Nominating Port Stephens' Mambo Wetlands as a wetland of international importance would cost ratepayers about $150,000, a council report says.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Port Stephens Council voted this year to investigate nominating the 175 hectare nature reserve at Salamander Bay for protection under the Ramsar Convention.
The push to give the area, which has been described as the "lungs of the Port Stephens marine wonderland", greater protection follows a decade of controversy.
The Ramsar convention was signed in the Iranian city of Ramsar in 1971 and aims to promote and protect wetlands throughout the world.
Areas that provide habitats for threatened or endangered species are typically listed. The Hunter Wetlands Estuary and Corrie Island at Tea Gardens are among 67 Ramsar-listed sites in Australia.
The council report, to be considered at this week's council meeting, also says the cost of maintaining a Ramsar-protected wetland would cost upwards of $190,000 in the first year and $150,000 each year after that.
"It is noted that Ramsar listing may improve access to grant funding however this cannot be relied upon as a recurrent funding source," the council report says.
The report also flags the risk that development adjoining at Ramsar-listed wetland would be subject to additional approvals resulting in delays and additional costs.
The report recommends updating the 2006 Plan of Management for wetlands, which provides a framework for the long-term protection and management of the site, at a cost of $75,000.
"It is recommended that an action be included in the Port Stephens Coastal Management Program to update the Plan of Management. This has the potential to attract state government grant funding and reduce the associated costs to council," the report says.
Port Stephens EcoNetwork has been among the groups lobbying to have the wetland listed on the Ramsar convention.
Group convenor Nigel Dique said he was disappointed that the council report did not recommend proceeding with the nomination, however, he hoped that alternative funding sources could be found.
"It's disappointing the report doesn't recommend taking the next step and agreeing in principle to nominating the area," Mr Dique said. "It's probably a little bit unfair to expect ratepayers to stump up that sort of money when they've got other priorities. But I think they can get funding from elsewhere."
Matthew Kelly
Matthew Kelly has worked as a journalist for more than 25 years. He has been working as a general reporter at the Newcastle Herald since 2018. In recent years he has reported on subjects including environment, energy, water security, manufacturing and higher education. He has previously covered issues including the health and environmental impacts of uncovered coal wagons in the Hunter Valley, the pollution of legacy of former industrial sites and freedom of information issues.
Matthew Kelly has worked as a journalist for more than 25 years. He has been working as a general reporter at the Newcastle Herald since 2018. In recent years he has reported on subjects including environment, energy, water security, manufacturing and higher education. He has previously covered issues including the health and environmental impacts of uncovered coal wagons in the Hunter Valley, the pollution of legacy of former industrial sites and freedom of information issues.
