Conservation covenants on private land : issues with measuring and achieving biodiversity outcomes in Australia

Conservation covenants and easements have become essential tools to secure biodiversity outcomes on private land, and to assist in meeting international protection targets. In Australia, the number and spatial area of conservation covenants has grown significantly in the past decade. Yet there has been little research or detailed policy analysis of conservation covenanting in Australia. We sought to determine how conservation covenanting agencies were measuring the biodiversity conservation outcomes achieved on covenanted properties, and factors inhibiting or contributing to measuring these outcomes. In addition, we also investigated the drivers and constraints associated with actually delivering the biodiversity outcomes, drawing on detailed input from covenanting programs. Although all conservation covenanting programs had the broad aim of maintaining or improving biodiversity in their covenants in the long term, the specific stated objectives of conservation covenanting programs varied. Programs undertook monitoring and evaluation in different ways and at different spatial and temporal scales. Thus, it was difficult to determine the extent Australian conservation covenanting agencies were measuring the biodiversity conservation outcomes achieved on covenanted properties on a national scale. Lack of time available to covenantors to undertake management was one of the biggest impediments to achieving biodiversity conservation outcomes. A lack of financial resources and human capital to monitor, knowing what to monitor, inconsistent monitoring methodologies, a lack of benchmark data, and length of time to achieve outcomes were all considered potential barriers to monitoring the biodiversity conservation outcomes of conservation covenants.

The role and contribution of private land in Victoria to biodiversity conservation and the protected area system

The distribution and attributes of properties involved in three major programs for biodiversity protection on private land in Victoria, Australia, was investigated to determine their role in relation to the reserve system. Overlaying of dowsets in a geographic information system, with particular emphasis on property distribution in relation to bioregional and population centres, was undertaken. Land for Wildlife agreements had greater numbers of properties and total area protected in all bioregions throughout the State, yet average protected area sizes were lower than those of conservation covenants and Trust for Nature reserves. A combination of large bioregional area and human population size tended to attract more private conservation properties and, to a lesser extent, the total area they protected. The potential contribution that such properties made to biodiversity conservation varied between bioregions. Inclusion of properties within a national reserve framework is proposed to improve the coordination and effectiveness of conservation measures.

The establishment of large private nature reserves by conservation NGOs : key factors for successful implementation

Private nature reserves created by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) are increasing, and their growing number and extent means that they can potentially contribute to biodiversity goals at a global scale. However, the success of these reserves depends on the legal, economic and institutional conditions framing their creation and management. We explored these conditions, and the opportunities and challenges facing conservation organizations in managing private nature reserves, across several countries, with an emphasis on Australia. Results from 17 semi-structured interviews with representatives of private conservation organizations indicated that while private reserves may enhance the conservation estate, challenges remain. Legal frameworks, especially tenure and economic laws, vary across and within countries, presenting conservation organizations with significant opportunities or constraints to owning and/or managing private nature reserves. Many acquired land without strategic acquisition procedures and secured funding for property acquisition but not management, affecting the long-term maintenance of properties. Other typical problems were tied to the institutional capacity of the organizations. Greater planning within organizations, especially financial planning, is required and NGOs must understand opportunities and constraints present in legislative frameworks at the outset. Organizations must establish their expertise gaps and address them. To this end, partnerships between organizations and/or with government can prove critical.

Reforms required to the Australian tax system to improve biodiversity conservation on private land

Private land conservation forms an integral part of Australia’s natural resource management and biodiversity conservation efforts, and the past two decades have seen a significant growth in the establishment of in-perpetuity conservation covenants. Specifically, conservation covenants address key national goals such as building the National Reserve System and expanding the markets for ecosystem services. However, a number of financial barriers exist to achieving these goals, and the national tax review in the form of the Tax White Paper Task Force provides an opportunity to address these barriers. This article provides a number of specific recommendations which outline how these financial barriers for private land conservation might be addressed by the Federal Government.

Building nature’s safety net 2011 : the state of protected areas for Australia’s ecosystems and wildlife.

This report is the third in a series with the two previous reports published in 2006 and 2008. This report details major conservation initiatives that have occurred in Australia since the last report, in which data was current to 2006, and highlights emerging issues. A major enhancement on previous reports is the inclusion of ecosystem and threatened species gap analyses, and the reporting on Australia's protected area systems on both land and sea. We define a minimum standard for an adequate, representative, and comprehensive reserve system by sampling ecosystem and species level diversity. Using the latest protected area and national species and ecosystem spatial data, we quantify the gaps: those areas needing to move from the current reserve system to one which meets the minimum standard. We also use data provided by various parks agencies, from responses to a questionnaire or as published by the agencies, to detail financial investments in protected areas, and estimate the investment levels needed to fill the documented gaps. We also identify critical policy changes needed to more effectively fill the identified gaps.

Cows, cockies and atlases : use and abuse of biodiversity monitoring in environmental decision making

Lesson #I. Good long-term monitoring makes for informed and confident decisions on land management.
Lesson #2. Monitoring showing species and habitat decline can directly lead to better protection mechanisms.
Lesson #3. Results of monitoring can be ignored, misused and misquoted to achieve political ends.
Lesson #4. Are we seeing a decline in systematic species surveys by government?
Lesson #5. We don't know enough about what monitoring is happening and why monitoring isn't happening.
Lesson #6. Disparate data sets and cumbersome collection methods are hindering species status monitoring.
Lesson #7. Make better use of existing resomces and expertise.
Lesson #8. Make monitoring data more accessible and enable it to be more repeatable.
Lesson #9. Embed the requirement for monitoring in biodiversity and threatened species legislation.
Lesson #10. Understand better the social elements of ecological monitoring

Australia

Describes the current state of private protected areas in Australia

Private protected areas in Australia: current status and future directions

Despite the recognised importance of private land for biodiversity conservation, there has been little research into systems of private protected areas at a country-wide level. Here I look at definitions, legislation, ownership, management approaches and effectiveness, distribution and incentives provided to private protected areas in Australia. The term 'private protected areas', although increasingly used, still suffers from a lack of a clear and concise definition in Australia. Australian states and territories have legislation enabling the application of conservation covenants over private land; covenants being the primary mechanism to secure conservation intent on the title of the land in perpetuity. If considering all 'in perpetuity' conservation covenants under a dedicated program to be private protected areas and land owned by non-government organisations and managed for the purpose of biodiversity conservation, there were approximately 5,000 terrestrial properties that could be considered private protected areas in Australia covering 8,913,000 ha as at September 2013. This comprises almost 4,900 conservation covenants covering over 4,450,000 ha and approximately 140 properties owned by private land trusts covering approximately 4,594,120 ha. Most conservation covenanting programs now seek to complement the comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness of the public reserve system, either stating so explicitly or by aiming to protect the highest priority ecosystems on private land. There are a range of incentives offered for private land conservation and requirements of owners of private protected areas to report on their activities vary in Australia. However, there are a number of key policy challenges that need to be addressed if private protected areas are to achieve their full potential in Australia, including managing broad-scale ecosystem processes, protection and tenure reform, improved financial incentives, and access to emerging ecosystem service markets.

Endangerment and Likeability of Wildlife Species: How Important are they for Payments Proposed for Conservation?

This paper examines empirically the relative influence of the degree of endangerment of wildlife species and their stated likeability on individuals' allocation of funds for their conservation. To do this, it utilises data obtained from the IUCN Red List, and likeability and fund allocation data obtained from two serial surveys of a sample of the Australian public who were requested to assess 24 Australian wildlife species from three animal classes: mammals, birds and reptiles. Between the first and second survey, respondents were provided with extra information about the focal species. This information resulted in the dominance of endangerment as the major influence on the allocation of funding of respondents for the conservation of the focal wildlife species. Our results throw doubts on the proposition in the literature that the likeability of species is the dominant influence on willingness to pay for conservation of wildlife species. Furthermore, because the public's allocation of fund for conserving wildlife species seems to be more sensitive to information about the conservation status of species than to factors influencing their likeability, greater attention to providing accurate information about the former than the latter seems justified. Keywords: Conservation of wildlife species; Contingent valuation; Endangerment of species; Likeability of species; Willingness to pay

Common And Endangered Species: How Does Society Allocate Support For Their Conservation

Examines how society allocates support for species’ conservation when numbers involved are large and resources are limited. Rational behaviour suggests that species in urgent need of conservation will receive more support than those species that are common. However, we demonstrate that in the absence of balanced knowledge common species will receive support more than they would otherwise receive despite society placing high existence values on all species. Twenty four species, both common and endangered and some with a restricted distribution, are examined. We demonstrate that balanced information is vital in order to direct more support for species that are endangered than those that are not. Implications for conservation stemming from the findings are discussed.