Bills

National Parks and Wildlife (Wombat Burrows) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading (resumed on motion).

The Hon. N.F. COOK (Hurtle Vale—Minister for Human Services) (15:40): I rise to speak on this very important bill and offer my support. Our very own southern hairy-nosed wombat (Lasiorhinus latifrons) is one of three living species of wombat as well as being South Australia's faunal emblem. This excellent wombat grows to be up to one metre long, weighing between 18 and 32 kilograms of pure muscle.

They use their big blunt heads to excavate deep, cool, humid burrows, which are essential for them to survive in hot desert conditions. Wombat burrows can cover a large area and will have many entrances. All wombat species live in burrows, often creating a complex network of burrows with tunnels and chambers that can extend up to 150 metres in radius; sometimes these burrows can even be seen from space.

The southern hairy-nosed wombat unfortunately has many threats to its population, including habitat destruction and fragmentation, illegal culling, grazing competition from domestic livestock and feral animals such as rabbits, and also collisions with motor vehicles and drought can really bring the a cropper. For both our faunal emblem and the common bare-nosed wombat (Vomatus ursinus) that are found in limited areas in South Australia, we are bringing forward this bill.

Both species are currently protected under the National Parks and Wildlife Act, which means that individuals are prohibited from taking action such as killing, injuring or capturing protected animals (under section 51) without a permit. Furthermore, it is also prohibited to interfere, harass, molest or engage in activities that may be detrimental to the welfare of protected animals (section 68).

This bill includes the following provisions: the first is inserting a provision that landholders are permitted to destroy a wombat burrow where it poses a risk to human safety, farming crops and machinery such as harvesters, or infrastructure such as tracks or built structures. This provision will not derogate from the requirement of a person to comply with sections 51 and 68 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act or the Animal Welfare Act. I believe that this is very important in a civilised society.

Landholders may occasionally have valid reasons to damage burrows due to concerns related to human safety and potential risks to their very valuable equipment and infrastructure; however, the Department for Environment and Water (DEW) promotes a 'living with wildlife' approach. This encourages people to consider alternative methods of managing wombat populations, with DEW recommending nonlethal approaches to landholders, including electric fencing, fence alterations, wombat gates and burrow marking.

Destroying burrows with the intention of harming wombats is not an approved method and would likely constitute an offence under the National Parks and Wildlife Act and/or the Animal Welfare Act 1985, particularly in relation to animal mistreatment (section 13). The second provision allows the minister to declare a wombat protection zone, a geographical area where a person must not without a permit granted by the minister destroy, damage or disturb the burrow of a wombat. This is really good news for wombats.

I do really love wombats. I have loved wombats ever since A Country Practice and Fatso. In fact, one of my favourite episodes features Fatso. I am sure we can all reflect and we know that he was a beautiful wombat. But I digress just a tad. However, this is not the first time I have spoken about wombats in this house. In 2021, I gave some great tips about how you can re-use corflutes and, if you were not here for that one, let me tell you how you can make a sustainable choice and help native wildlife.

Ms Stinson: Do tell.

The Hon. N.F. COOK: I will. We know that wombats suffer from sarcoptic mange, an awful disease.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. N.F. COOK: Yes, mange—terrible. Wildlife rescuers are able to use recycled corflutes as a burrow flap. You attach a milk bottle cap to the corflute and in that goes cydectin, which is the medication. As the little wombats scurry along and trundle off to bed at night or in the day—because they can be a bit lazy; but in the daytime or the night-time, whenever they go into their little house—they scurry in, the flap swings, the cydectin pops out of the milk cap and runs down the little back of the wombat, and it allows the illness to be treated. It is fantastic: mites gone, mange fixed. You might all like to try that at home, or maybe not, but it is a terrific use for corflutes.

I do not think you can talk about wombats, though—I have talked about Fatso, that was important—without talking about the square poop. Wombat poop is wildly geometric in its cuboid design. It does make one wonder how it gets shot out in such a form, but it does very regularly. You should google this; it is quite fascinating stuff. Some of my colleagues may already know that the wombat is the only animal in the world that has cube-shaped poop.

Bare-nosed wombats can excrete four to eight scat pieces at a time, that is pieces of poop, and they might poop up to 100 pieces of square scat poop a day. After the wombat defecates, the furry little critter uses its little fat hands and its nose, and gathers up the two-centimetre size cubes of poop and places them around their territory, probably to communicate with other wombats and, horrifically, to attract mates. If they could use their little hands, they might be able to build stuff out of it. Anyway, it is a great fact for young people. I am sure some of the kids in your electorate would be most entertained—or, indeed, your staff—but back to the bill.

Transferring or rehabilitating wombats from their natural habitats can be problematic due to their strong territorial nature and potential for high-risk conflict. While there is no real easy solution to this particular problem, it is crucial to ensure that wombats are sufficiently protected under the legislation so that any authorised destruction of wombats or their habitat is carried out with the utmost of humane considerations. Taking these measures is a sensible step towards addressing the situation responsibly. I want to pass on my thanks to the very excellent Minister for Environment, Minister Susan Close, for bringing this fantastic issue to the house. I commend the bill.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Brown): Thank you, minister—most informative. The member for Flinders.

Mr TELFER (Flinders) (15:48): I rise to speak on this amendment of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972, and I do so as one of the few members who actually have wombats within their electorate. I have been listening to the speeches from the other side, and you say 'informative' Mr Acting Speaker, but I will let others be the judge of that.

I seriously want the minister and the government to consider the ramifications of this amendment because those of us who are actually in electorates that have these—as has been described already—up to one-metre long, 18 to 30 kilogram balls of muscle, know that it is actually quite a challenge to live in areas where these wombats are often endemic, and some of the wording that is within this amendment really does concern me.

When you talk about interactions between landowners and wombats, you may think flippantly about it and talk about things like fence alterations and gates. Let me tell you right now: wombats do not respect fences and wombats do not use gates. In the sorts of numbers that you have to deal with in my electorate, and especially up the western side of my electorate, wombats are an absolute challenge for landowners to have to deal with.

I have had a look at some of the wording that is within this amendment, and it really does concern me. It talks about 'destroying, damaging or disturbing' burrows of wombats. Now, let me tell you, if you are driving around the Far West Coast of my electorate—the beautiful West Coast, the wild side of our state—it is pretty easy for you to be driving along and actually 'disturb', as the wording is within this amendment, a wombat burrow. Some parts of the state have wombat burrows all over. Landowners and farmers, whether they are graziers or whether they are broadacre farmers, have to deal with this all the time. To put rules in place, to make law within this place which actually does put at risk business and put stipulations that cannot effectively be followed is, I think, really poor lawmaking.

The other aspect that I highlight within this amendment bill is the stipulation around a wombat burrow protection zone. We see the definition in this bill as 'an area declared by the Minister by notice in the Gazette to be a Wombat Burrow Protection Zone for the purposes of this section'. We do not know what these wombat burrow protection zones are going to be. It may be that within the CBD is a protection zone and the rest of the state is not. I am maybe assuming a bit more than I may within this amendment, but I would assume that a wombat burrow protection zone probably is within an area where there are wombats.

There are not too many places within metropolitan Adelaide, or even some of our regional centres, that actually have wombats. So I am assuming that some of these wombat burrow protection zones are going to be in Flinders, in Giles, in Stuart, in Narungga and in the Riverland in Chaffey. This is where the uncertainty for landowners actually does come in. It is up to the minister to declare a wombat burrow protection zone, and this being in legislation means not just this minister but subsequent ministers to come. The intention might be there; it might be a positive one, but the ramifications for landowners, especially within my electorate of Flinders, are significant.

We see within this amendment that if a burrow is outside a wombat burrow protection zone then there is a process that needs to be followed. We have already heard, even in the previous speech in this place, that wombats are protected already. They are already protected. There is already a significant process that needs to be followed by landowners if they want to have to manage or deal with some of the challenges that they face with wombat burrowing. That is only exacerbated with this amendment, and that is only if the burrow is outside a wombat burrow protection zone.

This amendment puts so much more uncertainty into the lives of landowners who are doing their best to be productive, working with and around wombats already. I would challenge every member who gets up and speaks on this to actually go to the Far West of the state, talk with landowners there, and realise that the damage that is done to the land by wombats is significant but the way that this amendment has been put together actually makes it near on impossible to technically follow the legislation. You can be driving across your paddock, you can be putting your crop in, just like the thousands of acres in the Far West, and you can even inadvertently be disturbing a wombat burrow because they are literally everywhere. These little balls of muscle are so prevalent in some areas.

I remember only last year I was travelling from Elliston down to a beautiful part of the coastline that is about 20 or 30 kilometres south of Elliston. I counted 45 wombats on the side of the road as I was driving along. Let me tell you, the interactions that these wombats already have with landowners are really challenging. If we are to put extra stipulations, extra obligations and extra hurdles on landowners and actually bring law forward that is not practically workable, I think it is really poor lawmaking. The uncertainty that this amendment does create is causing a lot of concern within my electorate of Flinders.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON (Ramsay—Minister for Tourism, Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (15:54): I rise in support of this bill, the National Parks and Wildlife (Wombat Burrows) Amendment Bill 2022. I recognise and thank the Hon. Tammy Franks in the other place for her work on this bill. At its heart, the bill is designed to give additional protection to wombats. Wombats are an iconic species in South Australia. In fact, they are an iconic species for us as a nation. There is value in increasing the protection of wombats and clarifying for landholders and the community how wombats and their habitats are protected.

As Minister for Tourism, it would be remiss of me not to speak to the value of wildlife tourism to our visitor economy. Nationally, the nature-based tourism sector contributes $23 billion to the Australian economy each year. In South Australia, the most recently available value of nature-based tourism is $1.9 billion, and that is part of our $8.3 billion tourism economy. The data shows that demand is only rising. There is great interest in this type of tourism. There is a focus on conservation and protection of species, and we know that wildlife tourism has shown a positive conservation result.

This kind of tourism provides an economic incentive for maintaining or restoring natural habitats of Australia's iconic species. When you look at Tourism Australia's guide to wildlife tourism, our beloved wombats are front and centre. 'That moment you first see a kangaroo bounding across the plains, or glimpse a wombat waddling through the forest, is one you'll never forget,' is a quote from the guide.

Included in Tourism Australia's wildlife guide is excellent information on how tourists can engage with Australia's wildlife responsibly. In this list, there is information about how visitors can contribute to the conservation of wildlife habitats, including information for our working holidaymakers on how they can volunteer with wildlife conservation charities.

In South Australia, two species of wombat can be found: the southern hairy-nosed wombat and the common bare-nosed wombat. Both species are found in our state's glorious Eyre Peninsula. I have been very fortunate to travel to Eyre Peninsula several times as the Minister for Tourism, and I have also visited with my family in an unofficial capacity when working in the portfolio for opposition. In fact, we are heading there again later this year. It is one of our favourite places to go.

But even before visiting I knew that when it comes to wildlife encounters Eyre Peninsula really is the wild side. So important is wildlife to the Eyre Peninsula visitor economy that four of the top five tourism experiences in the region include wildlife encounters. One of the Regional Visitor Strategy priorities for Eyre Peninsula is to capitalise on the region's 'pristine nature, immersive wildlife experiences and coastal lifestyle to drive increased overnight stays from international and domestic visitors'.

Over and over again, the data is very clear. Interstate visitors cite unique experiences around interaction with wildlife as very appealing and they think about this when considering a trip to Eyre Peninsula. International visitors travelling our regions choose Eyre Peninsula for viewing and engaging with local wildlife both on sea and on land. Even us locals, the intrastate South Australians, name the opportunities for wildlife encounters among our top reasons for visiting the area.

It is only in Eyre Peninsula that you will find the opportunity to go swimming with the great whites. There is nowhere else in the world now where thrillseekers get face to face with all those teeth, but if you fancy a little less adrenaline you can stay on the EP to jump into the water to play with the sea lions and the dolphins. There are several animal species that are endemic to Eyre Peninsula; that is, they occur nowhere else. There are the furry friends of our wombat species, like the Pearson Island black-footed rock wallaby and the sandhill dunnart, and the scaly, like the Eyre Peninsula dragon.

Some of Eyre Peninsula's offshore islands are important for the survival of several threatened species, such as the southern brown bandicoot, the greater bilby, the Pearson Island black-footed rock wallaby and the greater stick-nest rat. Their survival is possible due to these islands being free of predators and competitors, such as foxes, dogs, cats, goats and sheep.

The southern hairy-nosed wombat, called Wardu across the Far West Aboriginal language groups, is an important species in Aboriginal culture and celebrated as part of the Dreaming for First Nations people in Western Eyre Peninsula. While both species are protected under the act, it is the common bare-nosed wombat, despite its name, that is recognised as a rare species in South Australia under the National Parks and Wildlife Act.

As my colleagues have already outlined, the National Parks and Wildlife Act currently prohibits a person from taking—that is, to kill, injure or capture (section 51)—a protected animal without a permit, or interfering, harassing or molesting a protected animal, or undertaking an activity that is or is likely to be detrimental to the welfare of a protected animal. With the following provisions agreed upon in the other place, the government will be supporting this bill. The provisions are to include:

1. That landholders are permitted to destroy a wombat burrow where it poses a risk to human safety, farming crops and machinery, or infrastructure, such as tracks or built structures.

2. That the minister is allowed to declare a wombat protection zone, a geographical area where a person must not, without a permit granted by the minister, destroy, damage or disturb the burrow of a wombat.

Importantly, the first provision will not derogate from the requirement of a person to comply with sections 51 and 68 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act or with the Animal Welfare Act.

Landholders may have a reasonable need to damage burrows from time to time due to human safety or risks of damage to equipment and infrastructure. The Department for Environment and Water encourages a 'living with wildlife' approach to how people think about and interact with wildlife. Burrow destruction is rarely effective when undertaken as the only means of managing a wombat population. The department recommends other methods to landholders. Nonlethal methods of management for wombats include electric fencing, fence alterations, wombat gates and marking burrows.

Destroying burrows with the intent of destroying an animal is not an approved method of destruction and would likely be an offence under the act and the Animal Welfare Act 1985, particularly the ill-treatment of an animal (section 13). I understand that the department will also be increasing compliance and education efforts to raise awareness of nonlethal methods of wombat management to reduce identified risks and impacts and the inefficacy of destroying wombat burrows in isolation from other management methods to reduce risks and impacts to safety and machinery. There will also be education on how to destroy a burrow in a manner that lessens the likelihood of an offence being committed.

This bill strikes a balance between the conservation of this iconic species and the needs of landholders. I commend this bill to the house.

Mrs PEARCE (King) (16:02): I rise to speak in support of the National Parks and Wildlife (Wombat Burrows) Amendment Bill. Our great state is home to two species of wombat: we have the bare-nosed wombat and, of course, the southern hairy-nosed wombat, which was adopted as our state's faunal emblem nearly 53 years ago, I believe, under the Don Dunstan government.

It is interesting to know that these friendly looking guys are real ecosystem engineers and that they juggle the important role they play in our ecosystem while spending most of their days burrowed underground and coming out at night to feed. Their burrows, which they tend to spend most of their days in, not only help to cycle nutrients around the soil and provide new avenues for water absorption into the soil but also happen to provide shelter to a range of animals, ranging from geckos to rock wallabies.

The bare-nosed wombat is also currently recognised as a rare species under the National Parks and Wildlife Act. Both the southern hairy-nosed wombat and the bare-nosed wombat, namely, the two species of wombat found here in South Australia, are both protected under the act, which means a person cannot take a protected animal without a permit—which includes killing, injuring or capturing them—and must not interfere, harass or molest a protected animal or undertake an activity that is or is likely to be detrimental to the welfare of a protected animal.

As a country girl, I appreciate that from time to time it remains an unfortunate reality that landholders may have a reasonable need to damage burrows due to human safety and risk of damage to equipment and infrastructure, albeit the natural benefit they bring to helping with soil nutrients, as we discussed earlier.

The Department for Environment and Water encourages landholders to take a 'living with wildlife' approach to how people think about and interact with wildlife. Burrow destruction is rarely an effective approach if done in isolation with no other measures of managing a wombat population supporting it. Other methods of managing wombat populations, particularly those methods that are non lethal, will also be encouraged by the department, such as the use of electric fencing, fence alterations, wombat gates and marking the location of burrows to alert others to their presence.

The government is supportive of the bill with some provisions, the first being inserting the provision that landholders are permitted to destroy a wombat burrow where it poses a risk to human safety, farming crops and machinery or infrastructure such as tracks or built structures. As I have mentioned, it is an unfortunate reality that sometimes landowners will have to remove burrows from their properties where they present a risk. This amendment therefore ensures that a landowner's ability to take care of a burrow is not impacted where it does present a risk to human safety, crops, machinery or infrastructure.

However, if a landowner's intention when destroying a burrow is undertaken with intent to also destroy an animal in that process—for example, a wombat that may be buried alive if the burrow is destroyed—this would not be an approved method of destruction and would remain an offence under the act and the Animal Welfare Act. This provision will not derogate from the requirement of a person to comply with sections 51 and 68 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act and the Animal Welfare Act.

The second provision allows the minister to declare a wombat protection zone, a geographical area where a person must not, without a permit granted by the minister, destroy, damage or disturb the burrow of a wombat. I understand that the department will also be increasing compliance and education efforts to boost awareness of other nonlethal methods of wombat management to reduce any identified risks and impact, something that I am pleased to hear.

As destroying wombat burrows in isolation can often be a largely ineffective endeavour, the department will be working with landholders to boost awareness of this inefficiency and will provide further information on other management methods. I think quite importantly the department will also be educating landholders on how to destroy a burrow where there is a need to do so and how to do it in a manner that lessens the likelihood of an offence being committed.

Having spent time over the years in the Riverland, while wombats may not be a common sight during the days as they are burrowed away, I know that in certain locations you can easily spot a wombat burrow around the place. Over the last few months, we have all seen how our wombats and other wildlife, particularly around the river area, have had a tough start to the year. We have seen how the flooding event has severely devastated their environments and impacted their burrows, with many wombats around the river having had their homes washed out from under them and with many not lucky enough to escape in time.

This has undoubtedly had a devastating impact on their populations, but during all of that there was a dedicated team volunteering their time helping to keep the isolated southern hairy-nosed wombats alive during the flood. While they encountered a great deal of tragic finds, their efforts undoubtedly helped save the lives of many wombats and other wildlife, and I believe they even managed to successfully relocate 10 of the wombats to the Adelaide Hills for specialty care.

On a more positive note, I am pleased to learn that, with the breaking of the drought, on the other side of our state we have seen a big boost in the numbers of southern hairy-nosed wombats in the Nullarbor, with a promising increase in their population. In fact, the signs of their bounce back are able to be spotted on satellite imagery by following the burrows.

With the southern hairy-nosed wombat, our state's faunal emblem, being such a uniquely Australian animal, rugged enough to survive the harsh and hot outback conditions, we should be taking great pride in an animal that does so much for our state's ecosystem. As such, ensuring that our wombats are better protected from badly performed burrow destructions and not left buried alive, whilst also teaching landowners how to better manage wombat population on their properties, is something worthy of supporting, and it is why I am commending the bill to the house.

Mr HUGHES (Giles) (16:08): I rise to support this bill. In doing so, I have heard everything I need to hear about wombats now, both the heavy-duty stuff and their bowel habits and the shape of the products. There has been a fair amount said. I see this bill as another expression of an orientation towards native wildlife in our state and on our continent.

I remember, when I first came out from England, my dad getting us into the EH and going to the Flinders Ranges and other places. We did not see any wombats up there, but we did see something that was at that time indicative of a more generalised attitude to native wildlife, and that was all the wedge-tailed eagles that were strung up on the barbed wire fences. These eagles had been shot and, I think in some cases, poisoned.

Fortunately, you do not see that anymore, so there has been over the decades a cultural change, not just in our urban areas but in our rural areas as well. Most farmers and pastoralists do take seriously the importance of conservation and looking after the environment, and sometimes there are compromises involved in that.

I listened with interest to some rural members of the opposition speaking. As they said, it is in our electorates that we find wombats. Indeed, the last time I was in the Gawler Ranges a four-wheel drive rolled onto its side because it hit a wombat burrow on the side of the road—so it can have an impact and at times a potentially dangerous impact. This legislation is an attempt at a compromise, trying to look after the interests of farmers and pastoralists while recognising the importance of enhancing protection for wombats.

It is interesting to hear some of the discussion about methods such as the 'living with wildlife' approach that sometimes impose costs on farmers. I think we need to have at times a greater recognition of that. We are expecting farmers to carry out some of the environmental obligations, and I believe that in many cases they probably need a bit more support to do that because they are doing it on behalf of the broader community.

The other thing I would say, which can also be said of a lot of legislation, is that there is sometimes a bit of a set and forget approach, but it is worthwhile, down the track, reviewing what has been done to see how effective it is, how effective on the ground it is, how well it is assisting the protection of wombats. As I said, I think this legislation is part of that orientation and direction that we have pursued now for many years in order to enhance the protection of our wildlife.

I referred to the wedge-tailed eagles that used to be strung up on fences. When it comes to extinction rates, Australia has absolutely nothing to be proud of, especially in regard to mammalian extinction. In just about every decade since the Europeans turned up, we have lost between one and two species, and we actually lead the world over that time period in the loss, in the extinction, of mammalian species.

In addition to that, when you look at species in general, once again our record is not great. I think we are in the top four or five in the world when it comes to extinction of species. It is a record that we have to do a lot about. There is a lot more talk these days about biodiversity and the value of biodiversity, both in a practical sense but also in an intrinsic sense, because there is absolutely no doubt that at the moment, when you look at the rate of background extinction globally, we are now heading into one of the great extinctions.

I think this will be the sixth period in which the globe has experienced extinction at this particular rate. Sometimes the cause has been a catastrophic event, such as 60 million-odd years ago when a very large meteorite hit this planet, but we are the agency, we are the cause now of the extinctions that are taking place.

Back in 2019, a major UN report came out and it indicated the future of both animal and plant extinction. The estimate was that in the coming years there would be around about one million plus when it comes to extinctions of species. The thing about this is that we still do not have anywhere near the perfect record of all those species that we share this planet with; in fact, it is why you get all sorts of numbers in this area. There are a lot of species that at this stage have not been discovered and have not been counted and we are probably in the process of losing some of those species before we even have knowledge of them.

The whole thing about an intact biodiversity is that it makes the planet run. We wreck it and we dilute it at our expense. This is getting a little bit away from wombats, but I think it is about the legislation and the orientation. It would be worthwhile in the future, with farmers, conservationists and others, to track whether these changes have worked, and to ask: can they be improved and what else is it that we might need to do? With those few words, I commend the bill.

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE (Port Adelaide—Deputy Premier, Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science, Minister for Defence and Space Industries, Minister for Climate, Environment and Water) (16:16): I will close the debate, of course, by thanking all those who have contributed, but I would like to offer some clarity or perhaps guidance on what is likely to happen next once the legislation goes through, assuming that that is the will of the house. I have listened attentively to the comments and questions raised by the opposition contributions and I understand the concerns or perhaps anxieties for landholders in particular who live in areas where there are significant amounts of wombat burrows.

I understand the challenges that they pose for managing a farm or an area of primary production. I do not want people to be left with a concern that this might become something that will cause enormous challenges in running their businesses, as long as they are within the law, or nor that it will be an overly administrative or bureaucratic process—that is not the intention.

Of course, this legislation has a slightly unusual history, not by any means unique, but slightly unusual, in the sense that it originated not only in the other place but from one of the smaller parties, from the Hon. Tammy Franks from the Greens, and therefore did not have, initially, the benefit of a contribution from the government department that might have views about the way in which administration might occur and was not the subject of ongoing internal discussions and resolution prior to its being presented to parliament—as I say, unusual but not unique.

As part of the process in the Legislative Council, a couple of amendments were proposed by the government that were accepted by the Hon. Ms Franks, which have made this a proposition that we in the government believe will be manageable.

In essence, what it is saying is that while there are already restrictions based on what can happen to a protected animal, and also what can happen or ought not to happen to any animal under the Animal Welfare Act—recognising that there are concerns in some areas in particular where there have been accusations of poor treatment of wombats through the filling of burrows while it is known that the animals are there, therefore knowingly, or perhaps even if not knowingly at least recklessly and with disregard, causing harm to and the death of those animals—there is an additional layer of protection that can be declared by a minister by declaring this protected area and that within that area not only does the legislation continue to exist as it exists outside but a permit needs to be sought in order to be certain that the process will be undertaken appropriately.

That is what the legislation does. What sits outside of that has been canvassed a little in my speech but also reasonably significantly in some of the other speeches that we have had on this side. They talked about what the department has done but intends to do more of in terms of working with landholders and the way in which they go about managing wombats, including all of the range of options for managing wombat impact on primary production areas, bearing in mind that dealing with burrows is not recommended as a solo or necessary management technique at all, but even in that case ways in which to do that in order not to break the law by harming a protected animal or by causing animal cruelty. That work that has existed will continue apace and will be more significant.

At the same time, assuming that the legislation does go through the parliament, the department will work with a group of stakeholders—people who have long expressed concerns about the welfare of wombats and landholders and those who represent landholders in areas where there are a significant number of interactions between primary production and wombats—to work on a way in which we can determine what would trigger having a protected area declared by the minister, what those conditions would be.

The member for Bragg was wondering whether it would be time limited or permanent, and that is a legitimate question but one I do not want to foreclose on now. It is whether it would be for a period of time or whether it would be about the geographical area and the circumstances under which perhaps reports of mismanagement might trigger having such a protected area for a period of time versus whether there are areas where there are a significant amount of wombats all the time—that that might be a place where management needs to occur more closely.

All of that needs to be worked through. Having now got the power to do that, should this go through the parliament, we will be in a position to work with landholders and with those who are deeply concerned about the welfare of wombats, including, I note, several members of the team on this side of parliament, to really make sure that there is a process that is clear and predictable for all those involved.

Keep in mind that the goal of this legislation, and will be the goal of this process in declaring those areas, is that these very, very precious animals are protected from harm, from cruelty and from being pushed closer to extinction. I particularly appreciated the member for Giles' contribution in talking about the relationship to the extinction crisis and the fact that South Australia and Australia have a terrible record over the last couple of hundred years—but it has not stopped—in losing particularly mammalian species.

We have a bit over 1,000 species of all sorts currently regarded as being under threat of extinction in South Australia alone. Plants and vertebrates—birds, mammals and other animals—are very much under pressure. We know that wombats not only are threatened but also can have the kind of interaction with landholders that leads to a degree of frustration from the landholders and might lead to a mismanagement of those animals.

That is where we need to make sure the government, the environment department, is working well with those landholders and avoiding that cruelty and that threat to the numbers of animals before it happens rather than waiting to hear that something bad has happened and then having to send rangers out to determine whether it was deliberate and how many animals have been killed.

That is the intention. I say again that I pay tribute to the member from the Legislative Council the Hon. Tammy Franks, the co-leader of the Greens, for having wanted to do something like this for a very long time and having raised with me the issues of what has been happening with wombats during the time when we were in opposition. It is a great pleasure to be able to deliver a bill that has had such a degree of burning passion in the other chamber to get something done and to be able to do that in partnership, with one of the minor parties—well, a third party; I do not mean to be in any way dismissive of the size, but a non-major party, one of the crossbench parties—and the government having been able to operate in cooperation.

It is important to our democracy not only in that all legislation does not have to originate from the government but also in that it is not just about whether the two big parties get together and agree on something. There are opportunities for legislation to originate in this way. This is not the first one that has occurred in the last year or so, and it is unlikely to be the last, but I think it is a good sign when we are able to do that. What is important is that we take that legislation in now and get the proper administration built behind it so that it operates in the way in which it is intended. I therefore commend the bill to the house.

Bill read a second time.

Third Reading

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE (Port Adelaide—Deputy Premier, Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science, Minister for Defence and Space Industries, Minister for Climate, Environment and Water) (16:25): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.