On the Power of Resilience in Climate Action with Associate Professor Kathy Townsend
Associate Professor Kathy Townsend is a renowned marine biologist whose work focuses on marine conservation and the human impacts on marine environments. Drawing on over two decades of experience working at marine research stations, Kathy has a deep understanding of tropical and subtropical ecosystems.
Her research, which takes a multidisciplinary approach, addresses global issues such as marine debris and pollution and their impacts on marine life. She has contributed to the conservation of marine species listed on the IUCN Red List, providing expert advice to policymakers both in Australia and internationally.
Kathy’s leadership in groundbreaking scientific programs like Project Manta and Turtles in Trouble has earned global recognition, with her work featured in major documentaries including David Attenborough’s Great Barrier Reef and Nat Geo Wild's Manta Mystery. A dedicated mentor to young scientists, Kathy is celebrated for her teaching, community engagement, and commitment to fostering the next generation of researchers.
My conversation with Kathy delved into the ecological challenges of restoring Lady Elliot Island and how mindful, science-backed approaches today contrast with destructive past practices. She highlighted the cyclical irony of human impact, the importance of considering long-term consequences, and how climate change is intensifying issues.
It was a powerful reminder of the need for thoughtful action to address our current environmental crises.
Uncovering the Stories of Sea Turtles, Marine Debris, and Resilience
Bohie: Kathy, thank you so much for joining me today. I came across your work while researching plastic found in birds’ nests at the CSIRO, which led me to your work with sea turtles, manta rays, and more. You’ve had such a stellar career. Can you share how your interest in human debris and marine life began?
Kathy: It started with my love for the marine environment. I grew up in Canada, and spent years working at a marine research centre on North Stradbroke Island in Queensland, Australia, where we often received sick or injured marine animals, especially sea turtles.
Being a marine researcher, I tried to triage these sick and injured animals and discovered that what was happening is we'd have all these sea turtles coming in that superficially looked fine - like, there was no big chop mark on them, there was no stuff tangled around them. But, they were dying. I had to ask, why is this occurring?
I started talking to other turtle rehabilitation groups around Queensland and into northern New South Wales, particularly down in Ballina in northern New South Wales, where after their animals had died they'd started to perform autopsies to try to figure out what may have caused death. They were finding animals that were defecating out plastics. So that's really where the question came from, where we started to ask: Is plastic really a big deal?
I actually had a colleague at the time who said “I don't know why you're bothering doing this. It's not a big deal. Even if something eats plastic, it's fine”. So that really got my interest peaked.
Bohie: That’s so frustrating, looking back now.
Kathy: Very much so. I had a gut feeling it was more serious.
The Queensland Stranding Database showed only about 2% of recorded turtle deaths were linked to marine debris, but the data collection was flawed. Rangers often didn’t perform autopsies, so many cases were likely missed. I got permits from Queensland Parks and Wildlife, started working with the traditional owners of the island, collaborated research with SeaWorld, and other organisations, and began conducting necropsies myself.
Bohie: What did you find?
Kathy: We discovered about 33% of turtles had marine debris in their guts, with 30% dying from plastic ingestion. Another 6% had plastic, though it wasn’t the direct cause of death. That’s nearly 40% of turtles impacted. It was shocking.
Bohie: That is insane. 33%?! Were turtles targeting specific types of debris?
Kathy: Great question! Yes, they were. It turns out that turtles are quite picky. They target what we call “film-like” plastics, which are basically your single-use shopping bags, your bait bags, clean film, all that kind of stuff. And the way that we could tell this is we actually looked at what was available for them in the environment. So we did beach surveys and at-sea surveys of the debris that was available to them, and then compared that to what we were finding in their guts. So we could see whether what they were consuming was higher than what you would expect to see based on random consumption.
Bohie: Oh, that’s so interesting!
Kathy: Then we conducted vision studies and found that turtles can see polarised light, which plastic bags emit, making them resemble jellyfish. Plastic even develops a biofilm in the ocean that gives off a smell tricking turtles into thinking it’s food.
Bohie: Wait, are scientists actually able to recreate how different animals might see the world?
Kathy: Yes! I worked with Justin Marshall, an expert in vision from the University of Queensland. We extracted the eyes of dead sea turtles (obviously not alive, that would be horrendous), and used microscopic examination to see what the cone and rod structure are in individual animals. You can then take that structure and simulate it in a computer-based environment so that you could see what kinds of wavelengths these animals can see with.
Bohie: Incredible. What did you find?
Kathy: We tested a whole range of different types of plastics to determine how turtles would visualise them in a marine environment, and not surprisingly, plastic bags - even though to us it's translucent - turtles can see them using polarised light. Actually, not only can they see them, it's something that they're targeting because it looks like a food source that they would be wanting to consume.
Bohie: Oh, so it's not just a drab vegetable, it's like candy to them?
Kathy: Yep, it's the stuff that they love. They will actually stop what they're doing to go and eat jellyfish.
Bohie: Wow. That is so ground breaking! So, you’ve discovered the cause, what about the effects? How does this loss in biodiversity impact ecosystems and resilience?
Kathy: Yeah. I mean, that's a big problem. Full stop. As soon as you start to reduce your biodiversity, it means that the ecosystem as a whole is far less resilient.
I don't think the general public really understands this. Scientists yabber on about why we need to maintain biodiversity, but I don't think the general public really understands why that's important as a concept, you know? Who cares? Why does it matter? Why can’t we just have 20 species of birds, why do we need 10,000?
Well, they actually have some pretty serious ecosystem functions, and provide ecosystem services for humans that if we did get rid of all that biodiversity, we'd actually be in really serious trouble, not just as an environment, but also for humanity as well. I don't think people get their heads around that.
Bohie: Have you heard of this mental health term “surviving” instead of “thriving”? It feels like society is just in this survival mode at the moment. Loss of an ecosystem feels “too much” on top of everything else right now. It’s too much to ask society to also have an empathetic connection to this external bigger picture of the ecosystem.
Kathy: Yeah, I think that's a really good analogy actually because it is very similar to that in that it's about having those strategies to thrive. It's all about resilience, right? I mean, that is the huge catchphrase right now in conservation and ecology. It's all about resilience because it's gotten to the point where scientists have screamed and tried to stop the impacts, but it's happening.
So now scientists have to shift our focus. What strategies can we put into place to make these environments more resilient? Because, there's nothing we can do at this stage to stop the impact. It's happening already. So now it's more like, how do we make these communities more resilient? What are the things that we need to put into place to allow them to help themselves?
Bohie: I want to talk about the longevity of these strategies. I’ve been researching the repercussions of human interventions in the Murray Darling Basin system. Looking at these man-made interventions from the last 50 years that were good solutions at the time, but have now resulted in mass extinctions and ecological disasters. I mean, I don't mean to be a fear monger by any means, I want you to feel confident in your work. But, is there any fear in creating action now that actually, 30 years down the track will have dire consequences?
Kathy: That’s something that we've thought a lot about. At Lady Elliot Island, we're working on a project called Leaf to Reef in collaboration with a vegetation team. This initiative goes beyond the traditional revegetation methods of the 1980s. Instead, we're adopting a more thoughtful and science-backed approach. By working with the herbarium, we've studied undisturbed coral cays in the region to understand their vegetation communities—what species grow there, where they thrive, and how they interact with their environment. For instance, some plants, like those on the island's edges, are highly wind- and salt-tolerant and act as nitrogen fixers, enriching the soil for other plants to establish themselves.
Bohie: How does this compare to how they intervened in the past?
Kathy: On Lady Elliot Island, the history of land use is deeply ironic. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, during early colonial days, the island was completely guano-mined. Settlers, struggling with agricultural production, needed fertiliser to support crops like sugarcane, which was starting to boom. To support this, they stripped up to two metres of topsoil from the island—essentially mining phosphate-rich guano and transporting it to the mainland to fertilise cane fields.
Bohie: WOAH! Okay, reckless.
Kathy: Ironically, this process contributed to the environmental degradation that later harmed the Great Barrier Reef.
Bohie: Omg, it’s all so connected.
Kathy: It’s a classic example of solving an immediate problem without considering long-term consequences. This short-sightedness is a recurring theme throughout history, driving issues like climate change and marine debris crises. We often tackle immediate challenges with large-scale solutions, unaware of their ripple effects.
Humans often want to build their way out of problems, but that’s how we created many of these issues in the first place. Instead, we need to think long-term and take mindful actions. Nature is resilient, but we have to meet it halfway.
Bohie: Right, it’s about working with the system rather than engineering solutions that might cause more harm.
Kathy: Exactly. We can’t stop storms or temperature changes, but we can strengthen the reef’s ability to recover. And here, it’s essential to avoid fear-based messaging. Instead, we need to use visuals that empower people to take action. The right visual communication can help frame these actions as achievable and inspiring, rather than daunting.
Bohie: This is so interesting that we’ve come to this because I’m so visual. I’m all about those key images and creating moments—visual moments that narrate straight to the heart.
I want to talk with you about where we are right now - with COVID, the bushfires - the series I’ve been creating to raise awareness about impacts of littering on wildlife. Well, after the bushfires I had to step back because the problem felt so much bigger than just one VB can in the paddock. It became too hard to communicate the scope of loss we, as a nation, are trying to comprehend.
Kathy: That’s such a poignant reflection. Art, especially public art like yours, holds immense power to process and reflect collective grief. But… It’s true that when the problem feels so vast, it’s challenging to find a starting point.
It’s important, though, to create space for people to connect with these stories in ways that don’t overwhelm them but instead invite them into the narrative.
Bohie: When I think about large-scale murals, I have the public’s eye—I’m literally creating massive, colourful artworks in the public thoroughfare. What can I do that doesn’t frighten people? Doesn’t make them feel guilty, or push them away? How do I inspire a call to arms in an accessible way, especially in this cultural environment where people are “surviving”, not “thriving”? Right now, everything feels “too much”.
Kathy: You’ve hit on such a critical point. People are exhausted—emotionally, physically, financially. It’s why your role as an artist is so vital. Large-scale murals are uniquely positioned to spark joy and inspire action simultaneously. They provide a moment of reflection without being overly demanding. By focusing on hope, resilience, and small achievable steps, you can create that bridge for people to feel involved, even when life feels overwhelming.
Bohie: Visual communication plays such a key role here, don’t you think? It creates those moments that engage people emotionally and spark conversations.
Kathy: Absolutely. Visuals have a unique power to connect with people on an emotional level, cutting through the noise of data and reports. An image can capture attention and inspire action in ways that words alone often can’t. It becomes a symbol of change—a visual representation of hope or urgency. Who would have thought that a single image of a plastic straw caught up a turtle's nose could result in the nationwide ban of plastic straws?
Change is possible, even if it feels overwhelming. Small collective actions—like reducing single-use plastics—can add up. This is where visuals play such a vital role—creating accessible, hopeful narratives instead of overwhelming people with fear.
Bohie: Amazing. I’ve loved this conversation. Ok, lastly, what keeps you motivated?
Kathy: One of the things I'm actually quite proud of is that a lot of the research that my team and I have done has actively contributed to change on a legislative level. So, we gave presentations to the federal government, we gave presentations to theQueensland government, wrote multiple different reports for them, and that information was then fed into the plastic bag ban, and the mass balloon release ban. It kickstarted the container deposit scheme across Australia, and then finally, coming up in September here in Queensland, is the banning of all single use catering items. So no more plastic items. And I've seen that both McDonald's and KFC have started already. So they're no longer offering plastic forks. They're no longer offering plastic straws - everything is now bamboo or paper.
If you had asked myself back in 2006 when I first started - could I have predicted that this research would result in a nationwide ban of plastic bags within the next 10 years? I would have laughed at you and said, no way. Because back then, as I said, it wasn’t even discussed. It was not an issue. It was thought that plastic was benign. And this sense of, “Who cares if it's out there? It's no big deal. It's not hurting anything. It's not a problem. It's fine”. It’s a privilege to do this work and see the positive changes we can achieve, even in the face of challenges. And by sharing these stories visually, we can inspire others to believe in and contribute to that change.
Learn more about Kathy’s inspiring and educational work via these links: