Under the second phase of the Natural Heritage Trust (NHT2), there is a fundamental shift towards more strategic investment based on regional investments. These investments will be made through an approved regional body with an accredited, integrated natural resource management plan and investment strategy developed by the particular region.

The process is being touted as a shift from an individual project approach to an integrated regional approach to natural resource management.

In view of this, it appears the Lake Eyre Basin process has been well ahead of its time. The Lake Eyre Basin process was conceived, designed and set up by the community in the mid 1990s as a truly regional group, working on integrated catchment management across four state jurisdictions.

The Lake Eyre Basin process doesn’t need to make this shift; it doesn’t need to make this shift because it’s already there.

This ‘new’ regional approach to the delivery of Natural Heritage Trust Mark II money for natural resource management is at varying stages of implementation in the four jurisdictions covering the Lake Eyre Basin.

New South Wales appears to have a healthy head start on the other states in that it is building its regional process on the back of an existing structure.

In the late1980s New South Wales created ‘total catchment management committees’ which were based, as the name suggests, on catchment boundaries. This became a moot point in the far west of the state where the management area, the Western Catchment, was a collection of sub-catchments and part catchments, most of which drain into the Barwon-Darling River.

In early 2000, Catchment Management Boards were established to replace the existing Catchment Management Committees. The new arrangement was designed to increase the integration of natural resource management efforts by the community, industry and government.

Daryl Green, who manages community partnerships out of the Department of Land and Water Conservation in Dubbo, says the Western Catchment Management Board already has a fair amount of work under its belt.

“The Board has completed its Catchment Blueprint,” he says. They’ve also submitted their 10-year investment strategy and have till the end of April to finish their 3-year, rolling investment plan.”

As well as identifying opportunities and threats associated with natural resources use, the Blueprint sets objectives and targets for the sustainable management of those resources, and develops management options, strategies and actions to meet those objectives and targets.

The Board itself is made up of representatives of community, government and industry and are drawn from primary producers, Aboriginal interests, local government, conservation and State Government. Some members are nominated by interest groups, others are drawn from the community through open nomination, and the Chair is appointed on the advice of the Minister. The State Government representation is drawn from the Regional Manager level of five agencies: National Parks and Wildlife Service; Land and Water Conservation; Fisheries; Agriculture; and Environment Protection.

“It’s the ‘Board of Directors’ of the catchment,” says Daryl Green, “and works at the strategic rather than operational level.

“The Board develops the investment strategy and directs where the monies will go but the Department of Land and Water Conservation will handle the actual funding.”

While there is no formal requirement to have complementarity with the plans of the neighbouring regions in either South Australia or Queensland, and no direct mechanism for joint projects, Daryl Green says that some projects will be, in reality, joint or cross-border.

The Queensland regional group, which covers the Queensland portion of the Lake Eyre Basin, is up and running. Desert Channels Queensland (DCQ) was formed at a meeting in Birdsville last October and draws much of its membership from the two existing catchment committees of the Lake Eyre Basin.

There are three members (including one Indigenous) from each of the Georgina Diamantina and Cooper’s Creek catchment committees, two from the Desert Uplands Committee, and one each from the Great Artesian Basin Consultative Council and the Local Government Association of Western Queensland.

In explaining the rationale for the membership, DCQ Chair, Peter Douglas pointed out that about half the Desert Uplands bioregion lies in the DCQ region; the Great Artesian Basin underlies most of the DCQ region; and there are 13 local governments either wholly or partly in the DCQ region.

“I think it’s a pretty fair cross-section of the major interest groups in the region,” he said, “but that’s not to say that others are excluded. Everyone has the right to have their say.”

“Effective communication is the key. If we have that we can avoid misunderstandings and work through the difficult issues.”

And there are already difficulties for DCQ. It is currently operating on minimal funding with in-kind administrative support from Department of Natural Resources and Mines. Peter Douglas admits the fledgling group is hamstrung by funding at the moment and the situation will continue until the bilateral agreement between Queensland and the Commonwealth is signed and Natural Heritage Trust 2 monies begin to flow.

“We’re well behind the other regions in both our planning and our budget,” he said, “but we’ll get there.”

He’s confident that any community misgivings will evaporate when people realise that DCQ is not a government body arbitrarily delivering directives to land managers on what they should be doing, but rather a funding delivery process to assist them in doing what needs to be done to look after the land.

“We’re not another layer of bureaucracy,” he asserts, “we’re a collection of community representatives with the aim of keeping the catchment in good condition, and fostering and assisting existing groups to continue their natural resource management work.

Despite the funding constraints, DCQ has had several meetings to date and recently appointed two staff members. Long-time natural resource management practitioner, Mike Chuk, is the Regional Planner and is joined by the well-credentialed, Steve Wilson, who got the job of Regional Coordinator despite, according to Peter Douglas, being a Carlton AFL supporter.

While the Rangelands Integrated Natural Resource Management Group (Rangelands INRM Group) in South Australia is different to its Queensland cousin in that it will ultimately be a statutory authority, it is clearly being shaped by the same funding environment.

As Group Chair, Chris Reed points out, funding is tight. We’re a bit starved for funds at the moment,” he said, “but we do have a very active Project Officer, Len Rule, on board, and Andrew White from the Northern Territory has just accepted the position of Executive Officer.

“In the eighteen months that we’ve been going, we’ve had considerable administrative support from the Government, and have been able to produce a ‘Foundation Document’ that outlines who we are, where we are at the moment, and is the precursor to our regional plan. The next step is to commence this plan and we’ve applied for funding through the Natural Heritage Trust to do this.”

The Rangelands INRM Group covers all of the rangelands in South Australia which is about half of the State. The sheer size of the area creates difficulties in effectively communicating with, and engaging, the community.

In an effort to ensure success in this area, the Board, which is comprised of people who live or work in the rangelands, has insisted that its staff live within the region. Consequently, Project Officer, Len Rule works out of Hawker and the Executive Officer, Andrew White will be based in Port Augusta.

South Australia’s integrated approach to natural resource management is for streamlining to minimise wastage and duplication. As part of this philosophy, the Rangelands INRM Group will share office space and administrative support in Port Augusta with other groups under the Outback SA umbrella.

According to Chris Reed, the Government is also very committed to a cross-border approach. Our Minister, John Hill, has made it clear that he expects all groups to cooperate across state borders to ensure seamless natural resource management.”

While the Northern Territory is a large chunk of Australia, it has a relatively small population and is, therefore, negotiating to be treated as a single region. They are seeking to have the Landcare Council of the Northern Territory become the regional body responsible for the delivery of Natural Heritage Trust Mark 2 money.

The major problem facing community groups in the Territory is that Federal funding has run out and experienced people have been put off. Across the Territory, facilitator and coordinator positions have been slashed from 33 to 8.

This lack of funding has hamstrung the efforts to roll out a natural resource management plan for the whole of the Northern Territory according to Rod Applegate, Senior Director of the Natural Resource Management Division of the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment.

“Our regional allocation of $3.8 million has to cover Foundation Funding and Priority Projects in addition to Facilitator and Coordinator bids,” he says. That’s not a lot of money when you have to spread it that far.”

Negotiations between the Northern Territory and the Commonwealth on the Bilateral Agreement are ongoing. We hope to have it signed by the end of June,” says Rod Applegate, “but it’s difficult to come to an agreement when the goalposts keep shifting.

Once the regional approach is bedded down he sees a pragmatic, cross-border reality emerging. There will be a natural cross-border focus on a range of natural resource management issues that are common across state borders. The approach to addressing these issues will be similar in the different areas and this should ensure a cross-border reality to the management of our natural resources.

“We, in the Territory, have no problem in taking a multi-lateral approach, but I can see there will be times when funding constraints may prevent or at least restrict it.

“People think we’ll get down to business once the Bilateral is signed but that’s only the beginning. I don’t envisage the roll-out of NHT2 will be without problems.”