The China–Australia Migratory Bird Agreement (CAMBA) is a bilateral treaty between Australia and China that aims to protect migratory birds and their environment between the two countries. Throughout all six Articles, the treaty defines what a migratory bird is, outlines key prohibitions for both contracting parties and determines the responsibilities of both nations to protect migratory birds and their habitats. The CAMBA was first developed on 20 October 1986, and came into force on 1 September 1988. This Article then states that both contracting parties, being Australia and China, must review the Annex and are given the ability to potentially amend the Agreement upon mutual agreement. The amendments included altering the scientific nomenclature of 17 species in the Annex as well adding the Roseate Tern and removing the Painted Snipe.
Article II
Article II prohibits both China and Australia from taking either migratory birds or their eggs unless otherwise permitted in the domestic laws of the respective country given certain circumstances. Some of these circumstances include if such actions are for: "scientific, educational, propagative" or other purposes that align with the motives of the Agreement, the reason is to protect people or property or it is during hunting season as established in Article II. which is a historic part of their muttonbirding tradition. This Article further states that both parties shall not sell, purchase or exchange migratory birds or eggs, but may determine a criterion for hunting these birds given reproduction rates needed for survival.
Article IV
Article IV asserts that both contracting parties must, to the best of their ability: create facilities that protect migratory birds, take necessary steps to preserve and improve the environment of these birds, prevent any harm to both the birds and their environment and monitor and control any animals or plants that are imported that may pose a risk. Australia has made bilateral migratory bird agreements with several Asian countries. It started with Japan (JAMBA) in 1974, China (CAMBA) in 1986 and the Republic of Korea (ROKAMBA) over 15 years ago in 2006. Second, international coordination with the Ramsar Convention must be maintained to achieve an international wetland network. Also, Australia is part of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals which is an environmental treaty as part of the United Nations which aims to improve international coordination of migratory bird conservation.
In more recent developments according to The Australian Government Department of the Environment and Energy, Australia has demonstrated initiatives interlinked with their commitment to agreements with Japan, China and Korea. The introduction of the Wildlife Conservation Plan for Migratory Shorebirds is a national framework focused on the research and development of migratory shorebirds within Australia.
Reasons for migratory bird protection
thumb|A Curlew Sanpiper pictured in Alaska
Evaluation of shorebird populations trends in eastern Australia has shown to have plummeted by 79% across 24 years. As Australia provides a habitat for millions of migratory birds yearly, there is a constant need for protection to prevent extinction and sustain ecosystems.
The decline in inland wetlands within Australia is another threat to migratory birds and a key reason for such agreements. Inland wetlands provide nutrients to surrounding water bodies and resultantly improve birdlife due to the nutrient-abundant habitats.
|width = 35%
|align = left
|bgcolor = #AEDAE9
Climate change is a major threat posed towards bird species given their sensitivity towards slight weather changes. Changes in climates and global warming not only influence the timing in migration, but also plant diversity in key habitual areas for birds due to processes like eutrophication which result in higher levels of nitrogen present in water. The increase in agricultural efforts has worsened ecosystems due to environmentally unfriendly and unfeasible processes such as the use of chemicals, as well as eutrophication. Rising sea levels is a threat to species that live around coastal lines and increases in forest fires is reducing bird populations due to the effects of climate change. Although there are moderate levels of responses to this specific issue, the increase in awareness and danger of climate change has meant there will be a greater need for more effective responses. For instance, in May 2015, the Eastern Curlew and Curlew Sandpiper were both listed as critically endangered, both of which are listed in the Annex. However, two-thirds of Australia's migratory birds remain unprotected under national protection, reflecting the need for further protection on this issue alongside the CAMBA.
Issues
Several issues influence the need for migratory bird protection such as the CAMBA. The top threats include agriculture, aquaculture, biological resource use and natural system modifications. The CAMBA recognises laws and regulation as an exception from prohibiting the taking of birds and eggs while encouraging both parties to take measures to protect the environments of these birds. Given the size of the Murray-Darling Basin water system, its impact on bird populations has proven to negatively influence ecosystems due to the increase in extraction, regulation and other harmful actions.
The complexity of multilateral treaties is another issue that worsens the effectiveness of protection measures. There is sophistication surrounding decision-making and implementation given the nature of multinational agreements as individual nations have different attitudes towards treaties. This national complexity given legal and political barriers makes migratory bird protection harder to implement and measure effectiveness. There has proven to be a greater need for harmonisation between state and federal responses by leveraging the EPBC Act 1999 through integrating it within the legislation to improve coordination. The involvement of the public in improving the protection of migratory birds is often limited too given the heavy reliance of the government on bilateral agreements. As governments tend to work with other stakeholders to integrate supportive measures, the government themselves do not tend to instigate any actions surrounding conversation.