">revolutionised</a> our understanding of the diversity and evolution of corals, shedding light on <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature02339">deeper branches</a> in the coral “tree of life”. But within hyper-diverse, ecologically-important coral groups, such as the staghorn corals from the genus Acropora, we are still in the dark. <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1055790320302165">Our new technique</a> addresses this by comparing thousands of key regions across coral genomes (the entire genetic code of an organism) to help identify species in this ecologically important group for the first time. This method will also allow us to identify morphological features that do reflect shared ancestry and help us recognise species when diving in the reef. About a quarter of all coral species on the Great Barrier Reef are staghorn corals, and they provide much of the three-dimensional structure fishes and many other coral reef animals rely on, just like trees in a forest. Unfortunately, staghorn corals are also highly susceptible to threats such as thermal bleaching and crown-of-thorns seastar predation. The future of reefs will be heavily influenced by the fate of staghorn corals. The risk of ‘silent extinctions’ While we don’t yet know how many coral species occur on the Great Barrier Reef or how widespread they are, many species appear to have far smaller ranges than we previously thought. For example, we now know some of the corals on Lord Howe Island are endemic to only a few reefs in subtropical eastern Australia and <a href="https://www.mapress.com/j/zt/article/view/zootaxa.3626.4.11">occur nowhere else</a>, not even on the Great Barrier Reef. They evolved in isolation and bleach at <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/gcb.14772">much lower temperatures</a> than corals on tropical reefs. This means Lord Howe Island’s corals are of far greater conservation concern than currently recognised, because <a href="https://theconversation.com/bleaching-has-struck-the-southernmost-coral-reef-in-the-world-114433">one severe bleaching event</a> could cause the extinction of these species. The risk of “silent extinctions”, where species go extinct without even being noticed, is one of the reasons behind the Australian Academy of Science’s <a href="https://www.science.org.au/support/analysis/decadal-plans-science/discovering-biodiversity-decadal-plan-taxonomy">Decadal Plan for Taxonomy</a>, which has led to the ambitious goal to document all Australian species in the next 25 years. Intervening now may have unexpected consequences In April, the <a href="https://www.gbrrestoration.org/reports#technical-reports">Reef Restoration and Adaptation Program</a> concept feasibility study found 160 possible interventions to help save the Great Barrier Reef. <a href="https://www.gbrrestoration.org/">Proposed interventions</a> include moving corals from warm to cooler waters, introducing genetically-engineered heat-tolerant corals into wild populations, and the harvest and release of coral larvae. What could go wrong? Well-intentioned interventions may inadvertently threaten coral communities, for example, through introduction or movement of diseases within the Great Barrier Reef. <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/amphibians/c/cane-toad/">Cane toads</a> are a famous example of unintended consequences: introduced in the 1930s to control an insect pest, they are now wreaking havoc on Australian ecosystems. Any intervention affecting the ecology of a system as complex as the Great Barrier Reef requires a precautionary approach to minimise the chance of unintended and potentially negative consequences. What we need, at this time, is far greater investment in fundamental biodiversity research. Without this information, we are not in a position to judge whether particular actions will threaten the resilience of the reef, rather than enhance it. Written by Tom Bridge, Andrea Quattrini, Andrew Baird and Peter Cowman. Republished with permission of <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-first-step-to-conserving-the-great-barrier-reef-is-understanding-what-lives-there-146097">The Conversation.</a>

Cruising

The first step to conserving the Great Barrier Reef is understanding what lives there

Look at this photo of two coral skeletons below. You’d be forgiven for thinking they’re the same species, or at least closely related, but looks can be deceiving. These two species diverged tens of millions of years ago, probably earlier than our human lineage split from baboons and macaques. Scientists have traditionally used morphology (size, shape and colour) to identify species and infer their evolutionary history. But most species were first described in the <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/027073a0">19th century</a>, and based solely on features of the coral skeleton visible under a microscope. Morphology remains important for species recognition. The problem is we don’t know whether a particular morphological feature reflects species ancestry, or evolved independently. Our new study <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1055790320302165">examined</a> the traditional ideas of coral species and their evolutionary relationships using “<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1755-0998.12736">phylogenomics</a>” – comparing thousands of DNA sequences across coral species. Join 130,000 people who subscribe to free evidence-based news. Get newsletter Our results revealed the diversity and distributions of corals are vastly different to what we previously thought. It shows we still don’t know many fundamental aspects about the corals on Great Barrier Reef. And after three mass bleaching events in five years, not having a handle on the basics could mean <a href="http://elibrary.gbrmpa.gov.au/jspui/bitstream/11017/3569/4/Draft-restoration-adaptation-policy.pdf">our attempts to intervene</a> and help coral survive climate change may have unexpected consequences. An international team of scientists have developed a new genetic tool that can help them better understand and ultimately work to save coral reefs. How do we know which species is which? Despite being one of the <a href="https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00146.x">best-studied</a> marine ecosystems on Earth, there are fundamental knowledge gaps around the Great Barrier Reef, including: 1. how many coral species live there? 2. how do we identify them? 3. where are they found across the vast Great Barrier Reef ecosystem? Finding the answers to these questions starts with accurate “taxonomy” – the science of naming and classifying living things. Identifying species based on how similar they look may seem straightforward. As Darwin famously said, closely related species often share morphological features because they inherited them from a common ancestor. However, this can be misleading if two unrelated species independently acquire similar features. This process, called convergent evolution, often occurs when different species are faced with similar ecological challenges. A <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/phenomena/2015/02/06/why-an-ichthyosaur-looks-like-a-dolphin/">classic example</a> of convergent evolution is dolphins and the prehistoric ichthyosaurs. These animals are unrelated, but share many similarities since they both occupy a similar ecological niche. Ichthyosaurs dominated the world’s oceans for millions of years. At the other end of the spectrum, morphology can vary considerably within a single species. An alien taxonomist visiting Earth could be forgiven for describing the Chihuahua and the Irish Wolfhound as two distinct species. Bringing coral taxonomy into the 21st century We used molecular phylogenetics, a field of research that uses variations in DNA sequences to reconstruct genealogies. From corals to humans, molecular phylogenetics has revolutionised our understanding of the origins and evolution of life on Earth. Molecular approaches have <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-31305-4_4">revolutionised</a> our understanding of the diversity and evolution of corals, shedding light on <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature02339">deeper branches</a> in the coral “tree of life”. But within hyper-diverse, ecologically-important coral groups, such as the staghorn corals from the genus Acropora, we are still in the dark. <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1055790320302165">Our new technique</a> addresses this by comparing thousands of key regions across coral genomes (the entire genetic code of an organism) to help identify species in this ecologically important group for the first time. This method will also allow us to identify morphological features that do reflect shared ancestry and help us recognise species when diving in the reef. About a quarter of all coral species on the Great Barrier Reef are staghorn corals, and they provide much of the three-dimensional structure fishes and many other coral reef animals rely on, just like trees in a forest. Unfortunately, staghorn corals are also highly susceptible to threats such as thermal bleaching and crown-of-thorns seastar predation. The future of reefs will be heavily influenced by the fate of staghorn corals. The risk of ‘silent extinctions’ While we don’t yet know how many coral species occur on the Great Barrier Reef or how widespread they are, many species appear to have far smaller ranges than we previously thought. For example, we now know some of the corals on Lord Howe Island are endemic to only a few reefs in subtropical eastern Australia and <a href="https://www.mapress.com/j/zt/article/view/zootaxa.3626.4.11">occur nowhere else</a>, not even on the Great Barrier Reef. They evolved in isolation and bleach at <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/gcb.14772">much lower temperatures</a> than corals on tropical reefs. This means Lord Howe Island’s corals are of far greater conservation concern than currently recognised, because <a href="https://theconversation.com/bleaching-has-struck-the-southernmost-coral-reef-in-the-world-114433">one severe bleaching event</a> could cause the extinction of these species. The risk of “silent extinctions”, where species go extinct without even being noticed, is one of the reasons behind the Australian Academy of Science’s <a href="https://www.science.org.au/support/analysis/decadal-plans-science/discovering-biodiversity-decadal-plan-taxonomy">Decadal Plan for Taxonomy</a>, which has led to the ambitious goal to document all Australian species in the next 25 years. Intervening now may have unexpected consequences In April, the <a href="https://www.gbrrestoration.org/reports#technical-reports">Reef Restoration and Adaptation Program</a> concept feasibility study found 160 possible interventions to help save the Great Barrier Reef. <a href="https://www.gbrrestoration.org/">Proposed interventions</a> include moving corals from warm to cooler waters, introducing genetically-engineered heat-tolerant corals into wild populations, and the harvest and release of coral larvae. What could go wrong? Well-intentioned interventions may inadvertently threaten coral communities, for example, through introduction or movement of diseases within the Great Barrier Reef. <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/amphibians/c/cane-toad/">Cane toads</a> are a famous example of unintended consequences: introduced in the 1930s to control an insect pest, they are now wreaking havoc on Australian ecosystems. Any intervention affecting the ecology of a system as complex as the Great Barrier Reef requires a precautionary approach to minimise the chance of unintended and potentially negative consequences. What we need, at this time, is far greater investment in fundamental biodiversity research. Without this information, we are not in a position to judge whether particular actions will threaten the resilience of the reef, rather than enhance it. Written by Tom Bridge, Andrea Quattrini, Andrew Baird and Peter Crowman. Republished with permission of <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-first-step-to-conserving-the-great-barrier-reef-is-understanding-what-lives-there-146097">The Conversation.</a>

Cruising

Roasted rhubarb, strawberry and rose conserve

Roasted rhubarb, and rose conserve, made with sweet strawberries that have been kissed by the sun is a delightful taste of summer. Makes: 2 x 300g jars Ingredients: <ul> <li>500g strawberries, washed and leaves removed</li> <li>5-6 rhubarb stalks leaves removed, about 300g</li> <li>½ cup (100g) sugar</li> <li>Juice of ½ a lemon, about 2 tablespoons</li> <li>2-3 teaspoons rose water</li> </ul> Method: <ol> <li>Preheat oven 180 degrees Celsius.</li> <li>Cut the strawberries into halves, and rhubarb into 3cm lengths. Place on a lined baking tray and sprinkle with 1 tablespoon of the sugar. Mix well and arrange in a single layer. Bake for 20 minutes until the fruit is tender and fragrant.</li> <li>Scoop fruit and juices into a shallow saucepan, and add the remaining sugar and lemon juice. Bring to a gentle simmer over a moderate heat.</li> <li>Cook uncovered, stirring regularly until thickened – about 20 minutes. Keep in mind the conserve will thicken some as it cools. Add the rose water to taste. Remove from the heat and cover.</li> <li>Sterilise 2 x 300g jars. Place clean jars in a 120C oven for 10 minutes. Meanwhile, boil lids for 10 minutes, drain and air dry. Carefully remove one jar from the oven, place on a wooden board and fill immediately with the hot conserve (reheated if needed). Wipe the rim and secure the hot lid. Repeat with the second jar. Cool completely, then check lids are sealed.</li> <li>Store in a cool dark pantry and use within six months. Once opened keep in the fridge and consume within four weeks.</li> </ol> Find comprehensive home preserving guidelines in my new cookbook, Homegrown Kitchen – Everyday Recipes for Eating Well. For more of Nicola's recipes visit, <a href="http://www.homegrown-kitchen.co.nz/" target="_blank">Homegrown-Kitchen.co.nz</a> Written by Nicola Galloway. Republished with permission of <a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/" target="_blank">Stuff.co.nz.</a>

Food & Wine

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Entertainment

Property

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Australia has a heritage conservation problem. Can farming and Aboriginal heritage protection co-exist?

How do conservation efforts stack up?

Britney Spears’ father steps down as conservator

The first step to conserving the Great Barrier Reef is understanding what lives there

The first step to conserving the Great Barrier Reef is understanding what lives there

Roasted rhubarb, strawberry and rose conserve