Archives – an important requirement in environmental management

Abstract

Without archives, the long-term trends in environmental performance cannot be measured. In ecosystems that are particularly dynamic, as in Australia, this is especially so. Yet most environmentalists discard raw data once their interpretations of these are complete; at best, any records remain poorly accessible. Other environmental practitioners may accumulate a lifetime of valuable raw field data, which they or their successors will sadly discard at career end unless retention is suitably arranged. Strayer (1986) and other authorities overseas have emphasised that environmental history is crucial to modern environmental policy through its contribution to understanding the dynamics of the landscape. While palaeobotanical records, repeat photography, fire-scar histories from tree rings, climate records and other physical materials are used frequently, relatively few are available for wildlife population dynamics. In the period since World War II, much field information has been gathered in Australia with the aim of applying results to arrest any observed decline in our natural ecosystems. In more recent times, gathering ecological field data has become less affordable and less popular, and attempts to lodge any legacy at suitably interested agencies are disappointing. Already accounts are circulating about the disposal of data to landfill, although professionals are understandably reluctant to admit this. It is basic to the efforts of all those who collect or are interested in using data that stock is taken regularly of environmental historical records (i.e. databases) to ensure there is suitably sound information on which to measure trends. We argue that the historical data on which Australia’s management of ecosystems over time is based must not only be sound but also reliably available. Its selection and storage must be a deliberate, planned exercise. We illustrate from a set of field case studies which provide evidence of actions contributing to that end. Dredging is a prominent, long-term sphere of activity which has demonstrable environmental consequences in topography and in water pollution, for example in the shipping channels of ports and in the recreational areas of harbours, respectively. Dredging records could thus show deterioration of seabed form and vegetation and be useful to sailors, fishers and bathers. Since 1788, parts of Sydney Harbour (Port Jackson, Middle Harbour, Lane Cove River and Parramatta River) have been modified substantially by dredging. McLoughlin (1999) sought to develop solutions to current environmental crises through the historical record of the quality of the waterways of Sydney Harbour. She found that dredging records, dating back more than 140 years, have not provided an adequate record. Her conclusion was that, in New South Wales, environmental records ‘which document government policy, determination and action’, ‘which embody citizens’ legal rights and document information about their existence and identity’ and ‘which are valuable for research on all aspects of the State, its communities, individuals, lands and built environs’ are not well prescribed (207). This situation is unlikely to be better in other Australian states, despite the needs recommended as early as 1909 by Elwood Mead in Victoria for ‘a vastly augmented bank of environmental data’ (Powell 2002, 107).