Biodiversity Offsetting in Victoria
-
Upload
institute-of-the-environment -
Category
Education
-
view
1.230 -
download
3
description
Transcript of Biodiversity Offsetting in Victoria
Michael Crowe
Biodiversity offsetting in Victoria
Biodiversity Offsets in Canada Conference
February 2014
Native Vegetation Controls
Year: 1788 to 2012
1989 – Initial regulation of native vegetation clearing • an end to large scale clearing
However offsetting was sporadic and not codified
1998 - Biodiversity mapping • Extant vegetation, 1750 vegetation, bioregions, threatened species
Provided state-wide information base
2002 - Policy - the Native Vegetation Management Framework • No net loss, like-for-like, metrics …..
However developers found it hard to find their offsets
2007 – Offset market based on credit trading • Third party suppliers, brokers, credit register
2013 – Some policy amendments and technical improvements
Evolution of Offsetting in Victoria
Regulation of native vegetation clearing:
• A planning permit required to clear native vegetation
• Assessment of permit applications based on the biodiversity significance of the impact
• Applications must demonstrate ‘avoid’ and ‘minimise’ steps of the mitigation hierarchy
• The permit (if granted) requires an offset
The Regulation
The nature and size of the offset was set by Native Vegetation
Management Framework policy (statutory document):
– Avoid, minimise, offset
– No Net Loss
– Quality/area metric - habitat hectares
– Offsets to be secure and ongoing
– Additionality
– Like for like rules
– Biodiversity importance
Offset policy in Victoria - 2002
No net loss – quality is important
Measuring site quality – 10 attributes in habitat hectares
increased cover of weeds
reduced recruitment
reduced cover of trees
reduced understorey
diversity
Habitat score = 0.50
Increased quality at the offset site
Habitat score = 0.90
tree canopy cover
logs & organic litter
large old
trees
understorey diversity
recruitment of young trees
size & connectivity of the patch
Total gain = area x quality increment/ha
• Improvement gain Increments in quality attribute scores resulting from
restoration actions (eg revegetation)
• Management gain Increments in quality attribute scores resulting from actions to
control threatening processes (eg pest & weed control)
• Security gain Increments in overall quality score depending on the changes
in land use (eg establish protected areas)
• Gain scoring includes rules for additionality
Estimating Gain
• The landowner agreement – private land
− permanent statutory contract − binds future landowners – on title − actions and commitments in the management plan − reporting and monitoring
• Land surrender − private land donated to a permanent protected area
• Upgrade to Protected Area − government re-classifies public land to higher security category through legislation
Secure and ongoing
Local Government
Determine small impacts
Developers
The offsetting process - summary
Loss site assessment, Permit application
Refer large impacts to
State Government
Permit may be granted Permit includes offset conditions – offset plan
Developers required to provide offsets
• first party • third party (market)
BushBroker price history
Bioregion Number of Agreements
Total number of Habitat
Hectares
Average price per Habitat
Hectare * (of total
Agreements)
Habitat Hectare price range *
(more than 80% of
Agreements) Central Victorian
Uplands 8 10 $110,000 $46,000 - $143,000
Gippsland Plain 21 29 $149,000 $85,000 - $250,000
Goldfields 39 38 $45,000 $25,000 - $66,000
Victorian Riverina 10 11 $101,000 $80,000 - $110,000
Victorian Volcanic Plain 29 54 $170,000 $49,000 -
$267,000
Highlands-Southern Fall 14 74 $34,000 $20,000 - $38,000
Other bioregions 11 25 $370,000 $206,000 - $380,000
• Third party offsets estimated 25-50% savings over first party • Estimated market turnover up to $100m
Prices vary by bioregion, EVC, location, rarity, demand and urgency of developer, landowner needs. Also initial trade, small or large trades
Offset market - credit prices
2013 Revisions
New provisions were recently announced: • Like for like Threatened species – distribution models Everything else – increased flexibility
• Use of maps for site assessment reduced transaction cost assessment consistency accuracy of maps?
• Transaction cost reduction more ‘over the counter’
Biodiversity offsetting in Victoria
Thank you
Biodiversity offsets in Canada Conference