Review of the National Framework for the Management and Monitoring of Australia's Native Vegetation (NVF)
19 May 2005
Contents
19 May 2005
Ms Bernadette O'Leary
Vegetation Management Policy Section
Department of Environment and Heritage
GPO Box 787
CANBERRA ACT 2601
Dear Ms O'Leary
Review of the National Framework for the Management and Monitoring of Australia's Native Vegetation (NVF).
Thank you for your letter of 29 March 2005 inviting the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) to make a submission to the above review. The Framework applies to councils throughout Australia and given the changes that have occurred in NRM and the state legislative changes since it's development, this is a timely review.
Strategic content
Local government has embraced the vision outlined in the NVF, with councils around Australia undertaking a greater role in the management of Australia's native vegetation. However, it is becoming more and more difficult as the costs to local government of accepting a greater role increase. For instance, councils who have been buying land with high conservation values to create reserves have had to seriously reassess their programs as the price of land has substantially increased over recent years. These increasing costs are making this activity extremely difficult, or no longer a financially viable option, for councils.
The vision promotes increased use of native species in replanting. Local government supports the planting of native species, and in fact, numerous councils have established their own native nurseries to promote the use of species local to the area. Further work could be done in the area of promoting the use of native species in urban streetscapes. ALGA supports the concept of urban forests including the value of native tree species.
Councils around Australia are exploring and adopting incentive programs to conserve areas of high value. A recent ALGA survey of coastal councils found that 37 per cent of responding councils provided environmental incentives to their community. Once again, these programs require funding, and one such option adopted by some councils is to impose an environmental levy on residents.
The coastal council survey found the most common form of incentive was the provision of technical advice. Many people who move to coastal areas want to preserve their natural resources but do not have any information on how to do so. In the past, state agencies provided technical experts and extension staff. These have mostly been withdrawn and it is councils who are filling the gap. This is cost shifting to local government. There are excellent environmental benefits to be gained from providing the service, however local governments should not have to foot the bill for undertaking an activity that has long been the responsibility other spheres of government.
Whilst a partnership between all levels of government is needed, some of these councils with environmental levies are concerned that activities that should fall into the responsibility of state governments are being left to local governments to fulfil. There is a risk that local governments are seen to able to afford such activities if a levy is imposed. As a result, state governments pull back on the activities they fund. State governments must continue to fund the areas they are responsible for, allowing the levy to be used for the environmental initiatives it was designed to fund.
The strategic content of the Framework says there'll be no clearing of endangered or vulnerable vegetation communities. ALGA undertook a recent survey of coastal councils to obtain some information on how they are managing their natural resource base in response to significant development pressures. Vegetation degradation was the third biggest environmental concern, behind water supply and degradation of sand dunes. Urban sprawl was a significant concern in New South Wales and Queensland and obviously impacts on native vegetation. Also of concern was increased pressure from invasive species and pressure on threatened species habitat, arising from development.
Local government is one of the largest land managers in the country. A primary responsibility is the control of weeds on council land. In addition, some councils provide assistance to private land holders to manage weeds. There have been a number of Commonwealth and state weed programs announced in recent months, which ALGA welcomes. Weeds need to be tackled as early as possible to prevent their spread, where possible. Each level of government, as well and the community and regional organisations must work together to control the spread of weeds and reduce the impact they can have on our native vegetation. Councils do not want to be left to deal with weeds on their own.
Best practice
Since the NVF was developed, the regional NRM arrangements have been adopted across Australia. These new catchment authorities must be included in the Framework. To date their focus has been on developing regional plans and investment strategies, however they are now moving into the implementation phase. They must work together with all three spheres of government and the community to ensure that activities are complementary and the best environmental outcomes are achieved.
Local government, as a primary land manager, can control native vegetation through land use planning and development applications. Council responsibilities are backed up with legislation. However, it is very expensive and time consuming to undertake prosecutions against those involved in illegal clearing activities. Councils often do not have the staff or resources to effectively monitor tree clearing activity. As such, many offenders are never prosecuted. Councils need assistance to bring these individuals and companies to court. If appropriate penalties are imposed, more native vegetation can be saved.
Councils are instrumental in providing education to their community on the importance of native vegetation. Blocks can be subdivided on the condition that certain trees are retained. Once developed, the blocks are sold and the new owners are not aware of the importance of the remaining trees and want them removed to instal swimming pools, sheds or for personal reasons. The catchment authorities and state agencies need to assist councils to develop education material to promote the retention of native vegetation to the community, and assist them to understand their legislative requirements to do so.
The catchment authorities could facilitate the training of council staff in how to best manage native vegetation and can provide them with tools to assist in decision making. Catchment authorities are instrumental in working with councils to ensure best practice is achieved. The formation of stronger partnerships between councils and their catchment authorities can be used to address the need for increased extension expertise.
Local government is a great supporter of bushcare activities, employing many bushland officers and supporting a large number of volunteers. Bushland protection is a core council activity for many local governments. In the recent ALGA survey of coastal councils, 67 per cent of councils have undertaken environmental management plans, such as for biodiversity conservation. This was most prevalent in Victoria and NSW where 88 and 79 per cent, respectively, of councils have developed an environmental strategy. In addition, nearly half of all councils reported having and implementing an invasive species strategy. However there is still a blur between the roles and responsibilities of the spheres of government. The catchment authorities also have a significant role to play.
ALGA NRM survey - information on council activities in relation to biodiversity conservation
Incorporating biodiversity objectives into council strategic planning instruments ensures that biodiversity is considered important at the highest level of council and is incorporated into relevant council activities. In a recent ALGA NRM survey of councils in four states (Victoria, Western Australia, Tasmania and South Australia), over 60 per cent of councils incorporated biodiversity objectives in their corporate or operational plan. This was as high as 81 per cent in Victoria.
In addition, 40 per cent of councils provided biodiversity training to staff, councillors or the community in the last 12 months. This was up from 30 per cent in 2000. This clearly demonstrates councils commitment to preserving biodivesity, including native vegetation.
The Biodiversity Toolbox for Local Government was developed in 2002 by the Australian Government. The survey aimed to gather information on the usefulness of the toolbox. Only 36 per cent of respondents were aware of the toolbox, with a greater level of awareness in Tasmania and Victoria than the other two states. Only 30 per cent of those who knew of the hoolbox used it. In a separate survey, Queensland councils reported a far higher awareness of the toolbox and use of it.
What do you consider to be the main native vegetation management and monitoring issues in Australia for the next five years?
Many of the endangered vegetation ecosystems are in coastal areas. As these areas continue to face significant pressure from both population increases and tourism, native vegetation communities will continue to be placed under pressure. The capacity of all levels of government to protect significant areas needs to be assessed. What price is the community willing to place on areas of high ecological value? Who will be responsible for protecting these areas? Which sphere of government has the resources to both purchase and manage these areas? What role will new incentive schemes, such as tradeable development rights, play?
Many states have undergone extensive changes in native vegetation legislation. It is very difficult for councils to stay on top of these changes. The community in turn needs to be educated on clearing controls and new legislation. Often this falls onto local councils to provide interpretations of the legislation when development applications are lodged. Council's job is made even more difficult when developers, encouraged by the profits that can be made, particularly in coastal areas, continually push the boundaries. Governments who develop new legislation must take responsibility for educating both councils and their communities on how it will work and the impacts of the legislation on land managers.
A recent survey of coastal councils found that councils were concerned that they were unable to keep up to date with changes in legislation, such as native vegetation and threatened species legislation. Training to assist staff to understand and interpret legislation changes was identified as a priority by councils, particularly those in NSW and Queensland. While developers put plenty of resources into finding their way around legislation changes, the state agencies responsible provide very little if any support to councils who are expected to implement the legislation. This makes enforcement by councils difficult.
The role of councils in protecting native vegetation is severely impacted on by a lack of funding associated with these activities. All incentive schemes cost money. By entering into rate rebate schemes, councils are forgoing income. Careful consideration needs to be given to all conservation agreement type schemes. It is imperative that agreements entered into now do not preclude the use of improved schemes that are developed in the future. It is essential that the best environmental outcomes can be achieved in the long term.
The use of GIS and mapping tools greatly assists all land managers, including councils, to better manage native vegetation. However these decision making tools require expert skills and can be costly to use. In the recent ALGA survey of coastal councils, 80 per cent of councils identified a need for increased training. The two main areas identified were improved planning and a greater understanding of legislation, responsibilities and prosecution powers. High growth councils identified a need for biodiversity conservation mapping, training to assist development assessment staff and better evaluation skills. Better training of councils should result in improved management of native vegetation.
Summary
Councils across Australia are currently working within the Framework to conserve native vegetation. Since the development of the Framework, the new regional NRM arrangements have been implemented and significant changes to state legislation has occurred. Whilst council activities in the area of native vegetation conservation continue to increase, their funding to do so has not. Councils in high growth areas, such as around urban centres and along the coast are already struggling to conserve their native vegetation and the pressures are likely to continue in the medium term. Given the development pressures these councils are facing and the numerous changes to state legislation, councils require assistance to effectively manage their native vegetation resources.
For further information, please call Angela Shepherd, Assistant Director, Environment Policy at ALGA on 02 6122 9433.
Yours sincerely
Ian Chalmers
Chief Executive
Contact regarding this submission
Rosemary James
Environment/NRM Policy
Australian Local Government Association
Tel: 02 6122 9433
rosemary.james@alga.asn.au
