National Parks - "National"? Yes, really

To: "" <>
Subject: National Parks - "National"? Yes, really
From: Peter Morgan <>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:35:21 +1100
In the nomenclature of the IUCN, if I recall correctly, Australia's national 
parks are covered by the phrase where they are set up by the highest government 
authority.  In this instance, the States, as the highest appropriate authority 
- the federal government not owning the land - are responsible for establishing 
and managing national parks.
Royal National Park was the second one in the world, and set up by the State 
While it might sound confusing, the term is historical, appropriate, and should 
not be interfered with lest we see the national park estate downgraded.

Peter Morgan

> On 6 Mar 2014, at 11:37 am, Graeme Stevens <> wrote:
> It seems to me that one of our issues in Australia is the title.
> We delude ourselves (or the general public) that "National" Parks are part of 
> some form of well managed National estate when largely they are at the whim 
> of the State Government of the day in terms of budgets, access etc.  - and  
> Commonwealth oversight is comparatively weak. They are in fact not "National" 
> at all  (Territory parks excepted?).
> At least in the USA there would appear to be a comprehensive National 
> oversight of their resource.
> Am I off the mark here?
> Graeme

Birding-Aus mailing list

To change settings or unsubscribe visit:

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the birding-aus mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU