Attached for your information the Australian Conservation Foundation nomination to add human population growth in Australia as a threatening process under theEnvironment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
As the nomination points out, “Population growth is the first driver in a complex chain of direct and indirect effects on Australia’s biodiversity. It underpins and exacerbates nearly every other threat to our ecological life support systems.”
The Third Intergenerational Report,Australia to 2050: future challenges, projected that Australia’s population will reach 35.9 million by 2050. If this is allowed to happen it will have devastating effects on our ability to protect our unique wildlife and ecosystems.
It is believed that if the nomination is successful it will enable us to be better equipped to deal with the environmental consequences of an escalating population in Australia.
Kelvin Thomson MP
Member for Wills
Population growth doesn't equal environmental degradation. I am sure Kelvin studied environmental science/resource management like I have???
He has no idea. Why is the USA the most polluting per capita in the world? Possibly because of their sprawl and dependance on cars for transport? Unfortunately, many large western countries have followed the USA in design, ie. sprawl over density. This is the main reason why we are facing environmental concerns. Only 1 city in North America has truly limited sprawl and built higher - Vancouver. It seems the most densely populated city in North America has also been rated world's most liveable city numerous times over the past decade...co-incidence?
If we want better public transport, better environmental management, then we need to build up and stop eating up our farms for endless housing blocks.
I will be happy for someone who is educated to prove how it is worse for the environment to limit sprawl and build up instead of out...My guess is I will hear no reply...