tag:theconversation.com,2011:/au/topics/native-vegetation-clearing-7411/articlesnative vegetation clearing – The Conversation2022-07-14T20:03:25Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1869002022-07-14T20:03:25Z2022-07-14T20:03:25ZAustralia’s central climate policy pays people to grow trees that already existed. Taxpayers – and the environment – deserve better<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474020/original/file-20220714-9155-8zz34h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=39%2C0%2C5179%2C2933&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock </span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The federal government has launched an <a href="https://minister.dcceew.gov.au/bowen/media-releases/independent-review-accus">independent review</a> of Australia’s central climate policy, the Emissions Reduction Fund, <a href="https://law.anu.edu.au/news-and-events/news/australia%E2%80%99s-carbon-market-fraud-environment">after we</a> and others raised serious concerns about its integrity.</p>
<p>The review will examine, among other issues, whether several ways of earning credits under the scheme lead to genuine emissions reductions.</p>
<p>One method singled out for scrutiny involves regrowing native forests to store carbon from the atmosphere. </p>
<p><a href="https://law.anu.edu.au/research/publications">Our new analysis</a> suggests the vast majority of carbon storage credited under this method either has not occurred, or would have occurred anyway. Here we explain why.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="man in suit speaks in front of flags" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474022/original/file-20220714-8948-wv4538.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474022/original/file-20220714-8948-wv4538.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474022/original/file-20220714-8948-wv4538.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474022/original/file-20220714-8948-wv4538.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474022/original/file-20220714-8948-wv4538.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474022/original/file-20220714-8948-wv4538.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474022/original/file-20220714-8948-wv4538.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen has announced a review of the Emissions Reduction Fund.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Steven Saphore/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The background</h2>
<p>The Emissions Reduction Fund provides carbon credits to projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For the past decade, it has been the centrepiece of Australia’s climate policy.</p>
<p>Under the fund, projects that reduce emissions receive carbon credits that can be sold to the federal government and private entities that are required, or choose to, offset their emissions.</p>
<p>We are experts in environmental law, markets and policy. The lead author of this article, Andrew Macintosh, is the former chair of the Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee, the government-appointed watchdog that oversees the Emissions Reduction Fund’s methods.</p>
<p>Earlier this year, we went public with details of serious integrity issues in the scheme. One main concern involves <a href="https://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/ERF/Choosing-a-project-type/Opportunities-for-the-land-sector/Vegetation-methods/Human-Induced%20regeneration%20of%20a%20permanent%20even-aged%20native%20forest">a method</a> known as “human-induced regeneration of a permanent even-aged native forest”. </p>
<p>This method <a href="https://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/ERF/project-and-contracts-registers/project-register">accounts for</a> almost 30% of the carbon credits that have been issued, roughly 30% of registered projects, and <a href="https://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/ERF/project-and-contracts-registers/carbon-abatement-contract-register">more than 50%</a> of carbon credits contracted for sale to the federal government.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-blew-the-whistle-on-australias-central-climate-policy-heres-what-a-new-federal-government-probe-must-fix-185894">We blew the whistle on Australia's central climate policy. Here's what a new federal government probe must fix</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="steam flows from chimney" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474023/original/file-20220714-17585-ron91w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474023/original/file-20220714-17585-ron91w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474023/original/file-20220714-17585-ron91w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474023/original/file-20220714-17585-ron91w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474023/original/file-20220714-17585-ron91w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474023/original/file-20220714-17585-ron91w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474023/original/file-20220714-17585-ron91w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Companies can offset emissions by buying carbon credits under the scheme.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Problems with the method</h2>
<p>Under the method, landholders get credits for regenerating native forests by changing the way they manage their properties.</p>
<p>When the method was created, it was assumed projects would be located in areas where vegetation had previously been cleared, and where grazing and repeated clearing were suppressing regrowth. </p>
<p>But most projects have been located in parts of Australia’s arid and semi-arid <a href="https://www.agriculture.gov.au/agriculture-land/farm-food-drought/natural-resources/vegetation/rangelands">rangelands</a> where native vegetation has never been cleared (because it is not economic to do so). </p>
<p>There are two main problems with the method and how it’s been applied. We outline these below.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-change-is-white-colonisation-of-the-atmosphere-its-time-to-tackle-this-entrenched-racism-185579">Climate change is white colonisation of the atmosphere. It's time to tackle this entrenched racism</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Map of Australia showing locations of human-induced regeneration projects." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474054/original/file-20220714-20-6llaip.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474054/original/file-20220714-20-6llaip.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474054/original/file-20220714-20-6llaip.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474054/original/file-20220714-20-6llaip.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474054/original/file-20220714-20-6llaip.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=605&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474054/original/file-20220714-20-6llaip.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=605&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474054/original/file-20220714-20-6llaip.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=605&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Clean Energy Regulator map showing locations of human-induced regeneration projects. Google satellite image, accessed 20th May 2022.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://data.gov.au/data/dataset/erf_project_mapping">https://data.gov.au/data/dataset/erf_project_mapping</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Problem 1: trees existed before projects began</h2>
<p>First, <a href="https://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/DocumentAssets/Documents/Human%20induced%20regeneration%20-%20A%20spatiotemporal%20study%20Peer%20Reviewed.pdf">data published by the regulator</a> shows proponents have been allowed to include a substantial number of mature trees in the areas for which they receive carbon credits. This has led to substantial over-crediting – in simple terms, the carbon abatement is not real.</p>
<p>So how has this occurred?</p>
<p>Under the method, proponents do not have to measure tree growth - they estimate it using a model. </p>
<p>The model assumes all trees in the forest begin regenerating at the same time when the project activities start. The modelled tree growth starts slowly, then accelerates to peak when the forest is young and vigorous. It then slows as the expanding trees compete with each other. </p>
<p>The model cannot be validly applied to estimate tree growth in areas where substantial numbers of pre-existing mature trees exist. But this is what’s <a href="https://law.anu.edu.au/sites/all/files/short_-_hir_measurement_july_2022_final.pdf">happening</a>. </p>
<p>As a consequence, proponents are being issued credits for growing trees that were already there when the projects started. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="fence and field with trees in background" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474024/original/file-20220714-9184-84qrxv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474024/original/file-20220714-9184-84qrxv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474024/original/file-20220714-9184-84qrxv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474024/original/file-20220714-9184-84qrxv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474024/original/file-20220714-9184-84qrxv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474024/original/file-20220714-9184-84qrxv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474024/original/file-20220714-9184-84qrxv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Proponents measure tree growth using a model.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Problem 2: rain, not the project activities, is making trees grow</h2>
<p>The method is based on the premise that changes in land management are necessary to regenerate the forests. But our <a href="https://law.anu.edu.au/sites/all/files/short_-_hir_additionality_july_2022_final.pdf">analysis</a> shows that, where trees are regenerating, it is due mainly to rainfall.</p>
<p>Almost all current projects seek to regenerate forests by reducing grazing pressure. For this to make sense, grazing would need to be responsible for dramatically reducing the prevalence of trees in the rangelands. It would also have to be possible to regenerate these “lost” forests by reducing grazing pressure. Neither of these are true. </p>
<p>For more than 30 years, there has been a heated debate in ecological and natural resource management circles about the causes of “woody thickening” (or increasing density of native trees and shrubs) in grazing areas. The two dominant, competing hypothesis are that woody thickening is:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>caused by grazing and an accompanying reduction in vegetation burning </p></li>
<li><p>a cyclical phenomena in which vegetation slowly accumulates over time, especially following runs of <a href="https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1890/11-1123.1">wet years</a>, until a drought causes woody plant cover to stabilise or decline. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>There’s no material evidence or support for the notion that grazing alone (in the absence of clearing) has significantly reduced tree cover over vast areas of the rangelands. </p>
<p>In fact, every year, between <a href="https://ageis.climatechange.gov.au/QueryAppendixTable.aspx">200,000 and 400,000 hectares</a> of land cleared for grazing is re-cleared. This demonstrates that grazing is rarely sufficient on its own to stop regrowth without mechanical or chemical interventions to kill trees. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/no-more-excuses-restoring-nature-is-not-a-silver-bullet-for-global-warming-we-must-cut-emissions-outright-186048">No more excuses: restoring nature is not a silver bullet for global warming, we must cut emissions outright</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="rain in puddle with trees in background" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474027/original/file-20220714-24-ab6s6y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474027/original/file-20220714-24-ab6s6y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474027/original/file-20220714-24-ab6s6y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474027/original/file-20220714-24-ab6s6y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474027/original/file-20220714-24-ab6s6y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=500&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474027/original/file-20220714-24-ab6s6y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=500&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474027/original/file-20220714-24-ab6s6y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=500&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Evidence strongly suggests woody vegetation in the rangelands fluctuates according to rain cycles.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Alan Porritt/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Restoring integrity</h2>
<p>Regeneration of native forests in cleared areas is a valid and desirable way to reduce emissions and generate carbon credits. </p>
<p>But the human-induced regeneration method is deeply flawed. It has led to credits being issued for tree growth that is not real, or would have occurred anyway.</p>
<p>The review, to be led by former chief scientist Ian Chubb, is a chance to restore integrity to this method and ensure that credits are only issued for legitimate regeneration projects. </p>
<p>Because as climate change worsens, Australians need to know our most important climate policy is both value for money, and delivering real environmental gains. </p>
<p><strong>The Clean Energy Regulator, which operates the Emissions Reduction Fund, did not respond to The Conversation’s request for comment on the authors’ claims. However in a previous statement it said:</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Prof Macintosh and his colleagues have not engaged with the substance of the ERAC’s comprehensive response papers on human induced regeneration … The government has said it will undertake a review of the ERF and details will be announced shortly. We do not wish to pre-empt the scope of the review or its findings. We welcome the review and look forward to engaging substantively with the review process once it commences.</p>
</blockquote><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/186900/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Macintosh is a Director of Paraway Pastoral Co. Ltd, a pastoral company that undertakes projects under the Emissions Reduction Fund. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Don Butler receives funding from the federal Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. He also works with the Queensland Department of Environment and Science as a science advisor for natural capital programs.. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Megan C Evans receives funding from the Australian Research Council through a Discovery Early Career Research Award and has previously been funded by the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, WWF Australia, and the National Environmental Science Program's Threatened Species Recovery Hub.</span></em></p>Our new analysis suggests the vast majority of carbon credits granted for regrowing native forests either has not occurred, or would have occurred anyway.Andrew Macintosh, Professor and Director of Research, ANU Law School, Australian National UniversityDon Butler, Professor, Australian National UniversityMegan C Evans, Senior Lecturer and ARC DECRA Fellow, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1688072021-10-08T01:46:08Z2021-10-08T01:46:08ZAustralia could ‘green’ its degraded landscapes for just 6% of what we spend on defence<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425199/original/file-20211007-27-cj85xr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=591%2C0%2C4164%2C2330&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The health of many Australian ecosystems is in steep decline. Replanting vast tracts of land with native vegetation will prevent species extinctions and help abate climate change – but which landscapes should be restored, and how much would it cost?</p>
<p>Our <a href="https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1365-2664.14008">latest research</a> sought answers to these questions. We devised a feasible plan to restore 30% of native vegetation cover across almost all degraded ecosystems on Australia’s marginal farming land.</p>
<p>By spending A$2 billion – about 0.1% of Australia’s gross domestic product – each year for about 30 years, we could restore 13 million hectares of degraded land without affecting food production or urban areas.</p>
<p>Such cost-effective solutions must be implemented now if we’re to pull our landscapes back from the brink. This bold vision would transform the way we manage our landscapes, help Australia become a net-zero nation and create jobs in regional communities.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Lone tree in field" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425361/original/file-20211007-23-1vdtqf3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425361/original/file-20211007-23-1vdtqf3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425361/original/file-20211007-23-1vdtqf3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425361/original/file-20211007-23-1vdtqf3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425361/original/file-20211007-23-1vdtqf3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425361/original/file-20211007-23-1vdtqf3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425361/original/file-20211007-23-1vdtqf3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Native vegetation cover must be restored across vast tracts of Australia.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>An ambitious agenda</h2>
<p>Since European settlement, large areas of Australia’s native vegetation have been progressively cleared for agriculture and urban settlements. Australia’s environment remains under <a href="https://soe.environment.gov.au/theme/land/framework/pressures">mounting pressure</a> from land clearing, altered fire regimes and invasive species. </p>
<p>Our research shows that about one-fifth of Australia’s ecosystems have less than 30% coverage of healthy native vegetation. Below 30%, ecosystem services and biodiversity <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/3545823?casa_token=_DAlDSXg2wgAAAAA:W4EPdBNA4ucCMRHl6FxZZ8sHJl2aBM2ESs-FFOoNROLmv1gEzb_k8VAjUprIrFyiZbGrqDY6O5NuE1Bnxv7mJgAHYpUGvSZtjlQWQnqpR4KFpwzQMf7v">sharply declines</a>. We calculate that 13 million hectares of land must be restored to reach the 30% threshold. </p>
<p>Targeted restoration of degraded ecosystems on less profitable agricultural land has enormous potential to alleviate these problems. Farmers can continue to produce valuable crops on their prime land, while rebuilding habitat and sequestering carbon on more marginal land. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-clock-is-ticking-on-net-zero-farmers-must-not-get-a-free-pass-168474">The clock is ticking on net-zero, farmers must not get a free pass</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Almost half of the land requiring restoration is Eucalypt woodlands and almost a fifth is Acacia forests and woodlands. Areas in most need are:</p>
<ul>
<li>the Wheatbelt region of Western Australia</li>
<li>Central Queensland</li>
<li>Central West, Tablelands and Riverina areas of New South Wales</li>
<li>Western Victoria</li>
<li>the Eyre Peninsula and southeast South Australia. </li>
</ul>
<p>Restoring native vegetation at selected sites would involve actions such as fencing to keep livestock away, pest removal, soil preparation and planting. </p>
<p>As well as direct restoration costs, our costings also included compensation payments to farmers and other landholders, for the cost of retiring the land from farming.</p>
<p>We identified the sites across Australia where revegetation would be most cost-effective. These are the places where land requires the least revegetation work and returns the lowest profit to farmers, thus minimising stewardship payments. </p>
<p>In practice, we recommend restoration sites be secured through voluntary arrangements with land holders. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="map with circle pullout photos" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425359/original/file-20211007-15-spmlrp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425359/original/file-20211007-15-spmlrp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425359/original/file-20211007-15-spmlrp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425359/original/file-20211007-15-spmlrp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425359/original/file-20211007-15-spmlrp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425359/original/file-20211007-15-spmlrp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425359/original/file-20211007-15-spmlrp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Map showing cost-effective restoration sites in heavily degraded ecosystems across Australia, with examples of possible restoration sites or landscapes.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Authors provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Cost-effective conservation solutions</h2>
<p>We estimate the required restoration would cost approximately A$2 billion annually for 30 years. To put this in perspective, it’s about 0.3% of the federal government’s <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/BudgetReview202021/AustralianGovernmentExpenditure">annual spending</a> last financial year and about 6% of what Australia spends annually on defence.</p>
<p>The restoration project would restore habitat and ecosystem services in our most degraded landscapes. It would expand threatened species’ habitat and re-establish ecosystem functions such as pollination and erosion control.</p>
<p>The revegetation would also help tackle climate change by drawing down carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and storing it. We estimate 913 million tonnes of greenhouse gases would be stored over 55 years. </p>
<p>After a decade of vegetation growth, 13 million tonnes would be stored annually – equal to 16% of the emissions reduction required under Australia’s Paris Agreement obligations.</p>
<p>We applied those figures to plausible <a href="https://www.afr.com/companies/energy/carbon-offset-prices-reach-record-as-buyers-grow-20210707-p587js">carbon price scenarios</a> where prices rise 5-10% per year from $15 per tonne, reaching $24-39 per tonne by 2030. If the carbon stored by the project was translated into carbon credits, the potential revenue could be between $12 billion and $46 billion. </p>
<p>The upper end of that estimate would more than cover the costs required to implement the plan. An intensive revegetation effort would also create jobs, mostly in rural areas.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/loved-to-death-australian-sandalwood-is-facing-extinction-in-the-wild-167281">Loved to death: Australian sandalwood is facing extinction in the wild</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Two naval ships" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425204/original/file-20211007-21-1ay7ljf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425204/original/file-20211007-21-1ay7ljf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=329&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425204/original/file-20211007-21-1ay7ljf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=329&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425204/original/file-20211007-21-1ay7ljf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=329&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425204/original/file-20211007-21-1ay7ljf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425204/original/file-20211007-21-1ay7ljf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425204/original/file-20211007-21-1ay7ljf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The restoration plan would cost a fraction of Australia’s defence spending.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Australian Defence Force</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Success is possible</h2>
<p>Australia’s environment laws <a href="https://www.edo.org.au/2021/02/04/trajectory-unsustainable-10-key-findings-of-the-epbc-act-review-final-report/">have comprehensively failed</a> to protect nature. This has been compounded by a lack of adequate <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/may/14/environment-department-tried-to-bury-research-that-found-huge-underspend-on-australian-threatened-species">funding</a> for environmental management, threatened species protection and ecological restoration.</p>
<p>Without doubt, the national project we describe is ambitious. But existing projects are showing the way. In southwest Western Australia, for example, the <a href="https://gondwanalink.org/">Gondwana Link</a> program has so far restored 13,500 hectares of marginal farmland, and also aims to connect 100,000 hectares of existing bushland. </p>
<p>Turning around the state of Australia’s environment requires big thinking and an even bigger government and public commitment. But as our research shows, restoring our degraded landscapes is both attainable and affordable.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-change-is-testing-the-resilience-of-native-plants-to-fire-from-ash-forests-to-gymea-lilies-167367">Climate change is testing the resilience of native plants to fire, from ash forests to gymea lilies</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/168807/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bonnie Mappin has received funding from the University of Queensland Research Scholarship and the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>James Watson has received funding from Australian Research Council and the National Environmental Science Program. He sits on the science committees of BirdLife Australia and Bush Heritage Australia and a long-term science partnership with Wildlife Conservation Society.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lesley Hughes has received funding from the Australian Research Council. She is a Councillor with the Climate Council of Australia, a Director of WWF-Australia, and a member of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists. </span></em></p>By spending $2 billion each year for about 30 years, we could restore much of Australia’s severely denuded landscapes.Bonnie Mappin, PhD Candidate, Conservation Science, The University of QueenslandJames Watson, Professor, The University of QueenslandLesley Hughes, Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1120682019-02-25T19:08:51Z2019-02-25T19:08:51ZKoalas can learn to live the city life if we give them the trees and safe spaces they need<p>Australia is one of the world’s most highly urbanised nations – <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/D3310114.nsf/home/Interesting+Facts+about+Australia%E2%80%99s+population">90% of Australians live in cities and towns</a>, with development concentrated along the coast. This poses a <a href="https://www.macarthuradvertiser.com.au/story/4898692/koala-colonies-under-threat-around-macarthur/">major threat to native wildlife</a> such as the koala, which can easily fall victim to <a href="https://soe.environment.gov.au/theme/built-environment/topic/2016/current-urban-planning-and-management">urban development</a> as our <a href="https://blog.iseekplant.com.au/australian-infrastructure-guide">cities grow</a>. <a href="https://infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/policy-publications/publications/future-cities.aspx">Huge infrastructure projects are planned for Australian cities</a> in the coming few years.</p>
<p>The need to house more people – the Australian population is projected to <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/3222.0">increase to as much as 49.2 million</a> by 2066 – is driving ever more urban development, much of it concentrated in our biggest cities on the east coast. This is <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-19/koalas-could-soon-be-wiped-in-areas-of-qld-nsw-wwf-australia/8540174">bad news for the koala population</a>, unless the species’ needs are considered as part of planning approvals and the creation of urban green spaces. The good news is that koalas can learn to live the “green city life” as long as they are provided with enough suitable gum trees in urban green spaces.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/long-running-battle-ends-in-a-win-for-residents-koalas-and-local-council-planning-rules-96263">Long-running battle ends in a win for residents, koalas and local council planning rules</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Indeed, our <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fendo.2019.00018/full">newly published research</a>, which analysed stress levels in wild koalas according to their habitat, reveals that koalas are the most stressed in rural and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural%E2%80%93urban_fringe">rural-urban fringe</a> zones. This appears to be due to factors such as large bushfires, heatwave events, dog attacks, vehicle collision and human-led reduction of prime eucalyptus habitats. Koalas living in urban landscapes are less stressed as long as the city includes suitable green habitats.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/260613/original/file-20190225-26174-i7hu2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/260613/original/file-20190225-26174-i7hu2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/260613/original/file-20190225-26174-i7hu2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=620&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260613/original/file-20190225-26174-i7hu2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=620&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260613/original/file-20190225-26174-i7hu2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=620&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260613/original/file-20190225-26174-i7hu2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=779&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260613/original/file-20190225-26174-i7hu2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=779&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/260613/original/file-20190225-26174-i7hu2i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=779&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">If there are suitable trees, koalas can learn to live among us – this one is next to a school in South Australia.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Vince Brophy/Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In other words, wild animals including the koala can adapt to co-exist with human populations. Their ability to do so depends on us giving them the space, time and freedom to make that adaptation. This means ensuring they can carry out, without undue pressures, the biological and physiological functions on which their survival depends.</p>
<p>Wildlife species that lack access to suitable green habitats in cities <a href="http://www.ecosmagazine.com/?act=view_file&file_id=EC118p31.pdf">are at higher risk of death and local extinction</a>. Having to move between fragmented patches of habitat increases the risks. Land clearing and habitat destruction for infrastructure projects and other urban development are compounding <a href="https://environment.des.qld.gov.au/wildlife/koalas/koala-threats.html">the major threats</a> to koalas, such as <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-12/simple-steps-to-help-save-koalas-from-extinction/9984932">being hit by vehicles</a> or attacked by dogs. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/koalas-are-feeling-the-heat-and-we-need-to-make-some-tough-choices-to-save-our-furry-friends-61306">Koalas are feeling the heat, and we need to make some tough choices to save our furry friends</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>How does human pressure cause stress in wildlife?</h2>
<p>Animals cope with stressful situations in their lives through very basic <a href="http://ose.utsc.utoronto.ca/ose/story.php?id=4336">life-history adjustments</a> and <a href="https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/stress-and-animal-health-physiological-mechanisms-and-23672697">ecological mechanisms</a>. These include changes in physiology and behaviour in response to stresses in their environment. </p>
<p>We can help make the environment more suitable for wildlife species by ensuring their basic needs for food, water and shelter are met. If animals are deprived of any of these necessities, they will show <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20536821">signs of stress</a>.</p>
<p>So by subjecting wildlife to <a href="https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rstb.2009.0128">extrinsic stressors</a> such as habitat clearance, climate change and pollution we are making it even more difficult for these animals to manage stress in their daily lives.</p>
<p>Basically any unwanted change to an animal’s environment that prevents it from performing its <a href="https://www.savethekoala.com/about-koalas/how-koalas-live-socialise-communicate">basic life-history functions</a>, such as foraging and social behaviour, will cause stress.</p>
<h2>So what can be done?</h2>
<p>The koalas are telling us it’s a major problem when urban design is not green enough. Innovative solutions are needed!</p>
<p>Cities can <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/mar/06/urban-jungle-saving-city-wildlife-with-trees-green-roofs-and-pools">do much more for wildlife conservation</a>. Creating <a href="https://theconversation.com/safe-passage-we-can-help-save-koalas-through-urban-design-63123">safe green spaces for wildlife</a> is critical. Not just koalas but other wildlife such as birds, small mammals, reptiles and frogs can benefit immensely from urban green spaces.</p>
<p>Even in suburbs with plenty of green space, problems still arise because urban planning typically designs this space around access for human recreation and not for the wildlife that was <a href="https://theconversation.com/koala-cul-de-sac-development-a-dead-end-for-wildlife-9047">living there before the housing development moved in</a>. </p>
<p>Urban planning should always incorporate the planning of green spaces that are safe for wildlife. Providing <a href="https://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/environment-waste/natural-environment/biodiversity-brisbane/wildlife-brisbane/wildlife-movement-solutions">wildlife crossings</a> is part of the solution. Another important element is educational programs to alert drivers to the need to look out for koalas. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/safe-passage-we-can-help-save-koalas-through-urban-design-63123">Safe passage: we can help save koalas through urban design</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Measures like this can minimise impacts on wildlife that faces the many challenges of adjusting to city life.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/112068/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Edward Narayan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Koalas can cope with the stresses of city life provided we plan urban developments in ways that help meet their basic needs.Edward Narayan, Senior Lecturer in Animal Science, Western Sydney UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/872592017-11-16T19:27:23Z2017-11-16T19:27:23ZAustralia is a global top-ten deforester – and Queensland is leading the way<p>When you think of devastating deforestation and extinction you usually think of the Amazon, Borneo and the Congo. But eastern Australia ranks alongside these in the top 10 of the world’s major deforestation fronts – the <a href="https://www.worldwildlife.org/publications/living-forests-report-chapter-5-saving-forests-at-risk">only one in a developed nation</a>. Most of the clearing is happening in Queensland, and it is accelerating.</p>
<p>Only last year a group of <a href="https://theconversation.com/queensland-land-clearing-is-undermining-australias-environmental-progress-54882">leading ecologists</a> voiced their alarm at new data which showed the clearing of 296,000 hectares of forest in 2013-14. This was three times higher than in 2008-09, kicking Australia up the list as one of the world’s forest-clearing pariahs. At the 2016 Society for Conservation Biology Conference, a <a href="https://www.ecolsoc.org.au/members/public-policy-and-outreach">Scientists’ Declaration</a> was signed by hundreds of scientists, expressing concern at these clearing rates.</p>
<hr>
<p><em><strong>Read more:</strong> <a href="https://theconversation.com/queensland-land-clearing-is-undermining-australias-environmental-progress-54882">Queensland land clearing is undermining Australia’s environmental progress</a></em> </p>
<hr>
<p>But the latest snapshot, Queensland’s Department of Science <a href="https://publications.qld.gov.au/dataset/land-cover-change-in-queensland-2015-16/resource/60a7902d-7a9d-49a7-90b1-a54686fbcef5">report on land cover change</a> published last month, showed a staggering 395,000ha of clearing for 2015-16: an increase of one third on 2014-15. As far as we can tell this rate of increased clearing is unmatched anywhere else on the globe.</p>
<p>Strong vegetation management laws enacted in Queensland – the <a href="https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/pdf/2017-07-03/act-1999-090">Vegetation Management Act 1999</a> – achieved dramatic reductions in forest and woodland loss. But the subsequent Liberal National state government, elected in 2012, overturned these protections.</p>
<p>The current government, elected in 2015, has tried and failed to reinstate the protections. In response, “panic clearing” caused clearing rates to shoot up, in anticipation that the state election will deliver a government that will reintroduce the much-needed protection of forests.</p>
<p>The Queensland Parliament is now in caretaker mode ahead of the November 25 election. The Queensland Labor Party has pledged to reinstate laws to prevent wholesale clearing, while the LNP opposition has vowed to retain current clearing rates.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194130/original/file-20171110-29358-7wxoti.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194130/original/file-20171110-29358-7wxoti.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194130/original/file-20171110-29358-7wxoti.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194130/original/file-20171110-29358-7wxoti.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194130/original/file-20171110-29358-7wxoti.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194130/original/file-20171110-29358-7wxoti.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194130/original/file-20171110-29358-7wxoti.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194130/original/file-20171110-29358-7wxoti.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Forest cleared by bulldozers towing massive chains.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Noel Preece</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Australian community and wildlife lose</h2>
<p>Whichever way you look at it, there is not a lot of sense in continued clearing. Australia already has some of the <a href="http://www.iucnredlist.org/about/summary-statistics#Tables_5_6">highest extinction rates</a> on the planet for plants and animals. With <a href="http://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/PC17001">80% of Queensland’s threatened species living in forest and woodland</a>, more clearing will certainly increase that rate. </p>
<p>Clearing also kills tens of millions of animals across Australia each year, a major <a href="https://theconversation.com/land-clearing-isnt-just-about-trees-its-an-animal-welfare-issue-too-80398">animal welfare</a> concern that rarely receives attention. This jeopardises both wildlife and the A$140 million invested in threatened species recovery.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/land-clearing-isnt-just-about-trees-its-an-animal-welfare-issue-too-80398">Land clearing isn't just about trees – it's an animal welfare issue too</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This rate of clearing <a href="https://theconversation.com/queensland-land-clearing-is-undermining-australias-environmental-progress-54882">neutralises our major environment programs</a>. Just one year of clearing has removed more trees than the bulk of 20 million trees painstakingly planted, at a cost of A$50 million. Australia’s major environment programs simply can’t keep up, and since 2013 are restoring only one-tenth of the extent of land bulldozed just last year.</p>
<p>Restoration costs to improve the quality of waters running onto the Great Barrier Reef are estimated at around A$5 billion to A$10 billion over 10 years. Nearly 40% of the land cleared in Queensland is in reef catchments, which will reverse any water quality gains as sediment pours onto the reef.</p>
<h2>Climate efforts nullified</h2>
<p>Since 2014, the federal government has invested A$2.55 billion on reducing emissions in the Carbon Farming Initiative through the Emissions Reduction Fund. Currently 189 million tonnes of abatement has been delivered by the <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/publications/emissions-reduction-fund-update">Emissions Reduction Fund</a>. This – the central plank of the Australian government’s climate response – will be all but nullified by the end of 2018 with the current clearing rates, and will certainly be wiped out by 2020, when Australia is expected to meet its climate target of 5% below 2000 emissions.</p>
<p>Ironically, this target will be achieved with the help of carried-over results from the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, which Australia was only able to meet because <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0210-x">land clearing had decreased</a> between 1990 and 1997.</p>
<h2>Why is this happening?</h2>
<p>Most of the clearing in Queensland since 1999 has been for pasture. Most good cropping land was cleared decades ago. Removing trees in more marginal lands can increase the carrying capacity for a short time with an immediate, and usually short-lived, financial reward. These rewards come at the <a href="http://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/RJ02008">expense of long-term sustainability</a>, which future landholders and government will bear.</p>
<p>Large areas of the cleared lands have been subject to <a href="http://www.publish.csiro.au/RJ/issue/1875/">substantial erosion and nutrient loss</a> from the newly cleared lands, and land degradation over time, and some areas have suffered massive woody weed incursions.</p>
<p>This is playing out today across the north where pastoralism is a marginal activity at best, with <a href="https://www.csiro.au/en/Research/Major-initiatives/Northern-Australia/Achievements/Mosaic-irrigation">declining terms of trade</a> of about 2% per year, with no net productivity growth, high average debts and low returns, and many enterprises facing insolvency. Clearing vegetation won’t change that.</p>
<p>A recent preliminary valuation of <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221204161630064X">ecosystem services</a>, on the other hand, estimated that uncleared lands are worth A$3,300-$6,100 per hectare per year to the Australian community, compared with productivity of grazing lands of A$18 per hectare.</p>
<p>With a clear divide between the policies Labor and the LNP are taking to the election, now is a good time to give land clearing’s social, economic and environmental impact the scrutiny it deserves.</p>
<p><br></p>
<hr>
<p><em>This article was updated on November 21 to reflect that land clearing increased in by a third in 2015-16 over 2014-15 levels. Previously the article stated an increase of 133%.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87259/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Noel D Preece is an environmental consultant who has consulted on major projects that involved land clearing. He has also received funding from the Australian Government's Biodiversity Fund for a rainforest restoration project. He has also been a Chief Investigator on an Australian Research Council Project, and a contributing Linkage Partner on another ARC project. He is a Councillor on the Ecosystem Science Council, and a Director of the Ecological Society of Australia.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Penny van Oosterzee is a partner in an Australian Research Council project on rainforest restoration. She has received funding from the Biodiversity Fund also for rainforest restoration.</span></em></p>The failed attempt to reinstate land clearing regulations in Queensland has prompted ‘panic clearing’, pushing Australia into the global top-ten deforesters.Noel D. Preece, Adjunct Asssociate Professor, James Cook UniversityPenny van Oosterzee, Adjunct Associate Professor James Cook University and University Fellow Charles Darwin University, James Cook UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/794192017-06-20T05:31:46Z2017-06-20T05:31:46ZLand clearing on the rise as legal ‘thinning’ proves far from clear-cut<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/174592/original/file-20170619-770-h5c4tb.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A 'thinned' landscape, which provides far from ideal habitat for many species.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="http://scboceania.org/policystatements/landclearing/">Land clearing is accelerating across eastern Australia</a>, despite our <a href="http://www.publish.csiro.au/PC/PC17001">new research</a> providing a clear warning of its impacts on the Great Barrier Reef, regional and global climate, and threatened native wildlife. </p>
<p>Policies in place to control land clearing have been <a href="https://theconversation.com/queensland-moves-to-control-land-clearing-other-states-need-to-follow-58291">wound back across all Australian states</a>, with major consequences for our natural environment. </p>
<p>One of the recent policy changes made in <a href="https://www.qld.gov.au/environment/land/vegetation/codes/">Queensland</a> and <a href="http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/vegetation/selfassess.htm">New South Wales</a> has been the introduction of self-assessable codes that allow landholders to clear native vegetation without a permit. These codes are meant to allow small amounts of “low-risk” clearing, so that landholders save time and money and government can focus on regulating activities that have bigger potential impacts on the environment. </p>
<p>However, <a href="http://www.wwf.org.au/ArticleDocuments/360/pub-accelerating-bushland-destruction-in-queensland-21mar17.pdf.aspx?Embed=Y">substantial areas of native forest are set to be cleared in Queensland under the guise of vegetation “thinning”</a>, which is allowed by these self-assessable codes. How did this happen?</p>
<h2>Thin on the ground</h2>
<p>Thinning involves the selective removal of native trees and shrubs, and is widely used in the grazing industry to improve pasture quality. It has been argued that thinning returns the environment back to its “<a href="https://publications.qld.gov.au/storage/f/2014-09-26T07%3A13%3A24.191Z/code-thickened-vegetation-in-the-brigalow-belt.pdf">natural state</a>” and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2015/s4462241.htm">provides better habitat for native wildlife</a>. However, the <a href="http://www.publish.csiro.au/bt/bt14137">science</a> supporting this practice is not as clear-cut as it seems.</p>
<p>Vegetation “thickening” is part of a natural, dynamic ecological cycle. Australia’s climate is highly variable, so vegetation tends to grow more in wetter years and then <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2005.00998.x/full">dies off during drought years</a>. These natural cycles of thickening and thinning can span 50 years or more. In most areas of inland eastern Australia, there is <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320712005009">little evidence</a> for ongoing vegetation thickening since pastoral settlement.</p>
<p>Thinning of vegetation using tractors, blades and other machinery interrupts this natural cycle, which can make post-drought recovery of native vegetation more difficult. Loss of tree and shrub cover puts native wildlife <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0133915">at much greater risk from introduced predators like cats</a>, and aggressive, “<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ddi.12294/full">despotic</a>” native birds. Thinning reduces the diversity of wildlife by favouring a few highly dominant species that prefer <a href="http://www.publish.csiro.au/rj/rj05029">open vegetation</a>, and reduces the availability of old trees with hollows. </p>
<p>Many native birds and animals can only survive in vegetation that hasn’t been cleared for at least 30 years. So although vegetation of course grows back after clearing, for native wildlife it’s a matter of quality, not just quantity. </p>
<h2>Land clearing by stealth?</h2>
<p>Thinning codes in Queensland and New South Wales allow landholders to clear vegetation that has thickened beyond its “<a href="https://publications.qld.gov.au/storage/f/2014-09-26T07%3A13%3A24.191Z/code-thickened-vegetation-in-the-brigalow-belt.pdf">natural state</a>”. Yet there is little agreement on what the “natural state” is for many native vegetation communities.</p>
<p>Under the Queensland codes, <a href="https://www.dnrm.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/342092/independent-review-sac-cardno.pdf">up to 75% of vegetation in an area can be removed without a permit</a>, and in New South Wales thinning can reduce tree density to a level that is <a href="https://biodiversity-ss.s3.amazonaws.com/Uploads/1494305298/LLS-Land-Management-Codes-exhibition-draft.pdf">too low to support natural ecosystems</a>.</p>
<p>All of this thinning adds up. Since August 2016, the Queensland government has <a href="https://data.qld.gov.au/dataset/vegetation-management-register-of-self-assessable-code-notifications">received self-assessable vegetation clearing code notifications</a> totalling more than 260,000 hectares. These areas include habitat for threatened species, and ecosystems that have already been extensively <a href="http://www.wwf.org.au/ArticleDocuments/360/pub-accelerating-bushland-destruction-in-queensland-21mar17.pdf.aspx?Embed=Y.">cleared</a>.</p>
<iframe src="https://www.google.com/maps/d/embed?mid=1L3revYC3nAXTLDCTlobq-0nbQ6c" width="100%" height="480"></iframe>
<p>It may be that the actual amount of vegetation cleared under thinning codes is less than the notifications suggest. But we will only know for sure when <a href="https://www.qld.gov.au/environment/land/vegetation/mapping/slats-reports/#slats-most-recent-reports">the next report on land clearing</a> is released, and by then it will be too late. </p>
<h2>Getting the balance right</h2>
<p>Vegetation policy needs to strike a balance between protecting the environment and enabling landholders to manage their businesses efficiently and sustainably. While self-regulation makes sense for some small-scale activities, the current thinning codes allow large areas of vegetation to be removed from high-risk areas without government oversight. </p>
<p>Thinning codes should only allow vegetation to be cleared in areas that are not mapped as habitat for threatened species or ecosystems, and not to an extent where only scattered trees are left standing in a landscape. <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-needs-better-policy-to-end-the-alarming-increase-in-land-clearing-63507?sa=pg1&sq=land+clearing&sr=2">Stronger regulation is still needed</a> to reduce the rate of land clearing, which in Queensland is now <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-19/land-clearing-rates-qld-need-to-be-lowered-new-study/8628524">the highest in a decade</a>. </p>
<p>Protecting native vegetation on private land reduces soil erosion and soil salinity, improves water quality, regulates climate, and allows Australia’s unique plants and animals to survive. Landholders who preserve native vegetation alongside farming provide essential services to the Australian community, and should be rewarded. <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-needs-better-policy-to-end-the-alarming-increase-in-land-clearing-63507?sa=pg1&sq=land+clearing&sr=2">We need long-term incentives</a> to allow landholders to profit from protecting vegetation instead of clearing it.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.publish.csiro.au/PC/PC17001">Our research has shown</a> that Australian governments spend billions of dollars trying to achieve the benefits already provided by native vegetation, through programs such as the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/29/exclusive-land-clearing-surge-in-qld-set-to-wipe-out-direct-action-gains-report">Emissions Reduction Fund</a>, the <a href="http://www.nrm.gov.au/national/20-million-trees">20 Million Trees program</a> and <a href="http://www.nrm.gov.au/national/continuing-investment/reef-programme">Reef Rescue</a>. Yet far more damage is inflicted by under-regulated clearing than is “fixed” by these programs.</p>
<p>Imagine what could be achieved if we spent that money more effectively.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/79419/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>April Reside receives funding from NESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub. She sits on the Black-throated Finch Recovery Team and Birdlife Australia's Research and Conservation Committee. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anita J Cosgrove receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is a member of the Black-throated Finch Recovery Team, BirdLife Australia and the Australian Conservation Foundation.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jennifer Lesley Silcock receives funding from the NESP Threatened Species Hub at the University of Queensland.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Leonie Seabrook receives funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Megan C Evans receives funding from the National Environmental Research Programme Threatened Species Recovery Hub.</span></em></p>Legal vegetation ‘thinning’ is contributing to high rates of land clearing, potentially causing problems for threatened species and ecosystems.April Reside, Researcher, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, The University of QueenslandAnita J Cosgrove, Research Assistant in the Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, The University of QueenslandJennifer Silcock, Post-doctoral research fellow, The University of QueenslandLeonie Seabrook, Landscape Ecologist, The University of QueenslandMegan C Evans, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Environmental Policy, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/299782014-08-04T01:09:05Z2014-08-04T01:09:05ZLand clearing laws bring out worrying libertarian streak<p>Last week, an environmental officer, Glendon Turner, was allegedly <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/elderly-man-charged-with-murder-of-environment-and-heritage-worker-near-moree-20140730-zycl2.html">shot and killed</a> by a farmer near the town of Moree in New South Wales.</p>
<p>A 79-year old man, Ian Turnbull, has been charged with Mr Turner’s murder. Police yesterday <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/police-to-allege-glen-turner-gunned-down-while-inspecting-an-unrelated-site-in-croppa-creek-20140804-10089f.html#ixzz39TCB51Dc">reportedly alleged</a> that Mr Turner was inspecting an unrelated property when he was shot. Mr Turnbull will <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/environment-operations-suspended-after-moree-death/story-e6frg6n6-1227014159571">reappear in court on September 22</a>.</p>
<p>Mr Turnbull was reportedly involved in a legal dispute with the New South Wales Office of Environment and Heritage over illegal land clearing, prompting speculation over whether this was a factor in Mr Turnbull’s alleged actions.</p>
<h2>Private property v public environment</h2>
<p>Vegetation laws have been politically controversial in several Australian states for well over a decade. Although different states have different laws, and changes of state governments sometimes result in changes to those laws, the rules over land clearing have largely become a fixture on the Australian legal landscape. So why the controversy?</p>
<p>Vegetation laws are controversial because they operate at the intersection of private property rights and public environmental law. Environmental laws have developed over time in response to the inadequacy of various existing laws related to land and natural resource ownership and use. They are designed to prevent environmental degradation and protect public health.</p>
<p>Environmental laws regulate land uses that were previously unregulated. In many cases they restrict and even prohibit activities that were previously encouraged by existing laws, especially property laws. </p>
<p>Property laws facilitate economic “growth” through profit-orientated uses of land and natural resources. Property rights are also associated with the political freedom of private individuals from the government. In recognition of the importance of property rights, the <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/coaca430/s51.html">Australian Constitution</a> requires the government to provide compensation for any property it acquires from a private citizen on “just terms”. </p>
<p>The importance of property rights to Australian law is reflected in cultural attitudes to the possession and deprivation of property rights. The Australian film [The Castle](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Castle_(1997_Australian_film) clearly portrays these expectations. Playing on the mythic notion that “a man’s home is his castle” the film’s main character, Daryl Kerrigan, argues that the government’s attempted acquisition of his home would be theft. </p>
<p>If these sentiments were limited to comedy movies there would be no controversy over vegetation laws. But they are not. Some members of the community believe that property rights should be immune to considerations of the public interest, and that the “environment” starts somewhere beyond their back yard.</p>
<h2>Rights over responsibilities?</h2>
<p>This view featured prominently in the responses to Mr Turner’s alleged murder. Public figures such as <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/30/moree-man-79-charged-after-nsw-environment-officer-shot-dead">Federal Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce</a> and <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/30/moree-man-79-charged-after-nsw-environment-officer-shot-dead">Moree Mayor Katrina Humphries</a> suggested that environmental laws can threaten and even violate property rights, and the political freedom and economic benefits that come with them. </p>
<p>“I am not overly surprised that something dreadful like this has happened,” Mayor Humphries <a href="http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stories/2014/07/31/land-clearing-linked-to-nsw-farm-killing.html">told the media</a>.</p>
<p>Yet the fact is that private property rights are not absolute, and never have been in Australian law. Property rights exist necessarily in relation to competing rights and interests. While the Constitution is often cited as proof of the priority of property rights in Australian law, the reason for the “just terms” provision is overlooked. Throughout Anglo-Australian legal history, the government has always held the legal right to grant, regulate and acquire private property. </p>
<p>Environmental laws indicate the government’s prerogative, indeed responsibility, to balance private rights against the public’s interest in health and environmental protection. In the 1800s, colonial government grants of private land in NSW were often subject to conditions including vegetation clearing, whereas today there are no such conditions, and environmental laws operate separately.</p>
<p>The environmental legacy of 19th century ideas of ownership and land use practices are precisely what modern environmental laws are designed to address. </p>
<p>Under the <a href="http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/viewtop/inforce/act+103+2003+fn+0+N">Native Vegetation Act 2003 (NSW)</a>, landholders who want to clear native vegetation usually need to apply for permission from the relevant catchment management authority or local council. Failing to do so can incur fines of up to A$1,100,000. Permission to clear vegetation is granted only after considering its environmental impact in accordance with the Act.</p>
<p>However, in response to resistance to the Act from some sectors of the community, the NSW government recently introduced <a href="http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/vegetation/index.htm">reforms</a> that purport to “strike the right balance between sustainable agriculture and protecting the environment”. </p>
<p>In effect, the new <a href="http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/subordleg+543+2013+cd+0+N">Native Vegetation Regulation 2013 (NSW)</a> (which supplements the 2003 Act) offers wider exemptions from the need to seek permission to clear native vegetation, and restores some decision-making responsibility to private proprietors.</p>
<h2>Property rights are not paramount</h2>
<p>In a <a href="http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/MinMedia/GlenTurner.pdf">statement</a>, Mr Turner’s family pointed out that he was “in the course of fulfilling his duty” when he died. Premier Mike Baird has called for cool heads to prevail. “Supporting this family and completing the criminal case, that’s the priority,” <a href="https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/24609488/baird-urges-cool-heads-over-land-clearing">he said</a>.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, public figures such as Joyce have been <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/right-wing-extremists-labor-attacks-nats-over-land-clearing-comments-20140801-zza56.html">accused</a> of attempting to justify Mr Turner’s death in terms of strong rural community antipathy to land clearing laws. This, critics say, smacks of a particular streak of ultra-libertarianism more often seen in parts of the <a href="http://prfamerica.org">United States</a> (see also the “<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine">castle doctrine</a>”) than in northwestern NSW.</p>
<p>Those who think the sanctity of property rights supersedes the need to comply with environmental laws have a view of land ownership that is based on individual entitlement. But environmental laws are designed to deliver benefits at a scale far larger than the individual. </p>
<p><em>*This article was amended on August 5 to reflect updated information about the allegations against Mr Turnbull.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/29978/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicole Graham does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Last week, an environmental officer, Glendon Turner, was allegedly shot and killed by a farmer near the town of Moree in New South Wales. A 79-year old man, Ian Turnbull, has been charged with Mr Turner’s…Nicole Graham, Senior Lecturer of Law, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/185162013-10-03T05:36:32Z2013-10-03T05:36:32ZHidden flaws in Victoria’s new native vegetation clearing rules<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/32370/original/q8z62g22-1380769111.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Will new Victorian land clearing rules clear up confusion, or just create more?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">www.shutterstock.com/123250027</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Victorian government is overhauling its rules on native vegetation clearing, the first major change in this area for more than a decade.</p>
<p>Vegetation management policy rarely makes it into the news - but it is important, not least because <a href="http://www.landcaretas.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/NatVegManageOnAgLand20121116_Ver1.0.0.pdf">native vegetation provides vital environmental services</a> including pasture for animals to eat, erosion control, nutrient cycling for healthy soils, water purification and habitat for plants and animals.</p>
<p>The new Victorian government regulations have some positives, including clear, <a href="http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/_rework/environment-and-wildlife/biodiversity/native-vegetation/?a=180645">step-by-step processes</a> that are underpinned by a set of <a href="http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/_rework/environment-and-wildlife/biodiversity/native-vegetation/?a=180649">publicly-available biodiversity information maps</a>. </p>
<p>Yet the <a href="http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/145528/Future-directions-Consultation-Paper-September-2012.pdf">consultation paper</a> about these current changes attracted more than 200 <a href="http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/land-management/land/native-vegetation-home/native-vegetation-review-submissions">submissions</a>, largely expressing concern. And much to the consternation of local governments, environmental groups and academics, <a href="http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/_rework/environment-and-wildlife/biodiversity/native-vegetation/?a=180641">the new reforms were announced in May</a> with no further opportunity for comment.</p>
<p>So why are <a href="http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/167638/NVR_30.pdf">local governments</a>, <a href="http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/167825/NVR_134.pdf">landcare groups</a> and <a href="http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/168193/NVR_176.pdf">scientists</a> like me deeply uneasy about these changes, which will change the way land is managed right across Victoria?</p>
<h2>From ‘net gain’ to ‘no net loss’</h2>
<p>One of the most significant changes is in the stated goal of the native vegetation rules. </p>
<p>In the <a href="http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/102319/Native_Vegetation_Management_-_A_Framework_for_Action.pdf">original 2002 regulations</a>, the objective was to achieve “a reversal, across the entire landscape, of the long-term decline in the extent and quality of native vegetation, leading to a net gain”. Now, the goal is for <a href="http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/_rework/environment-and-wildlife/biodiversity/native-vegetation/?a=180645">“no net loss in the contribution made by native vegetation to Victoria’s biodiversity”</a>.</p>
<p>The original “net gain” objective was a recognition that Victoria had already lost a significant amount of its native vegetation. Incremental loss was continuing, particularly on private land, and native vegetation management was a cost-effective way to protect the productive capacity of land, the quality of water resources and biodiversity. More than a decade on, <em>none</em> of these facts have changed.</p>
<p>Given this context, adopting a goal of “no net loss” effectively acquiesces to continued long-term decline, instead of aspiring to improve the situation.</p>
<h2>Chipping away at biodiversity</h2>
<p>The new rules aim to cut environmental regulation, or “green tape”, by minimising the need for expert on-site assessment and relying on modelled maps. </p>
<p>Previously, all applications for clearing required on-site assessments by consultants. Now, only those deemed to be “moderate” or “high” risk require comprehensive assessment and matching of clearing to offsets, if rare or threatened species are affected.</p>
<p>“Low” risk applications will be assessed solely using modelled information, and can expect land clearing to be allowed as long as compensatory offsets (also calculated using modelled data) are provided.</p>
<p>The risk level of an application depends on the size and location of the proposed clearing. All of Victoria has been mapped into three categories (A, B and C) that supposedly reflect “<a href="http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/169961/Location_risk_fact_sheet_NVR.pdf">the likelihood that removing a small amount of native vegetation at a location could have a significant impact on the habitat of a <em>rare or threatened species</em></a>”. </p>
<p>By focusing narrowly on potential impacts to just rare or threatened species, 91% of Victoria ends up in lowest Location Risk A category (shown in light blue on the map below), with clearing permitted as a right as long as it is less than 1 hectare and offsets are provided (Figure 1).</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/32280/original/s7hpfk9v-1380678393.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/32280/original/s7hpfk9v-1380678393.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/32280/original/s7hpfk9v-1380678393.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32280/original/s7hpfk9v-1380678393.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32280/original/s7hpfk9v-1380678393.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32280/original/s7hpfk9v-1380678393.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=477&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32280/original/s7hpfk9v-1380678393.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=477&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32280/original/s7hpfk9v-1380678393.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=477&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The modelled Location Risk map for Victoria, shown with 25m resolution.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Native Vegetation Regulation Location Risk map, version 2, 2013, DataSearch Victoria.</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This limited interpretation runs contrary to the <a href="http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/_rework/environment-and-wildlife/biodiversity/native-vegetation/?a=180645">government’s own definition of biodiversity</a>, which includes “the variety of all life forms, the different plants, animals and microorganisms, the genes they contain and support, and the ecosystems of which they form a part”.</p>
<p>This decision to ignore broadly-defined biodiversity at the risk assignment stage leaves remnant native vegetation vulnerable to being chipped away by permitted clearing and undermines the “no net loss” objective.</p>
<h2>Can we rely on our maps?</h2>
<p>If this new permitting process is to work properly, the accuracy of modelled maps at the intended scale of use will be crucial. But when I took a closer look, I discovered some worrying surprises. </p>
<p>For example, car parks and construction areas within the grounds of Melbourne Airport and the <a href="http://www.calderpark.com.au/track-hire.aspx">infield parking and viewing area within Calder Park Raceway</a> have been classified as higher risk categories B and C (see Figure 2 below).</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/32282/original/tfnttbcy-1380679029.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/32282/original/tfnttbcy-1380679029.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/32282/original/tfnttbcy-1380679029.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=240&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32282/original/tfnttbcy-1380679029.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=240&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32282/original/tfnttbcy-1380679029.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=240&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32282/original/tfnttbcy-1380679029.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=302&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32282/original/tfnttbcy-1380679029.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=302&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/32282/original/tfnttbcy-1380679029.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=302&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">On the left, car parks and construction areas in Melbourne Airport grounds have been classified as Location Risk B (shown in purple) and C (orange). On the right, parts of Calder Park Raceway have been classified as Location Risk B (purple).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">ArcGIS satellite World Imagery map overlaid with Native Vegetation Regulation Location Risk map, version 2, 2013, DataSearch Victoria.</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Conversely, <a href="http://www.biosphere.net.au/downloads/BioMappingAudit.pdf">well-documented locations of high-conservation value threatened flora and fauna</a> in places like Bungalook Conservation Reserve in Kilsyth South and the Dandenong Ranges National Park have inexplicably been classed as Location Risk A. These are unlikely to be isolated instances.</p>
<p>Instead of experiencing greater certainty and efficiency under these new rules, developers seeking to clear native vegetation that has been misclassified as “moderate/high” risk (at sites like the Calder Park Raceway) may face being unfairly burdened with excess costs in assessment and offsets.</p>
<p>In a similarly perverse way, permitted clearing of high conservation value native vegetation that is misclassified as “low” risk becomes a cost borne by the wider community.</p>
<p>Some of these errors are probably due to <a href="http://yungresearch.wordpress.com/">problems with the input data</a> used in the modelling.</p>
<p>Historically, the various species databases managed by the state have been chronically under-resourced, resulting in <a href="http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/167609/NVR_4.pdf">uneven data capture, lack of quality control and assurance and database maintenance and updating</a>.</p>
<p>Furthermore, <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380012003286">species occurrence data is heavily biased towards public land</a>. Common landscapes that are poorly represented include arable, lowland areas that are predominantly on a freehold title.</p>
<p>Ironically, this means our knowledge of biodiversity is poorest and possibly most error-prone in freehold areas that are most depleted in native vegetation, and also most likely to be subject to applications to clear for urban development or increased agricultural use.</p>
<h2>Where do we start to fix the new system?</h2>
<p>Errors are neither unexpected nor unusual given the complexity of the modelling involved with creating maps like these. But we could have more confidence in the permitting process if it included processes for handling inevitable errors and problems. </p>
<p>A good start can be made by: a) addressing data deficiencies on freehold land; b) conducting independent peer review and quality assurance testing by end-users such as local councils and planning authorities; c) providing avenues for error-reporting; and d) committing resources to quality assurance, improvement and regular updating of the biodiversity information maps.</p>
<p>There are real opportunities to make improvements to Victoria’s clearing regulations that will make life easier for landholders, farmers and developers, but also result in better environmental outcomes. </p>
<p>However, those opportunities can only be realised if the Victorian government is willing to properly address the concerns and solutions raised in <a href="http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/land-management/land/native-vegetation-home/native-vegetation-review-submissions">submissions from the wider community</a>. </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/18516/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Yung En Chee receives funding from research grants and contracts from the Australian Research Council, the federal government's Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Victorian government agencies and statutory authorities (Department of Sustainability and Environment, Parks Victoria and Melbourne Water) and non-profit organisations (Victorian National Parks Association and Trust for Nature).</span></em></p>The Victorian government is overhauling its rules on native vegetation clearing, the first major change in this area for more than a decade. Vegetation management policy rarely makes it into the news…Yung En Chee, Research Fellow, Environmental Science, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.