ENSTU 300: Critical Thinking & Communication in Environmental Studies

Coral Reef Protection Policy

Cambria Novelly, Environmental Studies Program, California State University, Monterey Bay

Cambria Novelly, 2019

Policy Options

The main issue facing coral reefs is
humans. Humans are the main cause
behind water pollution, chemicals, and the
warming ocean temperature. All these
factors are degrading the world’s beautiful
coral reefs that are spread all across the
world. Coral reefs have been struggling to
sustain themselves more and more in recent
years (Australian Institute of Marine
Science, 2018). The deterioration of these
coral reefs will greatly affect the biodiversity
of the reefs and marine life that call coral
reefs home (Australia's Great Barrier Reef
under threat, 2015). The largest coral
structure in the world that is facing this
harsh new reality is the Great Barrier Reef.
The Great Barrier Reef is home to more
than 1,500 species of fish, 411 types of hard
coral, one-third of the world’s soft corals,
134 species of sharks and rays, six of the
world’s seven species of threatened marine
turtles, and more than 30 species of marine
mammals, including the vulnerable dugong
(Australia's Great Barrier Reef under threat,
2015). The good news is many humans are
creating policies and legislation to help
minimize or stop these human impacts from
causing as much harm to the coral
ecosystems. Protecting the Great Barrier
Reef and coral reefs overall improves the
health of all underwater ecosystems.
After reviewing the data and the
specific issues facing the Great Barrier Reef
and other coral reefs around the world,
these 3 policy options seem to be the best fit
to protect the Great Barrier Reef. These
policy options can also be used as an
example for other countries that also want
to protect their reef structures and are
facing similar issues like the Great Barrier
Reef. The 3 policy options that are
being proposed are the Environment
Protection and Biodiversity Conservation
Amendment (Great Barrier Reef), Banning
sunscreen with harmful chemicals, and Stop
Dumping on the Great Barrier Reef Bill.
These policies will all be evaluated based on
four different criteria. The first is how the
policy would reduce the possibility of
chemicals entering the ocean. The second
criteria it will be judged on is the cost the
policy has to the government. The third
criterion is the other environmental impacts
that the policy reduces. The final criteria are
the benefits that the policy has for people.

Table 1: Policy Options in Support of Recovery

Policy Option 1: Policy option 2: Policy option 3:

Environment Banning sunscreen Stop Dumping on
Protection and with harmful the Great Barrier
Biodiversity chemicals such as Reef Bill
Conservation Oxybenzone,
Amendment (Great Octinoxate,
Barrier Reef) Octocrylene,
Homosalate

Criteria 1: Reduce Would not reduce Would ban sunscreens Would stop harmful
Chemicals chemicals, it would just that contain these chemicals from being
stop environmental certain chemicals. That dumped into the ocean
harm in ports. is found responsible for off the coast of the
coral bleaching. Great Barrier Reef.

Criteria 2: Cost This is going to have a The cost will be overall This is going to have a
greater impact on the higher to the companies greater impact on the
government’s finances who have to find government’s finances
than the people. different ways to create than the people.
sunscreen without these
chemicals to sell.

Criteria 3: Other Would stop the Also would stop these Would not allow for
Environmental building of new harbors chemicals from large amounts of
Impacts that disrupt preexisting affecting other marine sediment to be dumped
underwater life. life that is affected by back into the water
these toxic chemicals. after dredging occurs.
 Criteria 4: Human Protecting more areas
Benefits for tourism to flourish.
Policy Option 1: Environment
Protection and Biodiversity
Conservation Amendment (Great
Barrier Reef)
The first policy is the Environment
Protection and Biodiversity Conservation
Amendment (Great Barrier Reef). This
amendment would ban the building and
development of a port outside an existing
port. The environment protection and
biodiversity conservation amendment
would limit the further development of
pre-existing ports, while also stopping the
building of new ports along the coast. Ports
and the shipping industry have many
negative effects on coral reefs. The main
issues are grounding, anchoring, and oil
spills. Grounding is where ships accidentally
run aground on the reef structure and get
stuck. Anchoring is where cargo ships drop
their anchor offshore and sometimes it will
land and damage coral reef structures.
Finally, there are oil spills or the accidental
release of oil into the marine environment.
Oil is one of the most harmful as it can end
up being deposited directly on corals if the
corals are shallow enough. This is harmful
to corals because “once oil comes into
contact with corals, it can kill them or
impede their reproduction, growth,
behavior, and development” (NOAA, 2019).
The Environment Protection and
Biodiversity Conservation Amendment
(Great Barrier Reef) will deny the minister
the ability to approve any development that
does not have a positive impact on the Great
More natural Cleaner, safer, water
sunscreens. The start of near and around the
reestablishing the Great Great Barrier Reef and
Barrier Reef the coast of Australia
making it safer for
people to swim in and
not have any health
repercussions.
Barrier Reef World Heritage Site (Waters,
2013). It is an amendment to the
Environment Protection and Biodiversity
Conservation Act 1999. This policy would
not have a large effect on reducing
chemicals in the water. However, it could
prevent it by stopping construction from
happening near the water that could
possibly have these chemicals run into the
water. While also stopping the opening of
new ports in untouched parts of the
coastline which will stop chemicals from
being closer to the water in other areas as
well. It also has a positive impact on the
criteria of other environmental impacts. It
would stop the building of new harbors that
disrupt preexisting underwater life. The
main stakeholders affected by this policy are
construction workers, shipping, and fishing.
All of these are affected by the amendment
which would ban the building of new ports
as well as the expansion of ports. Which will
then affect the economy in many different
ways. It will affect construction or
expansion construction workers will be out
of a new site to work on. The shipping
industry will be affected because that means
there will be fewer ports for exports and
imports while also meaning they can’t be
expanded to accommodate larger shipping
boats. Fishing will be affected because there
will be no new ports for them to dock their
boats at and expand their companies.
Policy option 2: Banning sunscreen
with harmful chemicals
The second policy is the sunscreen ban, or
the banning of sunscreen with harmful
chemicals such as Oxybenzone, Octinoxate,
Octocrylene, Homosalate (Tarnas, 2021).
The original bill that is based on was just
recently passed in Hawaii. This should also
be implemented in Australia to help protect
the Great Barrier Reef. These chemicals are
commonly found in sunscreen and are
harmful to the Great Barrier Reef. This
policy option would reduce the number of
chemicals that are entering the waters
around Australia. Which would have a
positive impact on the coral degradation
that is happening due to certain chemicals
that are commonly found in sunscreens
(Tarnas, 2021). The criteria the sunscreen
ban would mainly affect is the reduction of
chemicals while also having a positive
impact on people (Magovern, 2021). It
would be a human benefit to switch to
reef-safe sunscreen because more natural
sunscreens will cause less harm to the
environment as well as people, while also
promoting the reestablishment of the reef
which has many positive impacts for
humans. The main stakeholder would
mainly be tourists and other sunscreen
consumers, and sunscreen companies.
Tourists would be affected because it would
be required to only bring reef-safe
sunscreens into Australia and the only
sunscreens that would be being sold in
Australia would have to be the reef-safe
brands which would affect the brands of
sunscreen that the consumers can buy and
use. It would cause sunscreen companies to
have to turn to a more green and
eco-friendly method of providing sunscreen.
Policy option 3: Stop Dumping on the
Great Barrier Reef Bill
The third and final policy suggestion
is the Stop Dumping on the Great Barrier
Reef Bill. This bill is to stop the dumping of
dredged material on or near the Great
Barrier Reef World Heritage site (Waters,
2013). It would mainly be adjustments to
the Environment Protection (Sea Dumping)
Act of 1981. These new policies would crack
down and impose stricter rules on dumping
dredged materials and other materials on or
near the Great Barrier Reef. It also imposes
strict regulations on loading dredged
materials (Waters, 2013). The biggest
criteria it would affect would be other
environmental impacts and human benefits.
It would affect other environmental impacts
by not allowing for large amounts of
sediment to be dumped back into the water
after dredging occurs. It would have benefits
for humans by helping cause cleaner, safer,
water near and around the Great Barrier
Reef and the coast of Australia making it
safer for people to swim in and not have any
health repercussions. The main
stakeholders in this policy would be the
government as well as dredging companies.
The government would then be forced to
actually protect the Great Barrier Reef from
dredging and dumping. It would affect
dredging companies because it would limit
the number of dredged materials that could
be removed from the water and force
dredging companies to change the way they
get rid of unwanted materials.
Recommendation
Overall the best policy is the Environment
Protection and Biodiversity Conservation
Amendment (Great Barrier Reef) seeing as
how it will overall have a greater effect in
protecting the Great Barrier Reef from
construction in ports. However, the
sunscreen bill would also be a good option
as many tourists visit Australia and the
sunscreens being sold in Australia may still
contain the harmful chemicals that are
increasing the rate of bleaching (Tibbetts,
2008). The same can be said about the
dumping act, it has many positive benefits
that could greatly affect the coral reef in
many positive ways however it requires the
government to enforce it and actually patrol
to protect it. Which would most likely not be
something that the government wants to
hire new people to patrol the coast and
enforce the dumping act. The dumping act
is a very good option however the overall
impacts of dumping of dredged material are
not as high of an impact as the chemicals
from sunscreen and the potential damages
caused by the construction of new ports.
Overall the policy that is best suited and the
most simple to implement is the
Environment Protection and Biodiversity
Conservation Amendment (Great Barrier
Reef). This policy has the most potential to
protect the Great Barrier Reef. It has a
variety of different ways that it could
positively affect the environment. While it
may be the most costly to the government,
there needs to be less development of the
coastline to help promote more wildlife and
push for an overall impact on the Great
Barrier Reef. All of these policies should
also then be considered by different
governments around the world who are
interested in having a better way to protect
the reef structures near their countries.
From there these foreign powers could
decide what policy would be the best policy
for their country and coral reefs. Many
different nations who have coral reefs in
their oceans look to Australia and the Great
Barrier Reef for guidance on what these
countries should be doing to protect their
own reefs while also having a stable amount
of tourists enjoy them.
Literature Cited

Australian Institute of Marine Science. (2018). Coral bleaching events. AIMS. Retrieved
September 17, 2021, from
https://www.aims.gov.au/docs/research/climate-change/coral-bleaching/bleaching-eve
nts.html.

Magovern, A. (2021, February). Everything you want to know about zinc oxide. Project
Sunscreen. Retrieved November 15, 2021, from
https://projectsunscreen.com/blogs/news/everything-you-want-to-know-about-
zinc-oxide.

NOAA. (2019). How Do Oil Spills Affect Coral Reefs? How do oil spills affect coral reefs?
Retrieved November 11, 2021, from
https://response.restoration.noaa.gov/about/media/how-do-oil-spills-affect-cor
al-reefs.html.

Tarnas, David. (2021). HB 102. Hawaii House (2021 Regular Session) - Open States.
Retrieved November 5, 2021, from
https://openstates.org/hi/bills/2021%20Regular%20Session/HB102/.

Tibbetts, J. (2008, April). Bleached, but not by the sun: Sunscreen linked to coral
damage. Environmental health perspectives. Retrieved November 15, 2021, from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2291012/.

Waters, L. (2013). Environment protection and biodiversity conservation amendment

(great barrier reef) bill 2013. Environment Protection and Biodiversity
Conservation Amendment (Great Barrier Reef) Bill 2013. Retrieved November 5,
2021, from https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2013B00076.

Waters, L. (2013). Stop dumping on the Great Barrier Reef Bill 2014. Stop Dumping on
the Great Barrier Reef Bill 2014. Retrieved November 5, 2021, from
https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2014B00189.

World Wildlife Fund. (2015, February 9). Australia's Great Barrier Reef under threat.
WWF. Retrieved November 5, 2021, from
https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/australia-s-great-barrier-reef-under-threa
t.