These represent side-to-side movements in the conservation sector and outside of other groups such as commercial entities
There so many ways in which you can interpret situations across different geographic, political and cultural lines. There is no one-stop-shop for major problems in Australia, BUT, there are structures and formulas that can be implemented to ensure a better future for all Australians, include our native species.
The various approaches that are currently used to address problems across Australia are not necessarily wrong. It's a struggle for people and organizations to get recognition for their work. Society is moving much faster than it was throughout the 70's 80's and 90's. Now, Australia is in the digital age and there is so much information available with so many people competing for attention. But, everyone needs to start somewhere.
The conservation sector is much more confusing compared to the captive sector, as there are many sub-groups bickering and fighting amongst themselves and competing for the role of "hero" for the koala. In order to move forward in the conservation sector, there needs to be more clarification and a better understanding for each of the 15 groups working with the koala. The 15 groups need to be reduced into 3 main categories, and within these categories, a clear structure must be formulated to understand differing roles.
Today: There are around 15 different types of entities today, but around 14 different types of Conservation sectors. These entities act as a support and resistance towards the koala and other native animals (including the three levels of government):
1. Federal Legislators (I see the written part separate as leaders come and go)
2. State Legislators (I see the written part separate as leaders come and go)
3. Council Legislators/Wires (I see the written part separate as leaders come and go)
4. Environmental-Governmental departments (Senior land services/biodiversity)
5. Department of Primary Industry
6. National Parks
7. Academics and University Sector
8. RSPCA
9. Veterinary Association-Clinics
10. Small resident koala groups
11. Independent wildlife rescue groups
12. Land & Bush Care
13. Large non-profit conservation koala groups
14. Koala hospitals
15. Wildlife Parks and Zoos are a-part of animal conservation, but still not really expected in the mainstream, of Australian Conservation as they have a different type of framework. So, the mainstream of zoological industry comes and goes as they please, as they see the mess-and choose most of the time to stay away, because of the inconsistency in the way most conservationist practice their operations. It's about the control of a program that both institutions can't agree upon. These 14 groups push and shuffle over the top of each other.
For example, it looks like the diagram below: Support & Resistance amongst different organisations
The conservation sector is rife with issues that present barriers to overall koala protection and conservation. They rely heavily on red tape. Many different factions and academics who have the foundational understanding on a scientific level, but in general, don't have the ability to set up a more holistic and structured process.
If we managed to fix the current process, it would involve commercial entities and would give priority to field experience, rather than relying too heavily on academia. There needs to be an equal amount of variety across these areas; knowing where to coordinate and break down barriers for everyone to win at the same time. There is an obsession in Australia; a belief that Australia need academics to solve every koala issue. We need to realize that even academics have their limits.
1. You have academics with their individual studies, conducting their own research;
2. You have academics who are conducting their own field studies, with a heavy presence of non-profit organization as they are financing these studies;
3. You have academics, who really don't see the results of their work in a direct way, like the captivity sector does on a daily base, even when they work or company the keepers, its always from a side view and aren't there for too long.
4. You have non-profit organizations who heavily rely on academic advice with an unconscious bias towards their understanding of koala behaviour through the use of environment and diet.
5. You have non-profit organizations slowly converting to commercialization practices in a strong koala community; e.g. Port Macquarie.
6. You have smaller direct organizations that support their local koalas in conservation, under their own terms and according to their local environment. They have limited resources and knowledge and are proud to support their local koalas, but only on their terms;
7. You have local groups forming with no real structure, working with and without academic influences. They form their own organization with a clear outline to protect their wildlife and koalas. As soon as they ask for help from councils, such as signage or warnings of wildlife in the area, they feel the pressure from councils to comply to their rules, as councils get nervous that a high-profile animal can cause an emotional response in residents which would stop further developments. This would mean a loss of income to local councils, so they might team up with such organizations to give them face-value legitimacy;
8. You have local councils conducting their own field studies who are receive advice from academics and non-profit organizations, but they form their own opinion as they are heavy influenced by their own agenda (and threats by outside parties).
At the moment, because things aren't clear, there is still plenty of debate on how to create legislation for the future. Environmental departments and academics are trying to work it out, but these two departments are missing a vital ingredient: how to get a return on investment in terms of both capital and impact. Money should be seen as a form of transport, but unfortunately that is not an option at the moment, particularly with the NSW state government who believes that the koala is happy with certain amounts of land. Koala's, like humans, need a purpose, as well as areas to move according to the weather patterns; they need trees, including major freeways of trees, like our transport system. Tree corridors should be seen as similar to our transport system:
1. Freeways;
2. Highways; and
3. Residential roads.
Koalas needs the same type of system in order to move about. It's all about creating a vision and processes to allow our native wildlife more inclusion.
There is no foresight in the current method. Everything is set in stone in the short term, with no room to expand and build a platform which allows flexibility to grow and improve.
If we follow a path which adopts proper planning and legislation while thinking of the big picture (like the horizontal line of support and resistance) then we could set up a framework throughout Australia, starting in NSW and Victoria.
Once the framework is in place a new form of conservation can emerge, one which will create further income and high ethical standards. It will be a new and improved industry that generates wealth while protecting and respecting the koala and the environment.
This would be the best outcome in terms of work practices. By creating the vertical line of support and resistance line (going through that side to side movement) we can understand which businesses work well together, and which don't. This sector would also combine both conservation practices with captivity management, as well as reducing the zoning rules between housing and tourism, commercial with residential. The future of tomorrow would much different than today with these living arrangements.
Conservation groups are also faced with the challenge of overcoming cultural obstacles. For example, the average volunteer trying to participate in the conservation of the koala (after foot-soldiering for years) will become acutely aware of the surrounding environment of their local koala population. These volunteers should, after some time in the game, be rewarded through some form of payment. Having a volunteer program is important only to sift-out people who find this type of work unsuitable. After a volunteer apprenticeship of around 3 years, they should be on a wage, as we need to encourage and give some form of self-confidence to their experiences. The biggest threat towards a stronger koala industry is the increase of volunteers. This should be looked upon-a process to enable people to find their true calling. Whether this type of work fits with their lifestyle or not.
The fact we continue to rely on a volunteer-heavy work force will only weaken the process. Another weakening factor is the fact that conservation programs are restricted by the government sector (just like the captive sector). It's all about the platform in which two sectors work from. If we had a long-term plan, whereby both sectors could see the possibility of a merger to drive progress through incentives and individual gain, then these sectors would be given the success they deserve along with governments grants to support the winning program.
The future of the 3 main entities and their Governance's should be more streamline and operate simply. My example below:
1. The Government - Overview a more holistic approach, with each state working together, to form one Platform-in which has been set-up, with bipartisan support
2. Conservation Sector - that brings in the data of numbers and creates options of managing the environment
3. Captive Sector – Works within these boundaries of the Conservation framework, that work off, both the first two entities and create that commerce structure, to provide an income, so koala's and wildlife in general become less relied on the tax payer, creating a platform of self-sufficient, while maintaining a high standards of animal husbandry.
Our next Article 33, is combining both pressure lines together for the conservation Sector
52 articles 4 themes 1 story www.koalaretreat.com