Environmental groups say they're 'gobsmacked' after the federal government greenlit bulldozing nearly 3,000 hectares of Northern Territory tropical savanna without requiring further environmental assessment.
The decision, reported by The Guardian, allows large-scale land clearing to proceed despite concerns about threatened species habitat. Critics say this is the first major test case for reformed EPBC Act protections—and it failed entirely.
Mate, the hypocrisy here is stunning. A small development clearing 100 hectares of already-cleared land can face months of environmental assessment because a threatened species lives next door. Meanwhile, pastoral operations get to bulldoze nearly 3,000 hectares of intact savanna with barely a second look.
The approval exposes how Australia's environmental laws continue to favor agricultural interests over conservation, even after years of promises about stronger protections. The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act was supposed to be reformed to prevent exactly this kind of outcome.
Environmental advocates point out that graziers and farmers consistently get away with environmental clearing at rates far greater than what the average Australian realizes. While urban developments face intense scrutiny over small patches of habitat, pastoral properties can clear vast areas with minimal oversight.
The Northern Territory tropical savanna is one of Australia's most intact ecosystems, supporting unique wildlife and storing massive amounts of carbon. Unlike southern forests that make headlines, the savanna gets far less public attention—making it easier for large-scale clearing to slip through.
One social media user who works in environmental assessment called the decision 'insane,' noting the stark double standard in how different types of development are treated. The comment captured widespread frustration among conservationists who have watched promised reforms fail to deliver real change.
For the Albanese government, the decision shows how Labor prioritizes agricultural interests over its stated environmental commitments. With climate policy under intense scrutiny and 's international reputation on conservation already damaged, this approval sends a clear signal about where the government's priorities actually lie.
