Biodiversity information revelation and assessment process

1
Biodiversity information revelation and
assessment process

• David Parkes
• Dept. of Sustainability Environment Victoria

2
(No Transcript)
3

• 58 of Victoria has been cleared

• 63 of Victoria is private land
• of which about 93 has been cleared

• alienation and associated clearing has been
  highly selective

4
Policy Context

• reverse the decline in the extent and quality of
  native vegetation and habitat, leading to a net
  gain
• Victorias Native Vegetation Management
• - A Framework for Action 2002
• to be achieved in the context of other goals
• maintain and recover biodiversity
• maintain and recover catchment values
• Ecologically Sustainable Development
• community capacity

5
BushTender
6
Influencing biodiversity management is a
continuing challenge

• inherently diverse and complex
• - 100s of major ecosystems
• - 1000s of species (higher plants animals)
• - untold genetic diversity
• across all tenures and land uses
• - 1000s of land managers
• limited awareness, scientific knowledge and
  investment

CHAOS!
gt approaches must be sound but very pragmatic
- strong DSE focus on vegetation information
(location, type, cons. status, condition, use by
species)
7
Traditional information relationships
8
Traditional information relationships
vegetation / habitat condition
BIODIVERSITY ASSETS species, ecosystems,
naturalness
9
Changing information relationships
CONDITION current habitat service
10
Desirable characteristics of an approach to
native vegetation condition
science
NRM
11
Vegetation / Habitat Condition

• one Habitat Hectare
• one hectare of native vegetation which
  retains the average characteristics of a mature
  and apparently long-undisturbed stand of the same
  vegetation type
• requires a reference point or benchmark for
  each vegetation type which encompasses the full
  range of condition states of interest to NRM
• vegetation types are Ecological Vegetation
  Classes described by bioregions (over 1000 in
  Victoria)

12
Habitat Score
13
Habitat Score
14
Undisturbed vegetation
Habitat score 0.90
15
Reduced quality of vegetation in cleared
landscapes
Habitat score 0.50
16
Reduced quality of vegetation in cleared
landscapes
Habitat score 0.25
17

• Based on currently observable features of site.
• Does not include risk (impact, likelihood,
  recoverability) related to
• pest animals
• conflicting adjacent land use
• (e.g. ag.chemicals, drainage)
• broad-scale issues
• (e.g. salinity, climate change)
• This risk needs to be based on modelling at the
  landscape scale.

18
Habitat Score - further development

• missing features? (e.g. hollows)
• additional hard to assess components?
• (e.g. soil health)
• different weightings / index formula?
• application to revegetation
• application to fluctuating environments
• (e.g. wetlands)
• review after two years of use / research
• stimulated similar development in NSW, Tas, Qld,
  SA, WA

19
Vegetation condition how full is the glass?
full and stable
20
Vegetation condition how full is the glass?
emptied by catastrophic disturbance event
21
Vegetation condition how full is the glass?
recovery from catastrophic disturbance event
22
Vegetation condition how full is the glass?
surviving a drought event
23
Vegetation condition how full is the glass?
sustainable use?
24
Vegetation condition how full is the glass?
recovery limited by damage to regenerative
processes?
regenerative processes
alternative state limit?
current condition
25
Vegetation condition how full is the glass?
unsustainable use
26
Vegetation condition how full is the glass?
snap-shot estimate of trajectory
What is the net outcome of current processes?
What management options can make the net
outcome more positive?
1. Current? 2. Prognosis? 3. Intervention?
27
Applications of habitat hectares

• predicting changes at site following changed
  management
• calculating losses gains as part of mitigating
  clearing
• improving investment decisions
• reporting overall progress

28
BushTender information relationships
THREATS
CONDITION current habitat service
BIODIVERSITY SIGNIFICANCE endangered, vulnerable,
depleted, rare
BIODIVERSITY SIGNIFICANCE conservation
status landscape priority
MGT. OUTCOME action to secure and/or improve
habitat service
MANAGEMENT
BIODIVERSITY BENEFIT (significance X mgt.
outcome) / cost
COST
29
Key questions for individual investment
decisionswhat is our level of interest in
intervening?
the right potential how much difference
would an action make?
the right actions what
is a reasonable amount to invest in an action?

the right cost will someone
undertake the action?
the right terms
how do we
bring all of the above together?
the
right choices
30
Key questions for individual investment
decisionswhat is our level of interest in
intervening? the right potential
SIGNIFICANCE MEASURE how much difference
would an action make? the right
actions SERVICE MEASURE what is a
reasonable amount to invest in an action?
the right cost COMPARATIVE
DOLLARS will someone undertake
the action? the right terms
PARTICIPATION / COMPLIANCE
how do we bring all of the
above together?
the right choices BENEFITS INDEX
31
An index must combine several interactive
measures (each being variable conceptually
complex). An index allow explicit calculations
based on controlled combinations of the factors.
(even the most capable people cant do this in
their head!)
.but remember, measures indices are just
models, ( all models are wrong, but
some are useful ) and must be
constructed and used mindfully (
players give up something to gain something )
32
Information characteristics

• SERVICE MEASURE
• Outcome-driven estimate of change in level of
  function based on available science
• (i.e. better thought of as a currency
• than a preference)
• A 4-dimensional unit
• change in quality
• quantity (area 2-d)
• time

33
Scoring gains
A standard period (10 years) is used to estimate
gains from changed management of vegetation
1
potential improvement gain (typically 0.05-
0.15)
projected gain from active management
Habitat Gain
habitat
score

potential maintenance gain (typically 0.05- 0.1)
projected loss from allowable uses
0
10 yr
low starting score (e.g. revegetation) gt mostly
improvement gain high starting score (e.g. long
undisturbed) gt mostly maintenance gain
34
Information characteristics

• SIGNIFICANCE MEASURE
• predominantly a value-driven consensus
• based on science policy
• (i.e. a preference)
• combines
• no. cons. status of species (capped)
• cons. status of vegn. types
• site condition
• Landscape preference

35
Landscape Preference Score

• applying rules to GIS datasets based on
  best-estimates of ecological drivers for major
  vegetation types and associated species
  assemblages
• resilience / recovery logic
• broad scale
• e.g. balance of reveg. vs remnant protection
• fine scale
• e.g. area thresholds?, buffering, linkage
• ? Risks e.g. salinity (negative)
• or likelihood of
  synergies (positive)

36
(No Transcript)
37
Remnant Vegetation Buffer/Linkage
X
Landscape Preference
Landscape Context Spatial Preference
38
Biodiversity Benefits Index
current Biodiversity Significance Score
Habitat Services Score /

• used for objective discrimination between bidders
  based on conservation preference, price and
  habitat services being offered
• value for money measure for biodiversity
  conservation

39
Results forNorthern Victoria trial area

Biodiversity
Significance
Habitat Service /

40

41
Results forNorthern Victoria trial area
Benefits Index threshold for available budget
42
On-site outcomes for habitat
Increased habitat
43
On-site outcomes for multiple environmental
attributes
Increased habitat
Increased carbon
Reduced nutrient / soil movement
BushTender, CarbonTender, PlainsTender,
RiverTender
44
On-site and off-site outcomes for multiple
environmental attributes

• Off-site outcome
• change
• surface
• water
• sub-surface water

• On-site outcome
• change
• habitat
• carbon
• water

45
Biodiversity information revelation and
assessment process

• David Parkes
• Dept. of Sustainability Environment Victoria