New Zealand lacks comprehensive threatened species legislation ? comparison with legislation in Australia and the USA

Abstract

New Zealand lacks dedicated threatened species legislation which is hindering the effective recovery of the country?s threatened species. Few of New Zealand?s recorded threatened species receive active management. New Zealand is recognized as a biodiversity hotspot which has undergone widespread anthropogenic change in a relatively short time. Using its own threat classification system based on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List, but modified to suit the island characteristics of its biota, New Zealand has identified 2,788 species and subspecies within 14 taxonomic groups that are threatened with extinction. However, this level of awareness of the threatened state of New Zealand?s biota is not supported by comprehensive threatened species legislation. We reviewed New Zealand?s current legislation for the management and recovery of threatened species and made a comparison with the US Endangered Species Act 1973 (ESA1973) and the Australian Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999 (EPBC1999). We argue that New Zealand needs to develop similar legislation to the ESA1973 and EPBC1999 to enable an integrated and legally accountable approach to the management and recovery of threatened species. A strength of the ESA1973 and EPBC1999 is that species that have been assessed to be threatened with extinction are listed on a central government register with a legal mandate for the production of recovery plans. A weakness of both acts is that species can languish on these lists without effective recovery actions. Although not always implemented, both acts have the provision for the protection and conservation of critical habitat.