Native Vegetation Plan CD.Indd

Home , Lang Lang River, Port Phillip, Western Port

NATIVE VEGETATION PLAN ISBN: 0 9757375 3 8

This publication is copyright. Copying for non-commercial/non-proﬁ t purposes is permitted subject to the publication being copied in its entirety. The Authority believes that the information contained in this publication is accurate and reliable as at the date of printing. It is the responsibility of readers to avail themselves of the latest information or advice in respect of the information contained in this publication after this date.

Published by:

Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment Management Authority PO Box 48 Frankston, Victoria 3199 Australia. Web: http://www.ppwcma.vic.gov.au

Speciﬁ c references to funding levels in this plan are for indicative purposes only. The level of government investment in this plan is contingent on budgets and government priorities.

Disclaimer: This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without ﬂ aw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication. Vegetation data used in preparing this plan has been compiled by the Land Stewardship and Biodiversity Division, Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE), Victoria. Copyright DSE, Victoria, August 2004. This data is held in the DSE Corporate Geospatial Data Library.

Acknowledgments The Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment Management Authority (PPWCMA) wishes to acknowledge everyone who contributed to the development of this plan. Their enthusiasm and support for the project over an extended period of time demonstrates a commitment to better natural resource management in the region by a broad range of stakeholders.

This project received signiﬁ cant ﬁ nancial and in-kind support from the Victorian Government, the Australian Government’s Natural Heritage Trust, Parks Victoria and Melbourne Water. These contributions are gratefully acknowledged.

The PPWCMA also thanks the region’s local governments, community organisations, enterprises and individuals who have helped prepare this plan, and whose ongoing support is needed to make its ultimate goal – a net gain through the region – a reality.

The PPWCMAs Biodiversity Committee oversaw the development of the plan. The PPWCMA also thanks Penny Richards and Dale Tonkinson for supporting the committee and for making important contributions to putting the plan together. Karin Reinke and Heather Bannerman provided expert assistance in data analysis, GIS-based compilation of maps and preparation of related information.

Front cover photograph: Shot on Sight Photography. Location: City of Melbourne from Mt Dandenong Tourist Road, Mt Dandenong. Foreword

Foreword The Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment Management Authority sees protecting, managing and restoring native vegetation as one of our most important and pressing tasks.

This native vegetation plan has been prepared to tackle this task in a strategic and coordinated way. The plan identiﬁ es the region’s most important areas of native vegetation, and sets priorities to protect, manage and restore them. The plan also sets priorities for revegetation.

The plan is consistent with the statewide approach to native vegetation management outlined in Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management: A Framework For Action, released in 2002. Both documents aim to achieve a net gain in the quality and extent of native vegetation in this region and across Victoria.

While this plan is an important piece of work, we recognise that it is far from a complete solution to the native vegetation issues of this region. Continued improvements and innovation will be required to reach an efﬁ cient, practical and resourced system of land and biodiversity protection and management. This will involve expanding landscape management approaches that integrate land restoration, land stewardship, community education, extension, compliance, monitoring and market–based mechanisms to purchase ecosystem services.

Therefore, implementation of this plan and continued improvements will be a complex and substantial task that will rely on having agreement, commitment and willing participation from various sectors of the community including state government, local government and landholders. The PPWCMA aims to generate a long-term, secure funding stream for this work with appropriate cost-sharing with relevant parties.

Andrew Grant Chair Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment Management Authority

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan i Glossary of key terms and acronyms

Glossary of key terms Offset Any works, or other actions to make reparation for the Biodiversity loss of native vegetation. The gains achieved must The variety of all life forms; the different plants, animals be permanent and ongoing, and linked to a speciﬁ c and microorganisms, the genes they contain and the clearing site. ecosystems of which they form a part.

Bioregion Acronyms Areas that capture the patterns of ecological AT Aspirational Target characteristics in the landscape, providing a natural RCT Resource Condition Target framework for recognising and responding to MAT Management Action Target biodiversity values. The Port Phillip and Western DSE Department of Sustainability and Port region includes parts of eight of Victoria’s Environment 29 bioregions. LG Local Government MAV Municipal Association of Victoria Bioregional Conservation Status PPWCMA Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment An assessment of the conservation status of the native Management Authority vegetation type in the context of a particular bioregion, DoJ Department of Justice taking account of how commonly it originally occurred, EVC Ecological Vegetation Class the current level of depletion due to clearing, and the ESO Environmental Signifi cance Overlay level of degradation of condition typical of remaining CFA Country Fire Authority stands. There are six categories of Bioregional TFN Trust for Nature Conservation Status: Presumed Extinct, Endangered, GAV Greening Australia Victoria Vulnerable, Depleted, Rare and Least Concern. PV Parks Victoria ABHF Australian Bush Heritage Fund Conservation Signifi cance MW Melbourne Water A state classifi cation of the relative ecological NGO Non-government Organisation importance of protecting and restoring a particular DPI Department of Primary Industries piece of indigenous vegetation. There are four RCS Regional Catchment Strategy categories of conservation signifi cance (Very High, High, GIS Geographic Information System Medium and Low) determined by assessing various LAL Landcare Australia Limited factors as outlined in Section 3.2 and 3.3 of this plan. ILC Indigenous Law Centre ILA International Law Association Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC) EPBC Environment Protection and A type of native vegetation classifi cation that is Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 described through a combination of its fl oristic, FFG Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1998 life form and ecological characteristics. Each EVC VNPA Victorian National Parks Association includes a collection of fl oristic communities. In ARCUE Australian Research Centre for 2006 approximately 300 EVCs have been defi ned and Urban Ecology mapped in Victoria with around 100 of these being located within the Port Phillip Western Port region.

Habitat Hectare A site based measure of quality and quantity of native vegetation.

Native Vegetation Plants (including trees, shrubs, herbs, and grasses) that are indigenous to a particular site.

Net Gain The outcome for native vegetation and habitat where overall gains are greater than overall losses.

ii Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan Contents

Contents

Foreword i Glossary of key terms and acronyms ii Contents iii

1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 The Port Phillip and Western Port Region 1 1.2 This Native Vegetation Plan 2 1.3 A brief history and description of the region’s native vegetation 4

2. STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS AND ACTIONS 10 2.1 Strategic direction 1: Retain the quantity of native vegetation by minimising clearing 14 2.2 Strategic direction 2: Protect native vegetation with reservation and management agreements 18 2.3 Strategic direction 3: Maintain and improve the quality of native vegetation 23 2.4 Strategic direction 4: Increase the quantity of native vegetation 29 2.5 Implementation arrangements 36

3. APPENDICES 44 3.1 Policy context for the protection and management of native vegetation 44 3.2 Assessing the bioregional conservation status of EVCs 47 3.3 Assessing the conservation signiﬁ cance of native vegetation 50 3.4 Responses and offset requirements for clearing remnant vegetation, scattered trees and timber harvesting 52 3.5 Data, bioregional conservation status and targets for protection and revegetation of EVCs 63 3.6 Bibliography 65

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan iii 1. Introduction

1.1 The Port Phillip and The rural landscapes and the many parks and reserves within and around Melbourne are enjoyed by locals Western Port Region and visitors and are also home to rare and diverse ﬂ ora The Port Phillip and Western Port region and fauna species. There are wetlands of international (Figure 1) covers 1.278 million hectares. importance and remnants of native vegetation seldom found elsewhere. The region’s water storage It is home to many of Victoria’s most important and waterway system provides reliable, high-quality environmental, economic and social assets. The drinking and commercial-use water to 75 per cent lifestyles and livelihoods of the region’s 3.4 million of Victoria’s population, while providing a network urban and rural residents, and the thriving tourism of streams that have important environmental and industry, rely on the diversity and health of the region’s recreational purposes. And where the catchments meet stunning natural resources. the sea, Port Phillip Bay and Western Port each have unique ecological, economic and recreational values.

Figure 1: The Port Phillip and Western Port Region

1 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 1. Introduction

1.2 This Native Vegetation Plan Regional vision and aim The future envisaged through this plan is one in which: Purposes of the plan The purposes of this plan are to: • The Port Phillip and Western Port region has sufﬁ cient native vegetation of adequate quality to • set out a coordinated and strategic approach to support productive and diverse ecosystems that are managing the region’s native vegetation, valued by the whole community. consistent with Victoria’s Native Vegetation In line with statewide policy, the aim of this plan is Management: A Framework For Action to achieve: • establish regional priorities and targets for • A reversal, across the entire landscape, of the retaining, protecting, enhancing and restoring long term decline in the extent and quality of native native vegetation vegetation, leading to a net gain in the quantity and • provide direction to authorities who consider permit quality of native vegetation in the region. applications to clear native vegetation A framework for integrated management of • guide investments in native vegetation planning natural resources and management As indicated in Figure 2, this Native Vegetation Plan • increase community awareness of the need is one of several issue-speciﬁ c plans that underpin the for a net gain in the region’s native vegetation, and Regional Catchment Strategy, providing an integrated community involvement in managing the region’s approach to the management of natural resources in native vegetation the region.

• provide detailed information about the It is also one of ten regional vegetation plans across region’s native vegetation, which can be used in the state that underpin Victoria’s Biodiversity Strategy other regional strategic plans and local landscape- and Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management: scale plans, such as integrated catchment plans, A Framework For Action. An outline of the policy community group (such as Landcare) plans and context for this plan is included in Section 3.1. Biodiversity Action Plans, and The Catchment Management Authority • identify gaps in knowledge about, and research requirements for, managing the region’s native The Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment vegetation. Management Authority (PPWCMA) is responsible for preparing the Regional Catchment Strategy and has also prepared this Native Vegetation Plan in close consultation with various agencies, stakeholders and community organisations.

The PPWCMA reports annually on the condition of the catchment, and will draw together advice and information from various organisations to report on what has been achieved under this plan.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2 1. Introduction

Figure 2: Framework for integrated management of natural resources in the region

Level Strategy Lead Responsibility

National strategies for various themes including pests, ecologically sustainable Australian Federal development, conservation of biological Government diversity, threat abatement.

State strategies including the Pest Management Victorian Framework, Victorian Landcare Action Plan, State Government Native Vegetation Framework, (Dept of Sustainability River Health Strategy & Salinity Framework. & Environment)

Regional Catchment Strategy (RCS) Port Phillip & Westernport Series of issue-specific regional plans underpinning the RCS Catchment Regional Management Authority Pest River Salinity Regional Native Mgt. Health Mgmt Landcare Vegetation Other (in cooperation Plans Plan Plan Plan Plan with stakeholders)

Integrated Implementation Land & Water Coordinated works planning, Managers investment partnerships, (including agencies, councils, water authorities, and implementation of non-govt organisations, strategies and plans community groups, landholders, etc.)

3 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 1. Introduction

1.3 A brief history and Firestick farming involved burning patches of vegetation at intervals to encourage new growth. This is likely to description of the region’s have resulted in a mosaic of vegetation, and a relatively native vegetation open landscape in the western part of the region. Some of the open plains and stands of important plants The Indigenous people of the region such as Cumbungi were probably burned almost every Before the arrival of Europeans in the Port Phillip and year, lightly forested areas burnt less often and high Western Port region, it had long been populated by mountain forests probably not burnt at all4. Mosaics people of the Woiwurrung (Wurundjeri), Boonerwrung, of recently burnt and unburnt patches supported a Wathaurong and Taungurung language groups. These diversity of species, allowing animals to move from groups formed part of a larger language grouping burnt to unburnt areas. known as the Kulin Nation1. European settlement Each language group identifi ed very closely with its European settlement began a period of signifi cant own area, and each was further divided into family impact on the region’s native vegetation. Regular units who moved together within their country to patterns of fi restick farming were disrupted (with which collect food and materials from the fl ora and fauna some native vegetation had evolved), and the lack of that was available from season to season. This way fi re changed some vegetation patterns. For example, of living called for an intimate knowledge of the local it reduced the vegetation quality in some parts of the 2. environment region, and caused particular plants to dominate or spread in some areas. Indigenous peoples’ use and management of the vegetation The region today The region’s native vegetation was an important source For almost 200 years, Australia’s economic development of food. Roots, leaves, stalks, fruits, gums and resins was based on the clearing of land to carry on (Acacia were all eaten. For example, the Black Wattle enterprises that return an income to the land manager, mearnsii), which today lines stretches of rivers and be it through agriculture, horticulture, industrial or tributaries, produced an edible gum that women and residential development. Native vegetation was often children collected. Manna exuded by insects on the seen as an impediment to development. stems of various eucalypts, especially on the Manna Gum (Eucalyptus viminalis) was also collected and In the Port Phillip and Western Port region, vast areas eaten3. of native vegetation have been cleared. Of the region’s 1.278 million hectares, about 70 per cent has been Native vegetation also provided the Kulin people with cleared of its native vegetation, leaving 386,818 materials. Coolamons and tamoks (water carriers) hectares of the original native vegetation. were made from round growths on the trunks of gum trees. Digging sticks were used to search for yams and Of the remaining 386,818 hectares, about 125,751 roots. Flat shields and canoes were made from the hectares (33 per cent) is on private land, 256,000 bark of various eucalypts. Wood from the Messmate hectares (66 per cent) is on public land comprising (Eucalyptus obliqua) and the fl ower stalk from the State Forests, National and State Parks and grass tree were used to make spears. Bark was used to conservation reserves. make shelters. Types of native vegetation A variety of herbal medicines were prepared from native plants by infusion, steaming, poultices and The distribution of various types of vegetation is binding. Aromatic plants such as Old Man Weed determined by physical factors such as soil types, (Centipeda cunninghami) and River Mint (Mentha topography (aspect and altitude) and rainfall. These australis) were used for coughs and colds. Vegetation physical factors together with the plants and animals also provided important fi bres for string, nets and they support form the ecological systems (ecosystems) weaving baskets. Kangaroo Grass (Themeda australis) with unique characteristics that occur across the was used to make fi shing nets4. landscape. To facilitate conservation planning of these ecosystems various means of classifi cation of the landscape and the vegetation have been developed.

1RCS, 2004 2du Cros, 1988 3Presland, 1983 in du Cros 1988 4Zola and Gott,1992

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 4 1. Introduction

These include: and ecological characteristics Each EVC includes a collection of fl oristic communities (ie. lower level in • Bioregions - areas that capture the patterns of the classifi cation that is based solely on groups of ecological characteristics in the landscape or the same species) that occur across a biogeographic seascape, providing a natural framework for range, and although differing in species, have similar recognising and responding to biodiversity values. habitat and ecological processes operating. Eight bioregions occur in the Port Phillip and • Fragment – an incomplete or isolated portion of Western Port region. native vegetation. • Broad Vegetation Types (BVTs) – a classifi cation Figure 3 depicts the eight bioregions that occur in the that provides a simplifi ed view of vegetation based Port Phillip and Western Port region. Table 1.1 provides on land system or biophysical attributes (such as the areas of Victorian bioregions within the Port Phillip geology, rainfall, elevation, soil type and landform). and Western Port region. Each BVT will contain a mixture of EVCs, often in a recognisable pattern, however any one EVC can The CD included in Section 3.5 provides detailed occur in more than one BVT. mapping by bioregion, including conservation status of remnant vegetation in each bioregion and detailed • Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC) – a type of EVCs by bioregion. native vegetation classifi cation that is described through a combination of its fl oristic, life form,

Table 1.1 The areas of Victorian Bioregions within the Port Phillip and Western Port region

Bioregion Area of Area of the % of the Number of Approximate Average the bioregion bioregion EVCs in number of fragment bioregion in PPW in the PPW PPW region fragments size in Victoria region region (hectares) (hectares)

Highlands – 1,202,780 376,557 31.31 44 12,164 24.5 Southern Fall

Gippsland Plain 1,248,568 358,963 28.75 72 9,321 5.6

Victorian 2,360,951 302,253 12.8 46 3,575 5.1 Volcanic Plain

Central 1,236,564 166,743 13.48 38 4,797 21.2 Victorian Uplands

Strzelecki Ranges 341,868 43,032 12.59 10 819 1.9

Victorian Alps 739,601 15,953 2.16 11 188 381.1

Otway Plain 387,929 14,919 3.85 10 86 3.6

Highlands – 2,617,571 424 0.02 10 61 825.1 Northern Fall

Total 10,135,832 1,278,844 - - - -

5 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 1. Introduction

Figure 3: The bioregions in the Port Phillip and Western Port region

Figure 3: The bioregions in the Port Phillip and Western Port region Legend

Remnant native vegetation Port Phillip and Westernport CMA Boundary Bioregion Boundaries

Central Victorian Uplands Highlands - Northern Fall

Victorian Alps Victorian Volcanic Plain

Highlands - Southern Fall

Otway Plain

Port Phillip Bay Gippsland Plain

Western Port

Strzelecki Ranges q

Bass Strait 010

Kilometers

Figure 3 shows that a substantial proportion of particular, Valley Heathy and Valley Grassy Forest has remaining native vegetation is found as forest on the mostly been cleared and the remaining vegetation is steep slopes of the Highlands Southern Fall, Highlands highly fragmented. Lowland and associated vegetation Northern Fall, Victorian Alps and Central Victorian along rivers and coasts has also been extensively Uplands bioregions. The native vegetation in these cleared and fragmented. Some native vegetation is areas is generally in good condition. There are generally protected in reserves, but what remains is increasingly small numbers of fragmented vegetatation types and isolated as fragments. The high number of fragments they have a high average size, and are protected as in the bioregion, and their relatively small average size parks or proclaimed water supply catchments with indicate this. Fragments are commonly found along limited public access. roadsides, in rail reserves and on private land.

In contrast, the steep Strzelecki Ranges bioregion, to the east of Western Port, which once supported tall Blue Gum Forest, has been almost entirely cleared for agriculture leading to a greater number of isolated fragments of smaller size.

The Victorian Volcanic Plain, Otway Plain and Gippsland Plain bioregions have also been extensively cleared. These ﬂ at to undulating lowlands and plains were originally open woodlands, grasslands and grassy woodlands. The sandy soils of the Mornington Peninsula and around Western Port supported heathy woodlands, heaths, swamps and coastal scrubs. On the gentler slopes, native vegetation has been substantially cleared for urban development and agricultural use. In

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 6 1.A briefIntroduction history and description of the region’s native vegetation

The status of the region’s remaining vegetation To identify the priority of EVCs that need to be protected, a classifi cation system of bioregional Extensive clearing and fragmentation has put many conservation status has been developed. This system of the region’s remaining vegetation types at risk of ranks EVCs within the bioregion as either presumed further degradation and extinction. For example small extinct, endangered, vulnerable, depleted, rare or least patches are exposed to weed invasion, recreational concern. activities, changed fi re regimes and grazing that reduce their quality and long-term viability. Table 1.2 shows the bioregional conservation status of the native vegetation in the region. Clearing of native vegetation in the region continues for housing, industrial estates, agriculture and Of particular note from the table is that of the remnant infrastructure. Smaller scale clearing also continues vegetation in the Otway Plain, Victorian Volcanic Plain, (such as to build fences and tracks), and grazing Strzelecki Ranges and Gippsland Plain bioregions continues to degrade native vegetation. having 100 per cent, 94 per cent, 79 per cent and 56 per cent respectively, classifi ed as either Endangered This makes the 33,000 fragments of native vegetation or Vulnerable. in the region even more important to protect and manage well.

Table 1.2: Summary of the extent of native vegetation in each bioregion

Bioregion Total area Total remnant Bioregional Conservation Status (ha) of vegetation PPWP Current (2004) extent in the bioregion within the PPWP region (hectares) PPWP

(hectares) (hectares) Proportion Presumed Endangered Vulnerable Depleted Rare Least of original extinct concern extent in PPW region remaining in the PPWP region (%)

Highlands – Southern Fall 376,577 224,782 60 0 2,454 18,038 4,859 14 199,417

Highlands – Northern Fall 424 306 72 - 0 4 24 - 278

Victorian Alps 15,953 15,943 99.9 - - 124 - 763 15,056

Central Victorian Uplands 166,743 81,069 49 - 3,141 12,667 14,869 - 50,392

Strzelecki Ranges 43,032 1,333 3 4 364 685 280 - -

Victorian Volcanic Plain 302,253 12,626 4 56 11,480 335 742 - 13

Otway Plain 14,919 186 1 0 186 - 0 - -

Gippsland Plain 358,963 45,364 13 0.5 12,842 12,456 5,231 5,943 8,891

Total (ha) 1,278,864 381,609 30 60.5 30,467 44,309 26,005 6,720 274,047

(%) 0.2 7.9 11.6 6.8 1.7 71.8

More detail on each bioregion and its EVCs is contained in section 3.5 of the plan.

7 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 1. Introduction

Some of the values and beneﬁ ts of native vegetation Native vegetation is essential for the survival of ecosystems and the native plants and animals in them. The Port Phillip and Western Port region is one of the most biologically diverse in Victoria and supports:

• 1,860 species of native fl ora (vascular and non- vascular – ie. fl owering, non-fl owering and all other plants – ie. mosses, bryophytes) and 616 native vertebrate fauna species and many invertebrate fauna species (ie. insects, worms, spiders, etc.) • 179 species of rare or threatened fauna of which 46 are listed under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and 122 under the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 • 358 species of rare or threatened fl ora of which 42 are listed under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and 55 are listed under the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 • helping prevent salinity (deep-rooted perennial • seven Vegetation Communities and one marine vegetation transpires large amounts of water, and community within the region listed under the Flora can keep water tables at levels that prevent salinity and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 from affecting plant growth). • three sites listed under the Ramsar International Native vegetation provides a range of natural Treaty on Wetlands (Port Phillip Bay western landscapes in contrast to the extensive urban areas of shoreline, the Edithvale-Seaford wetlands and the region. These landscapes: Western Port), and • 100 of Victoria’s 300 EVCs. • provide natural areas accessible from city and suburban areas (such as the Dandenong Ranges Native vegetation protects land, air and water resources National Park), for spiritual wellbeing and personal by: renewal

• stabilising the catchments of the reservoirs that • provide places of scientifi c importance, research supply over 70 per cent of Victoria’s water value and educational interest • minimising erosion of the banks of waterways • represent natural heritage (for example, the Lerderderg and Yarra Rivers are listed as heritage • acting as streamside buffers to reduce the amount rivers) of silt and pollution from reaching streams • provide unique landscapes with which we identify, • fi ltering urban runoff through wetlands, streams and and which help defi ne a unique Australian culture, rivers and • helping prevent fl ooding by controlling run-off • provide a valuable link with Indigenous history and • preventing erosion of susceptible soil types and culture (for example, Aboriginal canoe trees, and at landforms (such as the steep hills in the Bass and sites such as Ballum Ballum Aboriginal Place on the Lang Lang River catchments, the Lerderderg Gorge Kororoit Creek at Melton). and Parwan Valley) • absorbing carbon dioxide, which contributes to the greenhouse effect • providing the primary source of energy (organic matter) for waterway ecosystems, and

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 08 1. Introduction

Native vegetation provides an important economic accelerate erosion and increase sediment and nutrient resource by: movements to waterways.

• providing habitats for native birds, mammals and Fragmentation further isolates patches of native insects that prey on pasture and crop pests, and help vegetation. Making them increasingly susceptible landholders reduce their use of chemicals to control to degrading processes. The invasion of weeds and these pests pest animals for example can further reduce the • providing shelter for stock, pasture and crops size and quality of the patches. This can severely (resulting in increased production) impact the viability of fauna and fl ora populations, • increasing pasture growth in some situations especially where they rely on having large core areas • reducing reliance on introduced pollinators (as much of vegetation, contiguous habitat or high quality as 50 per cent of pollination is by native insects that vegetation. fl y from nearby bushland) • providing cleaner water for stock and domestic use When substantial clearing and fragmentation occurs, by providing natural fi ltration around farm dams there is a risk that ecological processes will be severely and wetlands diminished. In addition there are inherent diffi culties in effectively restoring native vegetation and ecological • increasing the health of stock and reducing stock processes. Therefore, the protection and enhancement losses of existing native vegetation is of great importance. • increasing property values • moderating spray drift, and Government and community action • being an essential aspect of the outdoor experience Until as recently as a few decades ago, native that draws tourists to the region. vegetation was often thought of as the vegetation in The value of isolated and scattered trees reserves and in closed water supply catchments and that protecting and enhancing this vegetation was the Isolated and scattered trees represent most of what task of park managers or water authorities. is left of some of the most highly depleted and endangered EVCs in the region. For example Plains This attitude has changed in more recent times, as more Grassy Woodland, once covered 124,851 hectares of the clearing has occurred and communities have become Victorian Volcanic Plain Bioregion and now only aware of the necessity to preserve what still exists. 4 per cent (4,682 hectares) remains. The Landcare movement, and government initiatives and incentives have focused attention on native The incremental loss of single scattered trees in the vegetation on private land. Many of the types of native landscape occurs due to clearing, dieback and a general vegetation found on private land are scarce on public absence of recruitment or regeneration. It is important land, and clearing controls introduced in 1989 have to retain scattered trees for environmental, social helped protect this native vegetation. and economic benefi ts. Where development occurs, scattered trees may be required to be retained but land The high number of people and organisations in management practices also need to protect the values the region provide challenges and opportunities for of these trees. the management of natural resources. There are 38 councils, about 500 volunteer Landcare and community The consequences of clearing and fragmentation groups, and about 3.4 million residents. There are also Urban, agricultural and industrial development has numerous state government agencies, non-government resulted in the clearing and fragmentation of much organisations, agricultural and industry groups and native vegetation. environmental organisations.

Clearing native vegetation destroys habitat for ﬂ ora Although economic development is essential to the and fauna and can lead to some plants and animals region, so is maintaining and re establishing native becoming extinct. For example, habitat destruction for vegetation, and improving its quality. The rising urban development has been the major cause of the (and potentially enormous) costs of salinity and decline to virtual extinction of the Frankston Spider- the attraction of the region for tourists are just a orchid (Caladenia robinsonii). few reasons that native vegetation is economically important. Of greatest importance, the region’s Clearing can also alter vital ecological processes such ecosystems provide us with healthy soils, waterways, as water ﬁ ltration and the hydrogeological balance, and clean air upon which our landscapes, lifestyles potentially contributing to salinisation. It can also and livelihoods depend.

9 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

2 Introduction to the 2. Protect native vegetation with reservation and management agreements Strategic Directions 3. Maintain and improve the quality of native In Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management: vegetation A Framework for Action, a series of seven principles were established for protecting and managing native 4. Increase the quantity of native vegetation vegetation. These were: Each of the 4 strategic directions that follow has aspirational targets (AT), resource condition targets 1. Protect remnant vegetation (RCT), and management action targets (MAT). These 2. Manage existing remnants provide a regional overview and can be incorporated in other plans including more detailed plans for local 3. Enhance larger degraded remnants areas or municipalities. 4. Enhance smaller degraded remnants to create corridors and buffers and provide better habitat for The lead role for actions native animals For each action, an organisation is listed as having 5. Revegetate to mitigate land degradation problems the lead role in seeing that the action is implemented. This may involve directly planning and undertaking the 6. Revegetate to create patches of vegetation action, or it might involve facilitating and coordinating 7. Revegetate for all other reasons. others to undertake the action in a partnership.

The Port Phillip and Western Port Regional Native The capacity of organisations to meet targets and take Vegetation Plan has established four stragetic directions the lead role in implementing actions will be dependent to achieve its vision, aims and purpose which tie in with on the availability of resources. However, it is also the seven principles identiﬁ ed in the state framework envisaged that agencies and organisations will use this these are: Native Vegetation Plan as a sound basis for seeking and securing funding to undertake the actions. 1. Retain the quantity of native vegetation by minimising clearing Figure 4 provides a summary of the targets for the plan.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 10 2. Strategic directions and actions

Figure 4: Summary of Targets

STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS 1. Retain the quantity of native 2. Protect native vegetation vegetation by minimising clearing with reservation and management agreements

ASPIRATIONAL TARGETS AT1. Minimise clearing of all classes of native AT2. At least 15% of the current area of each vegetation across the region. EVC in the region to be permanently protected in public reserves or under management agreements on private land by 2030.

RESOURCE RCT1. Achieve a net gain for all permissible RCT2. At least 1.5 ha of each Vegetation clearing. Protection Priority EVC or 15% of its CONDITION TARGETS 2004 extent (whichever is the greater) to be permanently protected in reserves or under management agreements on private land by 2015.

MANAGEMENT MAT1. Commence a program of education, MAT7. Benchmark the area of each EVC in ACTION TARGETS training and support for all rural and each bioregion protected under various urban-rural interface local governments types of management agreements, and (and other relevant organisations) establish a process of biennial reporting to achieve effective and consistent on changes in area. implementation of the State Native MAT8. Improve coordination between the Vegetation Management Framework various organisations involved in the and the Regional Native Vegetation region’s reservations and management Plan. agreements systems. MAT2. Full and consistent application of the MAT9. Substantially increase the area of native vegetation clearance controls Priority EVCs protected under achieved and reported upon by all management agreements. councils in the region. MAT10. Continue innovative policy and MAT3. Educate local communities about program development to expand clearing controls and enforce the options for native vegetation protection controls. and reservation. MAT4. Appropriate planning provision tools applied by all councils in the region to protect threatened native vegetation and achieve net gain. MAT5. Native vegetation clearance and offsetting monitored and reported upon annually. MAT6. Confl icts in planning scheme overlays reconciled, including those between wildfi re management overlays and environmental signifi cance overlays.

11 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

4. Increase the quantity of 3. Maintain and improve the Implementation Arrangements quality of native vegetation native vegetation

AT3. A net gain in the quality and extent of AT4. Increase the total extent of native native vegetation in the region with the vegetation to at least 35% of the region’s total ‘Habitat Hectares’ increased by area by 2030. 10% by 2030. AT5. At least 95% of the regions EVCs represented to at least 10% of their pre-1750 extent by 2030.

RCT3. Improve the quality of the region’s very RCT4. At least 95% of the regions EVCs high conservation signiﬁ cance remnants to represented to at least 5% of their achieve a total of 10% increase in Habitat pre-1750 extent by 2015. Hectares for these remnants by 2015.

MAT11. Benchmark the existing Habitat Hectares MAT18. Undertake programs that achieve MAT27. Establish a system to oversee and and establish a system to effi ciently at least 1,001 ha/year of regeneration monitor the implementation of this plan monitor changes in the quality of and revegetation. and issue regular activity reports. vegetation patches. MAT19. Develop revegetation plans for all local MAT28. Work with Indigenous communities MAT12. Further develop and apply an asset-risk government areas. to support the implementation of this assessment methodology for native plan and to ensure that actions arising MAT20. Encourage the use of appropriate native vegetation and associated threats. from the plan protect and enhance species in landscape plantings. Indigenous culture and heritage. MAT13. Develop and implement action plans MAT21. Provide information to urban households to protect and enhance the quality of MAT29. Collaborate with the region’s land, and businesses regarding the protection priority patches of native vegetation water and biodiversity managers, and planting of native species and the on public land. planners and policy-makers to ensure control of environmental weeds. their programs implement this plan and MAT14. Coordinate, support and expand MAT22. Provide demonstrations and on-site pursue the goal of net gain. schemes that assist landholders to information for urban areas regarding protect and improve the quality of MAT30. Establish an Action Tracking Database the values of native vegetation. priority native vegetation patches on to track and report on the investment, private land. MAT23. Encourage programs and partnerships action and outputs of this plan and to manage and restore native progress towards achieving the MAT15. Publish revegetation and restoration vegetation in urban areas. Management Action Targets. guides for improving the quality and extent of EVCs and fl oristic MAT24. Investigate the need for and, if required, MAT31. Develop Monitoring, Evaluation and communities. develop and implement a regional seed Reporting (MER) systems to track and supply strategy. adaptively manage this plan’s progress MAT16. Progressively reduce the sale of towards its Resource Condition Targets. environmental weeds in the MAT25. Encourage landholders to take up nursery industry. conservation leases on Crown land MAT32. Establish systems to give all partners water frontage reserves. and stakeholders access to the MAT17. Improve vegetation quality through information they need to implement well-managed and appropriate MAT26. Encourage councils, businesses and this plan. ecological burning regimes. others to use carbon trading and offset schemes to fund revegetation programs. MAT33. Establish a coordinated program of new research and development to fi ll the knowledge and technique gaps most needed to implement this plan. MAT34. Identify the training needs created by this plan and develop a systematic training program to support its implementation. MAT35. Explore opportunities for new and innovative funding, cost-sharing and contractual arrangements to support implementation of this plan. MAT36. Review this Native Vegetation Plan.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 12 2. Strategic directions and actions

130 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

2.1 Strategic direction 1: and, where it must occur, be offset by native vegetation protection, enhancement and revegetation. Retain the quantity of native vegetation by minimising clearing ASPIRATIONAL TARGET

BACKGROUND AT1 Minimise clearing of all classes of native vegetation across the region. The highest priority for the region is to retain the remnant native vegetation that still exists. Target AT1 recognises that all remnant native vegetation is a highly valuable natural asset that The main threats to the quantity of remnant native cannot be easily or effectively replaced if it is cleared. vegetation in the region are clearing associated with: It is therefore a priority to retain the remnants that we have in the region. • expanding urban and industrial areas around Melbourne and around other centres RESOURCE CONDITION TARGET • subdivision of large landholdings into smaller rural RCT1 Achieve a net gain for all permissible properties and associated infrastructure (such as clearing. roads, houses, sheds, fences and dams), and • increasingly intensive agricultural production. This target recognises that some clearing of remnant native vegetation is necessary and inevitable in the While some native vegetation clearing is necessary and region. However, the permissible clearing must be inevitable (particularly in the urban growth corridors), offset to achieve a net gain according to the criteria the goal of net gain requires clearing to be minimised outlined in Section 3.4 of this Native Vegetation Plan.

MANAGEMENT ACTION TARGETS Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT1 Commence a program of education, training and Commence DSE LG support for all rural and urban-rural interface local by 2006 governments (and other relevant organisations) to achieve effective and consistent implementation of the state Native Vegetation Management Framework and the Native Vegetation Plan.

This action recognises the skills and knowledge that responsible authorities particularly the rural and urban-rural interface Councils, will need to efﬁ ciently and, effectively implement this plan. The understanding and application of the guidelines for Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management Framework need particular attention.

Training and support will also be needed to optimise the use of other protection measures such as the use of planning scheme provisions, rate rebates, land management programs and other incentive schemes.

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT2 Full and consistent application of the native vegetation By 2009 LG DSE, MAV, clearance controls achieved and reported upon by all PPWCMA Councils in the region.

The guidelines for Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management Framework provide a process that local governments are required to follow when making decisions about what native vegetation can and cannot be cleared.

It is important that this process be applied consistently across the region to ensure the goal of net gain is achieved. Reporting on the application of the guidelines is an important element of monitoring the achievement of net gain at a regional scale.

0 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 14 2. Strategic directions and actions

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT3 Educate local communities about clearing controls and Commence LG DSE, MAV, enforce the controls. by 2007 DoJ

All native vegetation is protected by clearing controls except where current exemptions apply under the Victorian Planning Provisions or relevant municipal planning scheme. Anyone wanting to clear vegetation must seek local government advice as to whether a permit is required.

Nevertheless, illegal clearing occurs throughout the region. Some may be due to ignorance.

The degree to which local governments monitor clearing and enforce controls varies across the region. Councils generally manage planning provisions through a mix of community education and enforcement. A targeted and well-resourced community education campaign can achieve a large degree of compliance, reducing the extent and cost of enforcement.

Councils can also encourage public reporting of illegal clearing. This has proved effective in municipalities where education programs have increased community awareness about the value of native vegetation and its understanding of how to protect it.

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT4 Appropriate planning provision tools applied by By 2010 LG DSE all councils in the region to protect threatened native vegetation and achieve net gain.

The Victorian Planning Provisions enable local governments to apply various planning tools, through their local planning schemes, to protect native vegetation on private land. Local governments can match the planning tools available to the level of protection required for the vegetation.

The tools include: • municipal strategic statements • local provisions • zones and planning scheme overlays • schedules to overlays (which can set environmental objectives and guidelines to protect native vegetation, and protect the habitat of threatened species) • incorporated plan overlays, and • development overlays. Advice is also available for municipal planners in the form of planning practice notes such as the Biodiversity Planning Practice Note and the Practice Note for Vegetation Protection in Urban Areas.

The planning scheme overlays that local governments can use to protect native vegetation include: • Vegetation Protection Overlays (to protect individual trees, stands of trees or areas of signifi cant vegetation) • Environmental Signifi cance Overlays (to protect vegetation as part of protecting the environmental signifi cance of an area) • Signifi cant Landscape Overlays (to identify and conserve the character of a signifi cant landscape)

15 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

• Erosion Management Overlays (to protect areas prone to erosion, land slip or other types of land degradation) • Salinity Management Overlays (to ensure any development is compatible with site capability and the retention of vegetation and complies with the objectives of any salinity management plan for the area and to encourage revegetation of areas which contribute to salinity), and • Floodway and Land Subject to Inundation Overlays (restriction of development).

Threatened EVCs require particular protection from clearing. Some local governments in the region have detailed mapping and planning provisions for threatened EVCs and there is a need for these approaches to be applied consistently across the region. Environmental Signifi cance Overlays (ESO) are considered to be one of the most powerful tools that can be used to protect native vegetation. Benefi ts can be achieved by local governments ensuring that all endangered and vulnerable EVCs (and other areas of native vegetation considered signifi cant) are covered by an ESO.

Local governments also have the power under the Local Government Act 1989 to protect native vegetation. The City of Bayside, for example, has a local law to protect signiﬁ cant trees or existing tree canopies. The City of Whittlesea has a Red Gum Protection Policy to ensure that when developments are designed, existing River Red Gums are assessed and all trees worth protecting are incorporated in the design. The principles of this policy also apply to other native vegetation in the shire.

It is important to measure the effectiveness of these tools through local government monitoring systems, performance targets and indicators.

The Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) has a particular role in supporting this action as part of its education, training and support program for local government and other organisations.

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT5 Native vegetation clearance and offsetting monitored By 2008 DSE LG, PPWCMA and reported upon annually.

There is currently no consolidated data regarding the amount of native vegetation clearing (both legal and illegal) that occurs in the region.

Although local governments consider applications and issue permits to clear native vegetation, the area and type of vegetation that has actually been cleared is not routinely monitored at a regional scale.

Without such information, there is no clear process to accurately measure and report on net gain or loss for the region.

To address this problem, a ‘Native Vegetation Permit Tracking System’ is being developed by DSE to record the legal clearing of native vegetation. This ‘on-line’ system will be accessible to local government and other stakeholders to enable them to process, track and document (a) applications and permits to clear native vegetation, (b) the clearing that is undertaken and (c) the associated offsetting.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 16 2. Strategic directions and actions

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT6 Conﬂ icts in planning scheme overlays reconciled, By 2007 LG CFA, DSE including those between wildﬁ re management overlays and environmental/vegetation overlays.

A Wildfi re Management Overlay (WMO) is a statewide planning control administered through local government for private land that is subject to high fi re danger. WMOs are generally used by rural and urban fringe councils where there is high risk of wildfi re that could threaten life and property. WMOs affect native vegetation because they usually require landowners to reduce their property’s fuel load (mainly tall grasses and understorey fuels) while many of the same properties contain protected native vegetation.

Any conﬂ icts between the two types of overlays should be reconciled. For example, option 3 of the Building in Wildﬁ re Management Overlay Applicants Kit has information about trade-offs and innovative solutions that will achieve the WMO objectives while possibly minimising the need to clear native vegetation.

The Country Fire Authority (CFA), DSE, the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) and local governments are currently working to produce guidelines that will reconcile the dual objectives of these overlays - reducing wildﬁ re risk and protecting native vegetation.

To achieve this, DSE, the CFA, local governments and the MAV will need to:

• map overlaps between high priority vegetation and wildﬁ re management overlays, and • establish clear guidelines and provide planners with tools to protect native vegetation while implementing wildﬁ re management overlays.

17 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan Strategic direction 2: Protect native vegetation2. with Strategic reservation directions and management and agreements actions

2.2 Strategic direction 2: Management agreements on private land Protect native vegetation with There are many signiﬁ cant areas of native vegetation in reservation and management agreements the region that are not suitable for adding to reserves because they are isolated, too small or hard to access. BACKGROUND These areas will be better protected and managed by private landholders under the terms of management The most reliable, long-term protection for native agreements. Management agreements include vegetation will be achieved by: conservation covenants and other long-term binding legal agreements such as Section 173 agreements • securing remnants in public land reserves, or administered by local governments. • under long-term permanent management agreements on private land. Management agreements are often used to secure public investments where funding has been provided to Opportunities for establishing new public reserves protect vegetation. They are often more cost effective are limited so an important part of the work under and acceptable to landholders than reservation. Some this strategic direction will be in developing effective types of management agreements are legally binding management agreements for remnants on private land. and some are voluntary.

Public land reserves Legally binding management agreements include: Reserving land under the National Parks Act 1975, • Trust for Nature Conservation Covenants where Wildlife Conservation Act 1975 or the Crown Land the Trust arranges for covenants to be added to Reserves Act 1978 gives secure, long-term protection property titles to protect native vegetation of high to native vegetation. conservation value

It is national and state policy to build a reserve system • Section 173 Agreements under the Local that is: Government Act 1989 where a legal agreement that limits or prescribes the way a property can be • comprehensive, meaning that it includes all managed or altered is attached to a property title, ecosystems and EVCs, from forests to grasslands and • adequate, meaning that sufﬁ cient areas of each • Section 169 agreements under the Conservation, ecosystem are reserved to sustain populations, Forests and Lands Act 1987 whereby covenants species and communities, and binding future landholders in perpetuity can be • representative, meaning that differing genetic negotiated. variants of species are reserved. Voluntary agreements include: In the region, forested areas are generally well • Land for Wildlife Agreements where landowners protected in reserves, but other types of vegetation make voluntary agreements to protect and enhance including grasslands are not. remnant vegetation, and

Land can be added to the reserve system via: • Other non-binding agreements (such as Bushcare voluntary management agreements) usually • land donations associated with the provision of conservation • land transfers or swaps where applicants for project grants. development permits can be offered to exchange ASPIRATIONAL TARGET their land for public land which is cleared or contains lesser quality native vegetation, and AT2 At least 15 per cent of the current area of each EVC in the region to be permanently • land buy backs (whereby the Victorian Government protected in public reserves or under purchases land to ﬁ ll gaps in the reserve system). management agreements on private Large patches of high-quality native vegetation and land by 2030. patches that adjoin current reserves are the most suitable for adding to the reserve system. This target is included in the Regional Catchment Strategy (RCS). It aims to ensure that there is strong protection in place for a proportion of all of the EVCs in the region.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 18 2. Strategic directions and actions

The 15 per cent target is a minimum baseline and the part of the bioregion within the Port Phillip and should generally be much higher for heavily depleted Western Port region ecological vegetation classes. For the vegetation types • The current extent of the EVC in the Port Phillip and of which only a small amount remains, the target Western Port region should also generally be higher. The particular targets • The conservation status of the EVC, reﬂ ecting its for each ecological vegetation class in each bioregion level of depletion. are listed in Section 3.5. Those EVCs that are the highest priority to be further Vegetation Protection Priorities protected through reservation and management agreements are those that are either: The region’s priorities for protection of native vegetation are determined according to: • least reserved • have a very low extent, or • The proportion of each EVC currently reserved in • endangered. the relevant bioregion Table 2.2 outlines examples of the vegetation • The proportion of each EVC currently reserved in protection priorities. Table 2.2: Vegetation Protection Priorities Criteria Examples of Vegetation Protection Priority EVCs. Bioregion EVC Proportion of total remaining EVC in reserves in the bioregion. EVCs in a bioregion Strzelecki Ranges Riparian Forest 0.8% of total remaining vegetation in reserves. with less than 5% of Gippsland Plain Swampy Woodland 3% of total remaining vegetation in reserves. the extent (in 2004) in its bioregion reserved Victorian Creekline 2% of total remaining vegetation in reserves. Volcanic Plain Grassy Woodland

Highlands Floodplain 2.6% of total remaining vegetation in reserves. Southern Fall Riparian woodland

OR Central Grassy Forest 1.7% of total remaining vegetation in the Victorian Uplands Port Phillip and Western Port region in reserves. EVCs in a bioregion Highlands Floodplain 2.6% of total remaining vegetation in the with less than 5% of Southern Fall Riparian Woodland Port Phillip and Western Port region in reserves. the extent (in 2004) in the PPW region Gippsland Plain Plains 4.1% of total remaining vegetation in the reserved Grassy Woodland Port Phillip and Western Port region in reserves.

OR Bioregion EVC Extent (ha) in the Port Phillip and Western Port region.

EVCs in a bioregion Gippsland Plain Creekline Total of only 2.9 ha in the Port Phillip and with extent (in 2004) Grassy Woodland Western Port region. of 10 ha or less in the Port Phillip and Highlands Wetland Formation Total of only 1.3 ha in the Port Phillip and Western Port region. Southern Fall Western Port region. Victorian Hills Herb- Total of only 1.9 ha in the Port Phillip and Volcanic Plain Rich Woodland Western Port region.

OR Central Grassy Woodland Bioregional Conservation Status - Endangered Victorian Uplands EVCs in a bioregion Victorian Scoria Bioregional Conservation Status - Endangered that have a Volcanic Plain Cone Woodland conservation status of ‘Endangered’ Gippsland Plain Swamp Scrub Bioregional Conservation Status - Endangered

19 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

RESOURCE CONDITION TARGET There are beneﬁ ts in protecting any native vegetation, so attention should also be given to opportunities for RCT2 At least 1.5 hectares of each Vegetation protection when the action: Protection Priority EVC or 15 per cent of its 2004 extent (whichever is the greater) to be • is particularly cost-effective permanently protected in reserves or under management agreements on private land • involves areas of vegetation of particularly high by 2015. quality, or • involves habitat linkages between remnants. RCT2 is a stepping stone to the longer-term, aspirational target AT2. It identiﬁ es the EVCs in each The following reports provide additional information bioregion at greatest need of protection through about locations, land status and opportunities for reservation and management agreements and seeks reservation: to have these protected to a base level (at least • Linking People and Spaces – A Strategy for 1.5 hectares or at least 15 per cent of their 2004 extent) Melbourne’s Open Space Network (regarding areas by 2015. to link open space) Currently a number of these priority EVCs do not • Melbourne Area District 2 Review (1994) by currently have 1.5 hectares extent or are well under the Land Conservation Council (containing the 15 per cent level of protection. Achievement of this recommendations on the use and protection of target will be a challenging task because it will involve public land), and protection of remaining vegetation plus revegetation • Grassy Ecosystems Implementation Schedule of the EVCs that have been most depleted by urban (about areas of grassland for addition to the reserve development and other land uses. system in the region). To meet this target, the approximate area required to Section 3.5 provides detailed information on go under new reservation or management agreements bioregional conservation status and targets for is 3,572 hectares. It should be noted that this protection and revegetation of EVCs. target does not preclude protecting other EVCs as opportunities arise.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 20 2. Strategic directions and actions

MANAGEMENT ACTION TARGETS

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT7 Benchmark the area of each EVC in each bioregion 2008 DSE LG, TFN, GAV, protected under the various types of management PPWCMA agreements, and establish a process for biennial reporting on changes in area.

Over the past 20 years, considerable areas of native vegetation across the region have been protected under management agreements on private land. Many agreements have been made with landholders in exchange for public funding for land or stream frontage protection works. Others have been created using conservation covenants placed on land titles, while others use more informal Land for Wildlife agreements.

Records of these agreements probably exist but are held in numerous locations by many organisations for different purposes. There is not a coherent regional picture of their number, location, scope, duration and legal status or about which vegetation types they are protecting. There is an urgent need to bring together these statistics and to use them to establish a benchmark and provide knowledge to guide future investment in reservation and management agreements.

This regional collection process will also create the opportunity to establish regular regional-scale monitoring and reporting of changes to the area under management agreements. An effective monitoring, evaluation and reporting service will enable future evaluation of whether the systems of reservation and management agreements cost- effectively protect and enhance native vegetation and contribute to net gain at a regional scale.

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT8 Improve coordination between the various By 2007 DSE PPWCMA, organisations involved in the region’s reservation TFN, PV, MW, and management agreement systems. LG

The aims of this action are to:

• Establish a regional database enabling native vegetation protection on public and private land (through both the reservation system and under management agreements) to be tracked • Ensure that the organisations involved in generating additions to native vegetation reserves and management agreements are focussing their effort and investment on the regional priorities • Ensure that while innovation and diversity in the types of management agreements meet diverse situations and needs, agreed economic and legal standards are achieved in line with the collective aim of long-term net gain • Enable cooperative regional efforts to secure increased and ongoing public and private funding for protection programs • Investigate and, if appropriate, establish a system that signals the likely sale or transfer of land containing high priority EVCs. The system could also assess the land’s suitability and options for purchase, management agreement or covenant, and • Broker potential partnerships to meet the relatively high costs of land purchase for reservation in the Port Phillip and Western Port region.

21 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT9 Substantially increase the area of Priority EVCs Ongoing DSE, PV, LG, GAV, protected under management agreements. TFN PPWCMA

This action and target is one of the most critical parts of this Native Vegetation Plan. Its success will require the involvement and resources of public agencies, local government and non-government organisations.

A recommended strategy is to further develop the region’s Land for Wildlife program. Land for Wildlife, supported by DSE, is one of Victoria’s most successful private landholder responses to native vegetation and habitat protection. There is considerable potential to increase the area of native vegetation under voluntary management agreements by allowing individual members to form networks and groups and to increase their eligibility for Landcare and other community program assistance. A regional business plan may also assist the program’s development over the next 10 years. The business pan should include consideration of how the Land for Wildlife program can actively support and complement other management agreement programs.

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT10 Continue innovative policy and program development Ongoing DSE PPWCMA, to expand the options for native vegetation MAV, LG, protection and reservation. TFN, MW,

A number of innovative schemes are currently being developed in Victoria under the general terms of land conservancy and land stewardship. There are strong opportunities and needs for these innovations in this region where large populations and growing demand and capital investments in land development compete with parallel demand for the conservation of ‘green wedges’ and fragmented native vegetation patches. Finding and trialing new ways to recruit more landholders to protect native vegetation on their land and supporting these on-ground innovations with suitable public policy is a priority action.

A strong avenue for innovation is to continue the work commenced by the Bush Tender scheme. Bush Tender has piloted an assessment and management system that allows government to select and pay private landholders to protect native vegetation values at an agreed price.

The Victorian Land Stewardship project has extended the Bush Tender trial to explore how the state might purchase a wider range of ‘ecological services’ from private landholders. Ecological services are environmental beneﬁ ts that have value for the whole landscape or catchment or community. For example, they might include the protection of water quality or the provision of space for regionally signiﬁ cant vegetation and habitat corridors. In the Port Phillip and Western Port region, ecological services such as the protection of attractive landscapes and open space could be particularly valuable to the region’s urban population.

Better assessment and evaluation tools are also needed to ensure that landholders are rewarded for priority conservation services above and beyond their legal obligations. Measuring tools such as a Biodiversity Beneﬁ ts Index to establish ecological and economic values for patches of native vegetation would add to our practical ability to create equitable and transparent markets for the protection of native vegetation and habitat on private land.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 22 2. Strategic directions and actions

2.3 Strategic direction 3: • has varied age classes across its range Maintain and improve the quality of • has few, if any, weeds and can more effectively resist invasion by weeds than can degraded vegetation native vegetation • shows few signs of disturbance BACKGROUND • is able to naturally regenerate, and The quality of some patches of vegetation can • is cheaper to maintain than degraded vegetation. deteriorate under the pressure of various threats such as continual environmental weed invasion, grazing, ASPIRATIONAL TARGET plant pathogens, altered fi re regimes and recreational pressure. For these situations, addressing the threats AT3 A net gain in the quality and extent of is a logical and cost-effective fi rst step. If the most native vegetation in the region with the signifi cant threats cannot readily be addressed, then the total “habitat hectares” increased by value of investing in programs to enhance the quality of 10 per cent by 2030. the existing vegetation is questionable. This long-term RCS target places emphasis on gaining For other patches that are degraded but the main an overall improvement in the quality of vegetation threats have less impact or have been addressed, there as well as increasing the extent of the vegetation. A is value in programs that improve vegetation quality focus is particularly needed on the enhancement and such as replacement of understorey, ecological burning management of remnant vegetation and associated and weed removal. threats.

Decisions on which EVCs and specifi c patches of To better quantify this aspirational target, we fi rstly vegetation should be priorities for programs to maintain need to establish the current habitat hectares across and enhance vegetation quality will be infl uenced by: the region.

• The conservation status of the vegetation – Habitat hectares is a measurement of both the quality targeting endangered and vulnerable EVCs is often and extent of vegetation and, when further developed the most urgent need and applied extensively, will provide us with data to assess whether we are making gains at a site, local, • The size of the patch – targeting larger patches of regional and statewide level. vegetation will generally be a better investment because they will be more resilient to future threats Vegetation Quality Priorities • The quality of the vegetation – targeting vegetation The region’s priorities for maintaining and improving that is already of high quality will generally be a the quality of native vegetation are those patches better investment, and of vegetation that have very high conservation • The threats that are at play – targeting patches for signiﬁ cance. which the threats can be directly addressed will generally be a better investment. The conservation signiﬁ cance is determined according to the conservation status of the EVC in its bioregion, Maintaining and enhancing the quality of existing the quality score of the particular patch of vegetation vegetation, especially vegetation that is already of high and other regional attributes as outlined in Section 3.4. quality, is more cost-effective than revegetating new Table 2.3 outlines the vegetation quality priorities. areas.

High-quality vegetation:

• has all the species normally expected to be associated with that type of vegetation • provides the best habitat for fauna • has its structure of layers (such as canopy and understorey) intact

23 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

Table 2.3: Vegetatation Quality Priorities

Criteria Examples of Vegetation Quality Priority EVCs.

Patches of Endangered • High quality remnants of the Endangered Plains Grassy Woodland in the EVCs with a quality Victorian Volcanic Plain bioregion particulary those encompassing Floristic score of 0.4 or greater community 55-04 Western Basalt Plains (River Red Gum) Grassy Woodland which extends from Whittlesea to Epping and west to Craigieburn. • High quality remnants of the Endangered Plains Grassland in the Victorian Volcanic Plain, Otway Plain, Gippsland Plain, Central Victorian Uplands and Highlands Southern Fall bioregions. • High quality remnants of the Endangered Grassy Woodland in the Victorian Volcanic Plain,Central Victorian Uplands and Gippsland Plain bioregions.

OR Patches of Vulnerable • High quality remnants of the Vulnerable Valley Grassy Forest in the Highlands EVCs with a quality Southern Fall, Central Victorian Uplands, Victorian Volcanic Plain and Gippsland score of 0.5 or greater Plain bioregions.

OR Patches of Rare EVCs • High quality remnants of the Rare Sand Heathland in the Gippsland Plain with a quality score of bioregion. 0.6 or greater

RESOURCE CONDITION TARGET RCT3 Improve the quality of the region’s very high conservation signiﬁ cance remnants to achieve a total of a 10 per cent increase in habitat hectares for these remnants by 2015.

This target is a stepping stone to achieving the longer-term aspirational target of a 10 per cent increase in habitat hectares across the whole region by 2030.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 24 2. Strategic directions and actions

MANAGEMENT ACTION TARGETS

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT11 Benchmark the existing habitat hectares and establish Benchmark DSE PPWCMA, LG, a system to efﬁ ciently monitor changes in the quality established Community of vegetation patches. by 2007 groups

While on-ground work to protect and improve vegetation quality must continue, we also need to understand and document the average quality of each EVC in the region. This will provide the benchmark against which changes in the future can be measured.

This will involve on-ground assessment, extrapolation and expert judgement brought together from various organisations including DSE, councils and non-government organisations. The method, currently being tested, needs to be robust and repeatable. Training for ﬁ eld staff will be important to ensure the method is consistently applied.

This process will provide an opportunity to establish regular monitoring and reporting of changes to the quality of (a) speciﬁ c patches of vegetation, (b) the average quality of EVCs and (c) the overall habitat hectares. A system of reference sites across the region may be an element of this monitoring system.

An effective monitoring system is needed to enable evaluation of whether vegetation protection and management programs are cost-effective and contributing to net gain at a regional scale. (See also MAT 27 for Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting under Implementation arrangements section 2.5).

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT12 Further develop and apply an asset-risk assessment 2008 PPWCMA/ LG, DPI, PV, methodology for native vegetation and associated DSE MW threats.

A preliminary asset-risk assessment methodology for native vegetation was piloted in the development of the RCS. However, the data and the GIS analysis have been at a broad scale and there is a need to develop and improve the methodology.

The method should be designed to identify where priority EVCs in each bioregion are most threatened. This analysis will provide essential decision-support for investors, public authorities, landholders and community groups about threat management and investment priorities.

With the assistance of a range of organisations providing data, the PPWCMA and DSE should lead development of a risk analysis for vegetation alongside the complementary approaches for other catchment assets including coasts, rivers, groundwater and agricultural land.

Achieving agreement with relevant stakeholders will be important during the various stages of this process so that there is widespread support and cooperation in this approach.

25 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT13 Develop and implement action plans to protect and Plans for all DSE Managers of enhance the quality of priority patches of native council areas identiﬁ ed vegetation on public land. by 2010 public land areas (including PV and LG)

The protection and enhancement of high quality remnants on public land is an important task. Within this task, action plans are an important step to identify and manage unnatural disturbances of soil and vegetation and to plan buffers between high quality fragments and other land.

They do not need to be exhaustive and complex documents, but they should be developed according to the principles and priorities of this regional plan. Support from a government agency (DSE) for the managers of public land in the development of the plans will help to achieve this.

The managers of public land and its vegetation in this region include Parks Victoria, local government, public utilities , Melbourne Water, DSE, and Committees of Management.

A number of local governments have already prepared and implemented plans to improve the quality of native vegetation in their municipalities. Building on the initiative of these councils, a component of this action will be the development of action plans (where they do not already exist) for each local government area to restore the quality of priority native vegetation fragments.

A similar approach should be applied with other public land managers to achieve an appropriate level of consistency in the planning and to ensure that all of the plans are contributing to regional targets.

To ensure that action plans will be successfully implemented, they should be agreed to by all relevant parties including adjacent land owners. A high level of consultation with the relevant parties is therefore important in the development of the plans.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 26 2. Strategic directions and actions

MANAGEMENT ACTION TARGETS

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT14 Coordinate, support and expand schemes that assist Status report DSE LG, PPWCMA, landholders to protect and improve the quality of by 2008 Community priority native vegetation patches on private land. groups, TFN, MW, DPI, NGOs

A wide range of schemes to assist private landholders and community groups to protect remnant vegetation on private lands have operated for the past twenty years.

For example, the Trust for Nature’s Stewardship Program is an effective way of monitoring properties for which a covenant has been registered. The Trust’s regional coordinators visit properties to monitor the overall health of the remnant vegetation, note any changes to covenanted areas, identify any threats to the vegetation and help land owners address these threats. An expansion of this program would clearly have beneﬁ ts for the quality of native vegetation in the region.

Similarly, many local governments provide community groups with technical help and materials to improve the quality of degraded vegetation. Some offer rate rebates and grants to individual landholders. Melbourne Water’s Stream Frontage Management Program has taken a growing role in providing support for landholders with river frontages.

There is a need to check that these and other similar programs align with the priorities and targets of this plan. It may also be possible to better coordinate and streamline the current range of schemes across the region.

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT15 Publish revegetation and restoration guides for Guides for DSE PPWCMA, improving the quality and extent of EVCs and priority MW, PV, GAV ﬂ oristic communities. EVCs and distinctive ﬂ oristic communities by 2008

Guidelines for the management, enhancement and revegetation of priority EVCs and distinctive ﬂ oristic communities are urgently needed. Guides for priority EVCs should be developed by 2008 and all EVCs should be addressed by 2012. These guidelines need to be appropriate for a wide range of users and should cover various subjects including weed control, ﬁ re management and regeneration techniques.

27 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT16 Progressively reduce the sale of environmental weeds Status report DPI Nursery in the nursery industry. by 2008. industry, DSE

The sale of environmental weeds within the professional and ‘Sunday Market’ nursery trade remains a threat to native vegetation.

These plants can spread from gardens into areas of native vegetation through dumping of soil or cuttings, from seed spread by birds and other animals, along rivers or by wind. They become invasive environmental weeds and can eventually exclude native species.

Known and potential environmental weeds need to be progressively removed from sale to reduce this threat and minimise future management and eradication costs. The Department of Primary Industries (DPI) is working with the nursery industry and market vendors on this task.

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT17 Improve vegetation quality through well-managed Status report DSE CFA, GAV, DSE, and appropriate ecological burning regimes. by 2008 PPWCMA, PV, MW, LG, EPA

Fire is an important infl uence on the quality and rejuvenation of vegetation in the Australian bush. EVCs have evolved to suit the frequency and intensity of fi re regimes occurring naturally and fi re was used by Indigenous people prior to European settlement. Heathlands, for example, are well adapted to fi res at about 10-20 year intervals whereas cool temperate rainforests appear to have had major fi res only at 200-500 year intervals.

Too frequent or infrequent burning usually leads to the loss of some species of fl ora or fauna, or to greatly reduced amounts of some species. Over time, some species may be lost and the vegetation structure changed. As well, an uncommon intensity of fi res may signifi cantly alter the structure and composition of native vegetation.

The quality of EVCs is best maintained and improved by burning them at the frequencies to which they have adapted.

Fire management for ecological beneﬁ t needs to be linked to the management of fuel loads and the control of threats such as pest animals, weeds and soil erosion.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 28 2. Strategic directions and actions

2.4 Strategic direction 4: Accordingly, the enhancement of native vegetation in the region’s urban areas poses particular challenges. Increase the quantity of native vegetation This native vegetation is important, because it: BACKGROUND • provides examples of the original fl ora and fauna of Increasing the quantity of indigenous native vegetation the area is vital if we are to strengthen the diversity and resilience of the region’s ecological systems. • protects sites of national ,state or local biological signifi cance Natural regeneration is often preferable to revegetation • has educational and social values, and because it is less expensive and usually increases • provides a seed source for revegetation with native the quality of the native vegetation. Where natural species. regeneration is not practical, revegetation should be undertaken using locally indigenous species. These fragments provide people in urban areas with a direct link to the natural heritage of their area and From the perspective of biodiversity enhancement, contribute to their sense of place. decisions on which EVCs and specifi c patches of vegetation should be targeted for regeneration and Native vegetation in urban areas faces numerous revegetation programs should be made according to: threats including:

• The conservation status of the vegetation – it • destruction of individual plants would generally be better to target endangered and • increased fragmentation and ongoing edge effects vulnerable EVCs, and • domestic animals • The depletion of the EVC in its bioregion – it would be best to target efforts to increasing the area of • overuse by people using the area for recreation the most depleted EVCs. • loss of vegetation from further urban development However, restoration and revegetation programs can • too frequent, or too infrequent, fi re (altered fi re have a number of other benefi ts. Therefore, investment regime), and decisions should also be infl uenced by: • invasion from pest plants and animals. • The size of the patch – it would be benefi cial if small patches can be buffered to increase their In 2002, the Melbourne 2030 urban planning strategy ecological value and resilience was released and an urban growth boundary was • The potential for increasing the connectivity established. The strategy identifi es fi ve urban growth between patches areas: Werribee, Caroline Springs, Hume, Epping North/ Plenty Valley and Cranbourne/Pakenham. Some limited • Whether investment can extend the habitat for urbanisation will also occur in and around small towns. threatened species Figure 5 illustrates remnant native vegetation within • Whether additional benefi ts to the landscape can the urban growth boundary and green wedges. be achieved such as control of erosion, reduction of recharge to address salinity, improvements to Urban fringe areas typically need intensive river health, water quality protection, wetland management to protect their native vegetation from enhancement, protection of coastlines, and further degradation. However, protecting native vegetation on the urban fringe is often more diffi cult • Whether there are recreational, social and than in more rural areas because of development economic benefi ts such as landscape aesthetics or pressure, higher levels of human activity and the risks demonstration of native vegetation values in an of using fi re as a management tool. urban community. In 2004, 17 per cent of the Port Phillip and Western Port region (215,000 hectares) was urban. Over the next 25 years, the urban area is expected to increase by 17,000 hectares.

29 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan Figure 5: Remnant native vegetation in the urban areas and future urban growth areas & green wedges

Figure 5: Remnant Native Vegetation in the urban areas and future urban LANCEFIELD Legend growth areas & green wedges Port Phillip and Westernport CMA Boundary Green Wedge Zones Remnant Native Vegetation MACEDON Existing urban areas and future Urban Growth Area

WHITTLESEA

SUNBURY BALLAN YARRA GLEN MELTON KEILOR HEIDELBERG LILYDALE WARBURTON

MELBOURNE

WERRIBEE BELGRAVE 2. Strategic directions andactions

NARRE WARREN Port Phillip Bay PAKENHAM CRANBOURNE DROUIN

Port Phillip andWestern Port- FRANKSTON GEELONG KOO-WEE-RUP

QUEENSCLIFF Western Port HASTINGS PORTSEA DROMANA LOCH

Native Vegetation Plan q

010

Bass Strait Kilometers 30

2. Strategic directions and actions

ASPIRATIONAL TARGETS • Increase the connections between the region’s fragments of native vegetation. AT4 Increase the total extent of native vegetation to at least 35 per cent of the RESOURCE CONDITION TARGET region’s area by 2030. RCT4 At least 95 per cent of the regions EVCs represented to at least 5 per cent of their pre-1750 extent by 2015. AT5 At least 95 per cent of the regions EVCs represented to at least 10 per cent of their This is a stepping stone to the aspirational targets. pre-1750 extent by 2030. The priorities for regeneration and revegetation will be Meeting these long-term RCS targets will mean those EVCs that are depleted to below fi ve per cent of regenerating or revegetating 39,000 hectares over the their original extent in their bioregion. For EVCs with next 25 years (1,560 hectares per year) with a focus on very small areas a minimum target of 1.5 hectares the EVCs that are highly depleted. is set. Examples are Plains Grassland, Plains Grassy Woodland in the Victorian Volcanic Plain bioregion and Satisfying these targets will make an important Valley Heathy Forest in the Gippsland Plain bioregion contribution to the achievement of other long term RCS (see Section 2.2 for other EVCs that are depleted to targets including: below fi ve per cent of their original extent in each bioregion • Reduce the number of threatened fl ora species to less than 250 by 2030 and reduce the number of The targets for each EVC in each bioregion are outlined threatened fauna species to less than 100 by 2030 in Section 3.5 and summarised in Table 2.4. with no regional extinctions, and

Table 2.4: Targets for regeneration and restoration in each bioregion

Total area Extent of native Bioregion in PPW vegetation in PPW Target for native vegetation cover in region region in 2004 PPW Region in 2015 ha ha % ha % of Increase Ha/yr original from required (1750) 2005 (Ha) from extent 2005-2015 Highlands - Southern Fall 376,577 224,782 60 224,973 60 191 19.1

Highlands - Northern Fall 424 306 72 315 74 9 0.9

Victorian Alps 15,953 15,943 99 15,943 99.9 0 0

Central Victorian Uplands 166,743 81,069 49 81,069 49 9 0.9

Strzelecki Ranges 43,032 1,333 3 2,577 6 1243 124.3

Victorian Volcanic Plain 302,253 12,626 4 17,444 5.8 4818 481.8

Otway Plain 14,919 186 1 853 5.8 668 66.8

Gippsland Plain 358,963 45,364 13 48,468 13.6 3103 310.3

Total 1,278,864 381,609 30 391,642 30.6 10,041 1,004.1

31 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT18 Undertake programs that achieve an average of at 2005 to 2015 DSE PPWCMA, PV, least 1,001 hectares/year of regeneration and MW, LG, revegetation. GAV

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT19 Develop revegetation plans for all local government 2012 DSE LG , CFA, GAV, areas. ARI, PPWCMA, PV, MW, EPA

For both of these actions, the focus must be on the EVCs that are depleted below ﬁ ve per cent of their original extent and on the establishment of corridors and buffers to increase the extent of all Endangered EVCs.

The PPWP region is highly developed and there are limited opportunities to create new corridors. However, opportunities may be maximised in many areas if local governments, public land managers and private landowners work together and take a long-term, strategic approach to developing and protecting corridors. Many local governments have already prepared plans that include provisions for corridor and buffer areas while the Cardinia Environment Coalition of landholder groups has a highly developed Biolinks program in action across the northern part of the Western Port catchment.

Identifying the opportunities to buffer and link vegetation fragments is best done with local knowledge and access to spatial and land-use planning information at a relevant scale.

The development of speciﬁ c local government revegetation plans, where such plans don’t already exist, is a way of “scaling down” the regional target to smaller packages of activity that each council can take strong ownership of, whilst being a part of the overall regional program.

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT20 Encourage the use of appropriate native species in By 2008 LG DSE , GAV landscape plantings.

To help achieve net gain, local governments should require residential and industrial developers to use appropriate native species in landscape plantings. They should also use appropriate native species in their own landscape plantings.

There is a need to encourage the use of native species in landscape master plans for all developments and for council landscaping. To result in the maximum biodiversity beneﬁ ts, mixes of species should be encouraged, rather than single species.

Some native, non-indigenous species can, in time, become environmental weeds. For example, Coast Wattle (Acacia sophorae), Coast Tea-tree (Leptospermum laevigatum) and Burgan (Kunzea ericoides) can sometimes aggressively colonise away from their original planting sites. Native species for landscape plantings need to be carefully chosen for the conditions on and around the planting site. Measures are also needed to prevent the use of environmental weeds in landscape plantings.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 32 2. Strategic directions and actions

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT21 Provide information to urban households and Ongoing LG DSE, GAV, businesses regarding the protection and planting of PV , MAV native species and the control of environmental weeds.

Some local governments in the region currently provide ratepayers with information about the location of native vegetation, species lists to guide revegetation, and about how to control environmental weeds. This practice needs to be encouraged and expanded.

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT22 Provide demonstrations and on-site information in Ongoing LG DSE, PV urban areas regarding the values of native vegetation.

To improve urban communities’ knowledge and appreciation of native ecosystems, opportunities are required for them to experience native vegetation in urban areas. Clear signage, printed material, tours and demonstrations are all important, along with information in languages other than English.

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT23 Encourage programs and partnerships to manage and Ongoing DSE PPWCMA, PV, restore native vegetation in urban areas. MW, LG, VNPA, GAV, ARCUE

The region’s urban population provides a source of volunteers to help manage and restore native vegetation. ‘Friends of’ groups, Landcare and other community organisations have major impacts in urban areas protecting and restoring native vegetation. Plantings to re-establish native vegetation are important both for achieving net gain and for awareness raising. Many urban people get their fi rst exposure to native vegetation issues by helping out at a local planting day. Events that get people involved in native vegetation protection and restoration in urban areas include: • the Spring Planting Festival, run by Greening Australia Victoria (GAV) that coordinates community groups to plant trees • National Tree Day, run by PlanetArk that encourages groups and individuals to plant trees in urban areas • Biodiversity Month, coordinated by the Community Biodiversity Network that coordinates a variety of activities • Bush Month October, a Trust for Nature (TFN) scheme that opens some of the best bushland properties in Victoria to the public, giving them fi rst-hand experience of wild fl owers and wildlife • the Land for Wildlife scheme, which holds open days of Land for Wildlife registered properties • Integrated Urban Bushcare, a project funded by the National Heritage Trust and which funds groups to enhance remnant vegetation and to revegetate areas, and • the Tree Project, which organises urban volunteers to grow native plants for farmers, and to help plant them on farms.

33 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

Through these types of events, there are an increasing number of partnerships in the region between businesses, local governments, public authorities, land management agencies and local community groups to protect and replant native vegetation. For example, the Melbourne Water Corridors of Green program, launched in 1999, provides opportunity for private industry to invest in waterway improvement projects. Sponsorship is provided through Landcare Australia Ltd to fund local government works such as riparian revegetation and weed control. The program is currently supported by Alinta Energy in its operating area and the program was initiated as a partnership between Amcor, Landcare Australia Ltd and Melbourne Water. Amcor provided $500,000 over 3 years which resulted in more than 150,000 plants being planted along 23 kilometres of streamside.

If activities such as these can be increased and coordinated, then native vegetation can be enhanced in urban areas on a signifi cant scale. Revegetation of high-profi le areas, and involvement by high-profi le people and enterprises, would be an advantage to boost these efforts.

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT24 Investigate the need for and, if required, develop and Investigation GAV PPWCMA, implement a regional seed supply strategy. completed DSE, DPI, and report community upon by 2007 groups , LG

Meeting the restoration and revegetation targets requires a protracted effort across substantial areas of the region. This may require larger and more diverse seed and native plant stocks to be available. A strategy may be required to ensure that this supply is sustained and remains affordable.

Such a strategy will need to draw on the expertise of Greening Australia Victoria’s Melbourne Native Seedbank, Tree Project and nurseries in the region that supply tubestock grown from local seed.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 34 2. Strategic directions and actions

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT25 Encourage landholders to take up conservation leases Status report DSE MW, PV, on Crown land water frontage reserves. by 2008 TFN, PPWCMA, some LGs

Where Crown frontage licences have lapsed, landholders should be encouraged to take up new conservation licences to ensure that habitat values are restored. Incentives may be an important component of this program.

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT26 Encourage councils, businesses and others to use Status report DSE PPWCMA, carbon trading and offset schemes to fund by 2008 DPI, LAL revegetation programs.

The development of carbon accounting and auditing procedures allows individuals and organisations to actively pursue and document carbon neutrality for the organisation or for particular events. The Melbourne 2006 Commonwealth Games Tree Planting program provides a tangible example of a conservation-based carbon sequestration program. It established over 500,000 trees, creating beneﬁ ts in addressing salinity, biodiversity decline, erosion control and weed suppression.

This plan’s targets can also be supported by programs such as:

• Bush Broker is a system to register and trade native vegetation credits. A native vegetation credit is a gain in the quality and/or quantity of native vegetation that is subject to a secure and ongoing agreement. Native vegetation credits are listed on the BushBroker register and these can be bought by another party and subsequently used as an offset for the approved clearing of native vegetation. • Greenfl eet is a Victorian not-for-profi t organisation that both raises awareness about greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles and funds the planting of native vegetation to absorb those emissions. Subscribers to the Greenfl eet program get a certain number of native trees planted each year to absorb the greenhouse gases that they produce. • Plantations for Greenhouse, a program under the Victorian Government’s Greenhouse Strategy, fi nancially assists landholders and investors to plant long-rotation, high-quality sawlog plantations. The plantations will also mitigate salinity, provide buffers around priority remnant vegetation and waterways, provide wildlife corridors and shelter for stock and crops and help suppress weeds. In 2003-2004, 189 ha of plantations were established and funded by the program in this region, mostly in the Grow West area near Bacchus Marsh. • CarbonTender is a program that pays landholders to create carbon sinks on their property. Participating landholders must permanently revegetate with only native plants, and preference is given to sites that buffer, or connect with, existing areas of native vegetation. In the Port Philip and Western Port region, a CarbonTender trial has been conducted in areas in the Baw Baw, Bass Coast and South Gippsland Shires.

35 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

2.5 Implementation • Benchmarking, monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements against Resource Condition Targets • Data, mapping and information management BACKGROUND • Research and development The implementation of this plan requires action in: • Education and training • Coordination and cooperation • Funding and cost sharing, and • Tracking investment, action and outputs against • Review and renewal of the plan. Management Action Targets

MANAGEMENT ACTION TARGETS COORDINATION AND COOPERATION Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT27 Establish a system to oversee and monitor the First activity DSE PPWCMA, implementation of this plan and issue regular report DPI, MW, activity reports. by 2007 PV, LG

This plan cannot be implemented in isolation. It will need many organisations to integrate the plan’s priorities and goals into the way they manage and impact on the region’s native vegetation. Success will depend on representative and authoritative leadership, strategic and creative problem solving and good communications.

A high-level regional committee may be established. Its initial priorities would be to address immediate needs for communication, resourcing and coordination arrangements and to build wide support for and understanding of this plan.

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT28 Work with Indigenous communities to support the By 2008 GAV ILC,/ILA, implementation of this plan and to ensure that actions PPWCMA, arising from the plan protect and enhance Indigenous DSE, FNCV culture and heritage.

There is a need and responsibility to learn from the Indigenous land management practices of the country’s traditional owners. While we cannot manage many of the EVCs as they were once managed, the experience and knowledge of Indigenous communities will be critical to conserving landscapes as integral parts of Aboriginal heritage and spirituality and the value of native vegetation as sources of Indigenous foods and medicines.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 36 2. Strategic directions and actions

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT29 Collaborate with the region’s land, water and By 2007 DSE PPWCMA, LG, biodiversity managers, planners and policy-makers to MAV, MW, ensure their programs implement this plan and DPI, VicRoads, pursue the goal of net gain. VicTrack, etc.

Many regional strategies and local plans for salinity management, land protection, farm forestry, carbon sequestration, river health, wetland management, park management, urban growth and biodiversity conservation include provision for vegetation management and revegetation. Vegetation management and revegetation is also promoted to maintain the aesthetic and cultural qualities of urban and rural landscapes.

Successful implementation of this Native Vegetation Plan will require many organisations to attach its principles, targets and actions to their objectives and programs. Wherever possible, local programs should be implemented in ways that contribute to achieving the goals and targets of this plan.

Signiﬁ cant roles in implementing this plan can be taken by:

• local government through their vegetation management programs and statutory responsibilities for clearance controls and planning • organisations responsible for Melbourne’s urban growth area and green wedge programs • transport and infrastructure planners and their operations • Melbourne Water through its leadership of the Regional River Health Strategy and riparian management program • proponents of schemes and plantations for carbon trading and farm forestry • organisations and landholder groups implementing Biodiversity Action Plans6 and associated Local Area and Landcare Plans (Figure 6 illustrates the landscape zones in the Port Phillip and Western Port region) • government agencies with natural resource management responsibilities and which lead programs for landholders such as the adoption of Environmental Management System approaches to land stewardship • peak agency and private industry organisations with the networks and knowledge to support the plan with communication and training services, and • land developers and landholders.

6For further information on Biodiversity Action Planning contact DSE www.dse.vic.gov.au

37 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

It is expected that these organisations will need national recovery plans and action statements for planned and strategic assistance to help them support threatened species and ecological communities listed its implementation. It is expected that they will under the Commonwealth Environment Protection particularly need: and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988. There • a good understanding of the rationale and purposes is strong correlation between the conservation of of the plan priority EVCs identifi ed in this Native Vegetation Plan and the objectives of these Acts that should be refl ected • ready access to the information and expertise that in the implementation stages. will help them implement the plan • assistance to integrate information about the Similarly, DPI developed a Regional Farm Forestry Action benefi ts of native vegetation into their programs Plan in 2004 to guide the development of farm forestry in the region. The implementation of the Action Plan • assistance to benchmark and monitor vegetation should promote native species and multi-benefi t farm quality and quantity and report in ways that will forestry plantations that can provide corridors and links support measuring regional progress towards this between fragments of remnant vegetation. plan’s targets, and • specifi c information about the locations and In addition, ’whole-of-business’ approaches to requirements of regional priorities for achieving net gain are needed by the partners to this revegetation, etc. plan. Public and private infrastructure development and maintenance, recreation and social programs, DSE, together with the Australian Government and community development and cultural activities all have other stakeholders are developing and implementing potential roles and contributions to make to protecting the quantity and quality of the region’s native vegetation.

In relation to urban growth management, state and local government planners are ideally placed to plan for an increase in the quantity and quality of native vegetation by:

• developing precinct plans and open space strategies that ensure the retention and management of remnant vegetation and native plantings • requiring the retention and management of remnant vegetation, and native plantings, on both public and private land • in planning for urban growth, promoting development in the least sensitive areas and protecting existing remnant vegetation • encouraging the re establishment of native vegetation on public land and open space • requiring developers to develop landscape plans that contribute to net gain, and • leading by example, by carefully managing existing remnants, increasing the percentage of native plantings on the land they control, and avoiding the use of environmental weeds in open space and other public land.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 38 2. Strategic directions and actions

To help them, we need to ensure that native vegetation information systems provide easily accessible information about biodiversity values for any particular area to planners and land managers, early in the planning cycle.

In the near future, management plans for each of the 12 green wedges surrounding Melbourne’s urban growth boundary will be developed in partnership with local councils and DSE. These plans should be consistent with the principles, targets and actions of this plan. The many challenges and opportunities in green wedge management will require innovative ways to assist landowners, particularly in protecting high- priority vegetation whilst maintaining the economic viability of their properties. There is a high turnover in land ownership in green wedges, therefore incentive and education programs for landholders need to be resourced, ongoing, and constantly promoted.

In relation to rural land management, Environmental Management Systems (EMS) can assist farmers to identify the environmental impacts of their operations and their legal responsibilities and modify • work and learn with their peers about better their operations to minimise impacts and meet environmental management responsibilities. • improve their business skills (such as record keeping, An EMS helps farmers to: business planning and computer skills), and • better understand the environment and the • better understand how to monitor and improve their environmental impacts of their enterprise environmental performance. • improve their management skills, leading to In future, there may be opportunities to link accredited increased productivity EMSs to biodiversity rate rebates and other local government programs, and link outcomes of EMSs • gain a marketing edge in industries where a green to targets in plans such as this one. identity is essential

TRACKING INVESTMENT, ACTION AND OUTPUTS AGAINST MANAGEMENT ACTION TARGETS

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT30 Establish an Action Tracking Database to track and 2006 DSE, DPI, GAV, PV, report on the investment, action and outputs of this PPWCMA MW, LG plan and progress towards achieving the Management Action Targets.

A database is being developed by the PPWCMA to track progress with implementation of the Regional Catchment Strategy. This database should also be used to track progress with the implementation of the Native Vegetation Plan.

The database will be a central record of progress towards each of the management action targets in this plan. For the database to be effective, up-to-date and accurate, the organisations involved in the many actions will need to regularly provide information and progress reports. Commitment from these organisations to the process is expected to be negotiated as part of the project brief that will be exchanged between the coordinator of the implementation and each lead organisation.

39 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

BENCHMARKING, MONITORING, EVALUATION AND REPORTING AGAINST RESOURCE CONDITION TARGETS

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT31 Develop monitoring, evaluation and reporting By 2008 DSE PPWCMA, LG, systems to track and adaptively manage this plan’s GAV, DPI, PV, progress towards its Resource Condition Targets. MW

To determine whether this plan is resulting in net gain in the region, we will need to monitor the outcomes of all levels of vegetation management. The system of monitoring, evaluation and reporting for this Native Vegetation Plan will ideally be integrated with the Regional Catchment Strategy MER system being developed by the PPWCMA (see Chapter 9 of the Port Phillip and Western Port Regional Catchment Strategy for details).

Monitoring changes in the extent of native vegetation involves recording losses as well as gains. The Native Vegetation Permit Tracking system is currently being developed by DSE. It will record losses in the extent of native vegetation through legal clearing.

DSEs Catchment Activity Management System (CAMS) currently records gains in the extent of native vegetation through regeneration and revegetation. All restoration and revegetation activities and sites in the region should ideally be mapped and entered into the CAMS database.

The Native Vegetation Permit Tracking system and CAMS should be brought together to enable net gain to be monitored.

To monitor changes in vegetation quality, we must know its current quality and be able to compare it with future changes. There is no region-wide data about the current quality of native vegetation. This data needs to be collected. The CAMS database does not currently store information about vegetation quality but should. Many agencies and organisations do not have staff trained to enter data into CAMS. As a result, some data is not recorded, and CAMS data is incomplete. A system to ensure comprehensive and accurate CAMS data entry is necessary.

Under the Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994, PPWCMA must resport annually on the condition of the catchment. This will include a report on the implementation of this plan and on vegetation gains and losses in the region, drawing on advice and information from DSE.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 40 2. Strategic directions and actions

DATA, MAPPING & INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT32 Establish systems to give all partners and stakeholders By 2007 DSE PPWCMA, LG access to the information they need to implement this plan.

A necessary ﬁ rst step is a review of the current regional arrangements for data and information management and sharing.

The 1:25,000 mapping of native vegetation across the region needs to be completed. Further mapping at 1:5,000, or at a scale that will best support benchmarking, monitoring and planning is an urgent need. Mechanisms also need to be developed to ensure the timely and reliable updating of EVC maps.

A number of municipalities including Manningham, Yarra Ranges, Mornington Peninsula and Frankston have been leading the way in undertaking this work as a sound basis for planning scheme overlays and local planning decisions. This action includes the mapping of native grasslands in the region; a difﬁ cult but important task. Melton and Moorabool Shire Councils have also prepared additional information on grasslands, and further work associated with the rollout of Melbourne 2030 will extend the grasslands mapping.

Continued advances in mapping techniques are needed and strong coordination is required between state government agencies and local government to ensure consistency, complementary approaches and effective use of data in planning, enforcement, monitoring and reporting.

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT33 Establish a coordinated program of new research and By 2007 DSE PPWCMA, development to ﬁ ll the knowledge and technique gaps DPI, LG most needed to implement this plan.

Research and knowledge needs identiﬁ ed through the development of this plan include the need to:

• collate and actively disseminate the results of research on the restoration of grassy ecosystems and Plains Grassy Woodland - generally the most threatened EVCs in the region • improve and disseminate knowledge about how to conduct large-scale restorations • undertake ground truthing of EVCs mapped for the Lysterfi eld, Cardinia Creek, Silvan and Kilsyth 1:25 000 map sheets • further sample and research some threatened EVCs • support fi eld studies to gather information for the Biosites database, and • ensure that agricultural and land and vegetation management research and development programs refl ect the needs of the region. It will be necessary to identify existing research and development projects and ensure that the products of this work are available to the organisations implementing this plan.

41 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 2. Strategic directions and actions

EDUCATION AND TRAINING

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT34 Identify the training needs created by this plan and By 2006 DSE GAV, develop a systematic training program to support its PPWCMA, implementation. TAFE, LG, private training providers

There is also a broader need to invest in training in all aspects of native vegetation management. In particular, training should be provided for:

• local government Councillors • local government planners • developers • land management contractors, and • real estate agents. Some local governments in this region run environmental seminars, training events and property management courses for landholders and residents. Some of these are linked to conservation incentive schemes such as rate rebates.

The ‘habitat-hectares’ method is the current system used to evaluate the quality of native vegetation and habitat. It works by comparing features of a given patch of vegetation to the benchmarks provided by reference patches of the same type of vegetation that are mature and undisturbed.

The habitat hectares method is relatively new and complex. Guidelines are needed to ensure it is used widely, reliably and consistently, and all stakeholders will need to be trained to understand and implement them.

FUNDING AND COST SHARING

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT35 Explore opportunities for new and innovative funding, Status report DSE, DPI, GAV, LG cost-sharing and contractual arrangements to support by 2008 PPWCMA implementation of this plan.

There is a need to ﬁ nd new reliable sources of funds that can support the implementation of many of the actions in this Native Vegetation Plan and achieve its targets.

Opportunities should be actively explored for generating new funding streams from both the public and private sectors. Emerging ideas such as carbon trading and vegetation clearance offset systems, nitrogen offset systems and community contributions are possibilities.

In addition, effective mechanisms to use the funds are required, such as through the Bush Tender approaches or a new system of land stewardship payments.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 42 2. Strategic directions and actions

REVIEW AND RENEWAL OF THE PLAN

Action Timeframe Lead role Key partners

MAT36 Review this Native Vegetation Plan. 2009 DSE, Various PPWCMA

This plan will be reviewed in 2009, ideally in conjunction with the review of the 2004–2009 Port Phillip and Western Port Regional Catchment Strategy. This review will take account of changes in native vegetation quality, whether (and how) offsets are achieving net gain, and the results of management actions.

The review will also respond to changing knowledge about the region’s vegetation resources. The review is expected to consider new targets and priorities including new actions and priorities derived from current studies of marine and coastal vegetation conditions.

43 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 3. Appendices

3.1 Policy context for the The Fisheries Act 1995 provides for the management, protection and ecologically sustainable development protection and management of the state’s ﬁ sheries, aquaculture industries and of native vegetation associated aquatic resources and relates to the Commonwealth Fisheries Management Act 1991. A range of legislation and supporting policies applies The Forests Act 1958 speciﬁ es Forest Management to the protection and management of native vegetation Areas for Victoria’s forests, and schedules to the Act and biodiversity and supports integrated catchment provide sustainable yield rates for forest production. management. Victoria’s strategic plan for the protection and enhancement of native vegetation, Victoria’s Native Vegetation: A Framework for Action, establishes a policy to achieve ‘net gain’ in the extent and quality of native vegetation. Sitting underneath the statewide framework and the Regional Catchment Strategies are the Regional Native Vegetation Plans.

While the national and state legislation provides a comprehensive set of rules and standards for the maintenance of biodiversity, there are few requirements for biodiversity protection to be integrated into other catchment activities. In response, the Regional Catchment Strategy and this Native Vegetation Plan seek ways to better link native vegetation and biodiversity protection with land and water management. As an example, they seek to assist local government planning and decision-making to contribute to net gain for native vegetation. The Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and the Victorian Figure 6 depicts some of the national, state and Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 are the main regional policies, strategies and plans that are relevant statutory frameworks for protecting biodiversity to the protection and management of native vegetation including native plants and animals and ecological and biodiversity in the Port Phillip and Western Port communities. Threatened species and communities, region. and threatening processes can be listed under each Act. Threatened Species and Communities Recovery Plans and Threat Abatement Plans are developed under the EPBC Act 1999. Action Statements for listed threatened species, communities and potentially threatening processes are developed under the FFG Act 1988.

The Wildlife Act 1975 provides for the protection and conservation of wildlife. It aims to prevent species becoming extinct and provides for the sustainable use of and access to wildlife. In addition, it provides for the establishment and management of state wildlife and nature reserves. National and other types of parks are provided for by the National Parks Act 1975.

The Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978 provides for reservation of Crown land for a variety of public purposes, and the management, leasing and licensing of reserves, primarily for grazing. The Land Act 1958 makes provision for the leasing, occupation and sale of unreserved Crown land.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 44 3. Appendices

Figure 6: Some of the important policies, strategies and plans relating to the protection and management of biodiversity

NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL

National Strategy for Environment National Framework Nationally Agreed Ecologically Protection and for Management and Criteria for Establishment of a Sustainable Biodiversity Monitoring of Endorsed or Approved Development (1992) Conservation Act Australia’s Native Comprehensive, (1999) Vegetation (2000) Adequate and Representative Reserve System for Draft Strategy for the Forests in Australia Conservation of Ramsar Convention National (1997) Australia’s Biological on Wetlands (1971) Greenhouse Diversity (1996) Strategy (1996) Australia’s Oceans JAMBA and Policy (1998) CAMBA agreements

STATE

Victorian Planning Victoria’s Native Victorian River Victoria’s Pest Victorian Provisions (2000) Vegetation Health Strategy Management Greenhouse Management: (2002) Framework (2002) Strategy (2002) A Framework for Action (2002) Victorian Biodiversity Strategy (1997) Victorian Inland Victoria’s Salinity Our Forests Our Victoria’s System of Fisheries Strategy Management Future (2002) Marine National (1997) Framework (2000) Victorian Coastal Parks and Marine Strategy (2002) Sanctuaries (2002)

REGIONAL

Port Phillip and Management Plans Port Phillip and Threatened Species Port Phillip Bay Western Port for the region’s Western Port Recovery Plan for Environmental Regional Catchment parks and reserves Native Vegetation Plan Species that occur in Management Plan Strategy (2004) this region (2002)

Management Plans Flora Fauna Port Phillip and for the region 8 Municipal Strategic Biodiversity Action Guarantee Action Western Port Marine National Statements, Plans for each of the Statements for Regional River Parks and Marine planning schemes 8 bioregions in the species and Health Strategy Sanctuaries and Environmental Port Phillip and communities that Strategies of the 38 Western Port region occur in this region municipalities in the region Port Phillip and Linking People and Western Port Spaces strategy for Management Plans South East Region Regional Salinity managing for the region’s 3 Marine Plan (2004) Management Plan Melbourne’s open Ramsar wetlands space (2002)

45 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 3. Appendices

The status of this plan Framework represent the minimum requirement for offsets and that they could be increased in this plan Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management: A for the Port Phillip and Western Port region where Framework for Action is an incorporated document appropriate. under the Schedule to Clause 81 in all planning schemes. The decision guidelines in Clause 52.17 of the particular provisions in all planning schemes require An incorporated document has the same status as that, before deciding on an application involving the other parts of the planning scheme in determining the removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation, appropriate response to a planning permit application. responsible authorities must consider this plan. The Framework states on page 33 that regional Clause 15.09 of the State Planning Policy Framework vegetation plans will provide regional guidelines for in all planning schemes requires the planning responsible authorities (usually local governments) in authorities to consider this plan when preparing determining permit applications to remove, destroy or planning scheme amendments or municipal strategic lop native vegetation. It requires the plan be used as statements affecting native vegetation, ﬂ ora, fauna, a reference document for the conservation status of waterways or wetlands. native vegetation communities in the region. It also points out on page 25 that the offset criteria of the

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 46 3. Appendices

3.2 Assessing the bioregional conservation status of EVCs7

The criteria outlined in Table 3.2A have been used to assign a conservation status for each EVC in each bioregion. Complexes/mosaics are assigned the conservation status of their most threatened component EVC.

Table 3.2A: Criteria for determining the Bioregional Conservation Status of EVCs

STATUS CRITERIA

Presumed X Probably no longer present in the bioregion Extinct (the accuracy of this presumption is limited by the use of remotely-sensed 1:100 000 scale woody vegetation cover mapping to determine depletion - grassland, open woodland and wetland types are particularly affected)

Endangered E1 ◆ Contracted to less than 10% of former range; or ◆ Less than 10% pre-European extent remains.

E2 Combination of depletion, degradation, current threats and rarity is comparable overall to E1. That is: ◆ 10 to 30% pre-European extent remains and severely degraded over a majority of its area; or ◆ naturally restricted EVC reduced to 30% or less of former range and moderately degraded over a majority of its area; or ◆ rare EVC cleared and/or moderately degraded over a majority of its former area.

Vulnerable V1 10 to 30% pre-European extent remain.

V2 Combination of depletion, degradation, current threats and rarity is comparable overall to V1. That is: ◆ greater than 30% and up to 50% pre-European extent remains and moderately degraded over a majority of this area; or ◆ greater than 50% pre-European extent remains and severely degraded over a majority of this area; or ◆ naturally restricted EVC where greater than 30% pre-European extent remains and moderately degraded over a majority of this area; or ◆ rare EVC cleared and/or moderately degraded over a minority of former area.

Depleted D1 Greater than 30% and up to 50% pre-European extent remains.

D2 Combination of depletion, degradation and current threats is comparable overall to D1, and greater than 50% pre-European extent remains and moderately degraded over a majority of this area.

Rare R Rare EVC (as deﬁ ned by geographic occurrence) but neither depleted, degraded nor currently threatened to an extent that would qualify as Endangered, Vulnerable or Depleted.

Least Concern LC Greater than 50% pre-European extent remains and subject to little to no degradation over a majority of its area.

7Tables presented are taken from Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management: A Framework for Action, NRE (2002).

47 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 3. Appendices

Table 3.2B: Geographic occurrence of EVCs within Bioregions

Rare R1 total range generally less than 10,000 ha R2 pre-European extent in Victorian bioregion less than 1,000 ha R3 patch size generally less than 100 ha

Naturally Restricted NR pre-European extent in Victorian bioregion less than 10,000 ha

Common C pre-European extent in Victorian bioregion greater than 10,000 ha

Minor M pre-European extent in Victorian bioregion less than approximately 1% of Statewide extent

Some ﬂ oristic communities in the Port Phillip and Western Port region warrant a higher conservation status than would be assigned to their relevant EVCs using the criteria outlined in Table 3.2B. These amendments are outlined in Table 3.2C.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 48 3. Appendices

Table 3.2C: Conservation Status of particular ﬂ oristic communities and their parent EVC occurring in the Port Phillip and Western Port region

Floristic Community EVC number & Initial Bioregional Amended Justiﬁ cation name in which this Conservation Bioregional for upgrade (FC) FC occurs Status of EVC Conservation Status of Bioregional of EVC containing Conservation this FC within Status the region

Coastal Moonah 858 - Calcarenite Dune Victorian Volcanic Plain Victorian Volcanic Plain FFG listed Woodland Woodland/Coastal = Depleted = Endangered community alkaline scrub (FFG no. 460) Gippsland Plain Gippsland Plain = Depleted = Endangered (See Action statement no.141) Otway Plain = Endangered Rocky Chenopod 64 - Rocky Chenopod Victorian Volcanic Plain Victorian Volcanic Plain FFG listed Open Scrub Woodland = Vulnerable = Endangered community (FFG no. 167) Central Victorian Uplands Central Victorian Uplands = Vulnerable = Endangered

Cool Temperate 31 - Cool Temperate Highlands Southern Fall Highlands Southern Fall FFG listed Rainforest Rainforest = Vulnerable = Endangered community (FFG no. 207) Highlands Northern Fall Highlands Northern Fall = Vulnerable = Endangered Victorian Alps = Rare Victorian Alps = Endangered

Sedge-rich 937-Swampy Woodland Highlands Southern Fall Highlands Southern Fall FFG listed Eucalyptus = Vulnerable = Endangered community camphora Swamp (FFG no. 339) or Victorian Volcanic Plain = Extinct Gippsland Plain = Endangered Strezlecki Ranges = Endangered

83-Swampy Riparian Highlands Southern Fall Highlands Southern Fall Woodland = Depleted = Endangered Victorian Volcanic Plain = Endangered Gippsland Plain = Endangered

Central Victorian Uplands = Endangered

Strzelecki Ranges = Endangered

49 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 3. Appendices

3.3 Assessing the conservation signiﬁ cance of native vegetation

The criteria outlined in Table 3.3 are used to determine the Conservation Signiﬁ cance of any patch of native vegetation.

Table 3.3: Determining Conservation Signiﬁ cance of native vegetation in the Port Phillip and Western Port region

Conservation Biodiversity Attributes

Signiﬁ cance Vegetation Types OR OR Conservation Habitat Species Other Attributes Status Score

VERY HIGH Endangered 0.4 – 1 • best 50% • Sites identifi ed as being of national signifi cance of habitat for as a relict, endemic, edge of range or other non- Vulnerable 0.5 – 1 each threatened species values (Ecological Integrity, Scientifi c and species in Education Values) as identifi ed in biosites8 Rare 0.6 - 1 a Victorian • Sites with unique National Estate values bioregion • Ramsar sites • East Asian- Australasian Shorebird Site Network Sites • Other wetlands of international signifi cance for migratory waterbirds • Critical habitat or listed communities or species under the FFG Act • Areas identifi ed as providing refuges (eg. during drought) for threatened species

HIGH Endangered < 0.4 • the remaining • Sites identifi ed as being of state signifi cance 50% of habitat for relictual, endemic, edge of range or other Vulnerable 0.3 - 0.5 for threatened non-species values or according to the criteria species in (ecological integrity, species richness and Rare 0.3 - 0.6 a Victorian diversity, rarity and conservation status, bioregion scientifi c and education values) used to Depleted 0.6 - 1 determine signifi cance in biosites 8. • best 50% • Sites with rare National Estate values of habitat for rare species • Wetlands listed in ‘A Directory of Important in a Victorian wetlands in Australia ‘. bioregion • Wetlands of national signifi cance for migratory (includes state waterbirds signifi cance for species • Areas identifi ed as providing refuges (eg. during attributes in drought) for rare species Biosites8) • Priority areas for the re-establishment of habitat for a threatened community or species (eg. as determined in a Biodiversity Action Plan, species Recovery Plan or Action Statements).

8Biosites refers to the Statewide database of site of Biological Signiﬁ cance and DSE map layer and the Sites of Biodiversity Signiﬁ cance in the Port Phillip and Western Port Region – Victoria 2002 report.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 50 3. Appendices

Table 3.3: Determining Conservation Signiﬁ cance of native vegetation in the Port Phillip and Western Port region continued

Conservation Biodiversity Attributes

Signiﬁ cance Vegetation Types OR OR Conservation Habitat Species Other Attributes Status Score

MEDIUM Vulnerable < 0.3 • the remaining • Sites identifi ed as being of regional signifi cance 50% of habitat for edge of range or other non-species values Rare < 0.3 for rare species or according to the criteria (Ecological Integrity, in a Victorian Species Richness and Diversity, Rarity and Depleted 0.3 - 0.6 bioregion Conservation Status, Scientifi c and Education Values) used to determine signifi cance in Least Concern 0.6 - 1 • best 50% biosites8 of habitat for • Sites with uncommon National Estate values regionally signifi cant • wetlands of Bioregional signifi cance (based species (includes on application of National Land and Water Regional Resources Audit criteria) signifi cance • Areas identifi ed as part of the regional open for species space network in ‘Linking People and Spaces: attributes in A Strategy for Melbourne’s’ Open Space Biosites8) Network‘ (PV 2002) and in policy 5.7 and coastal protection zones as identifi ed in policy 5.9 within ‘Melbourne 2030’ (2002).

LOW Depleted < 0.3 Least Concern < 0.6

51 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 3. Appendices

3.4 Responses and offset 3.4.1 The policy response to requirements for clearing clearing applications remnant vegetation, As noted in the introduction, the Statewide Native scattered trees and Vegetation Framework describes a Hierarchy of Action. timber harvesting The hierarchy requires land developers and planning authorities to: INTRODUCTION This appendix sets out the permit requirements that will 1. Avoid clearing, with a particular focus on protecting be applied when applications to clear native vegetation the most signifi cant native vegetation. are approved by planning authorities in the Port Phillip 2. Minimise clearing and impacts through appropriate and Western Port region. The requirements impose consideration in planning processes and expert input a system of clearing offsets that ensure that native to project design or management vegetation losses at a cleared site are compensated for by protecting and planting vegetation on other 3. Identify and mitigate clearing with appropriate offsets sites. The offset requirements vary according to the in order to achieve a Net Gain in native vegetation conservation signifi cance, age, size and growth rates of across the region. the vegetation or scattered trees or to be cleared. The Hierarchy of Action must be followed in all permit applications where clearing of native vegetation is In all circumstances, the aim of the permit system is proposed. Only after the fi rst two steps have been taken to achieve net gain in the extent and quality of the will offsets be considered. Details with regard to the region’s native vegetation cover. This appendix must process can be obtained in Victoria’s Native Vegetation be considered in the context of the statewide goal of Management: A Framework for Action and associated net gain. While a system of approvals and offsets for practical advice provided in Victorian Planning Provision clearing has been established, it will only be available (VPP) Practice Notes available on the DSE website. and applied as the last of three steps in the Statewide Native Vegetation Framework’s Hierarchy of Action. In order to ensure that the net gain policy is achieved, a clear link must be established between losses at the This appendix is in six parts: clearing site and gains at the offset site. Calculation of • describes the overall policy response to clearing the amount of gain associated with the offset actions applications will be based on an estimate of the improvements that will be realised within 10 years of the actions being • describes the requirements for offsetting the loss initiated. Specifi c responses to a proposal can only be of remnant but relatively intact areas of native fully determined after comprehensive and expert site vegetation assessment. The status of this plan is described further • describes the requirements for offsetting the loss of in section 3.1. scattered, individual trees of various ages, sizes and growth rates Table 3.4A shows the policy responses to applications to clear vegetation in each of the four categories of • describes the requirements for offsetting the loss of conservation signifi cance. The table is an extract from scattered trees smaller than medium old trees and Appendix 4, Table 6 (page 54) of Victoria’s Native slow-growing tree species Vegetation Management: A Framework for Action. • describes the requirements for offsetting grass trees It is important to note that some native vegetation types and tree ferns, and are now so depleted in the Port Phillip and Western Port region, and across the state, that permits to clear it will • describes the requirements for offsetting harvesting be refused under nearly all circumstances. of timber from naturally established native forest on private land.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 52 3. Appendices

Table 3.4A Response to proposal to clear indigenous native vegetation9

CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE

Very High High Medium Low

Clearing not permitted unless Clearing generally not Clearing generally not Clearing may be impacts are an unavoidable part of permitted. permitted. permitted but only as a development project with approval part of an appropriate of the Minister for Conservation sustainable use and Environment based on response as considerations of statewide determined by the environmental, social and responsible planning economic values. authority.

3.4.2 Offset requirements for Table 3.4B summarises the outcomes that must be achieved if clearing affecting a remnant patch is to be clearing patches of native permitted. To qualify as a net gain result, each type vegetation of outcome must be achieved by an offset proposal. Offset requirements become more demanding as This part of Appendix 3.4 describes the formula that the conservation signiﬁ cance of the vegetation to be must be used to determine the offset requirements for removed increases. clearing approvals that affect remnant patches of native vegetation. ‘Patches’ are deﬁ ned in DSE’s Guide for assessment of referred planning permit applications available from www.dse.vic.gov.au

9The tables in this appendix are `derived from Table 6 [page 54] of ‘Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management - a Framework for Action’, Summary of responses and offset criteria graded according to conservation signiﬁ cance.

53 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 3. Appendices

Table 3.4B: Offset requirements for clearing patches of native vegetation

CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE OUTCOME SOUGHT Very HighHigh Medium Low

Net Gain in extent Substantial net gain Net gain Equivalent gain Equivalent gain and quality of the ie. at least 2 X the ie. at least 1.5 X the ie. at least 1 X the ie. at least 1 X the region’s native calculated loss in calculated loss in calculated loss in calculated loss in vegetation cover. habitat hectares10 habitat hectares habitat hectares11 habitat hectares

Formal agreement For all vegetation losses, the requirements to achieve offsets must be identiﬁ ed in the to achieve and management agreements and/or the permit conditions for the clearing and development. secure offset. Gains must be on-going and secure. The offset vegetation must be maintained and planning authorities must maintain records of offset arrangements on DSEs Native Vegetation Permit Tracking system.

Type of vegetation The same vegetation The same vegetation/ The same vegetation/ Any EVC in the or habitat to be and habitat type as habitat type as habitat type as Bioregion or a created by the that destroyed by that destroyed by that destroyed by Very High or High offset. clearing. clearing or a Very clearing or a Very conservation High conservation High conservation signifi cance signifi cance signifi cance vegetation/habitat vegetation/habitat in vegetation/habitat in in an adjacent the same Bioregion. the same Bioregion. Bioregion.

Ecological and Similar or more Similar or more Similar or more Similar or more landscape function effective ecological effective ecological effective ecological effective land of the vegetation function and land function or land function or land protection function as to be created by protection function protection function as protection function as impacted by the loss. the offset. as impacted by the impacted by the loss. impacted by the loss. loss.

The quality The existing The vegetation The vegetation The vegetation objectives for the vegetation proposed proposed as the basis proposed as the basis proposed as the basis vegetation to be as the basis of an of an offset must be of an offset must be of an offset must be created by the offset must be at at least 75% of the at least 50% of the at least 50% of the offset. least 90% of the quality in the area quality in the area quality in the area quality in the area being lost. being lost. being lost. being lost.

The proportion The proportion of The proportion of The proportion of of revegetation revegetation included revegetation included revegetation included included in the offset in the offset (in in the offset (in in the offset (in (in habitat hectares) habitat hectares) is habitat hectares) is habitat hectares) is is limited to 10%. limited to 25%. limited to 50%. limited to 100%.

10Gains can include active improvements of quality and/or avoiding potential losses of quality by agreement to forego permitted uses. Note that applying all of the following offset criteria (where relevant) may require more than the minimum habitat hectares specifi ed by these multipliers. 11Where gains are achieved in vegetation/habitat of a higher signifi cance than the vegetation lost, then the amount of the offset will be proportionally reduced (eg. offsetting losses in medium conservation signifi cance with very high conservation signifi cance gains will reduce the amount of the offsets required by half, ie. the medium multiplier divided by the very high multiplier)

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 54 3. Appendices

Table 3.4B: Offset requirements for clearing patches of native vegetation continued

CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE OUTCOME SOUGHT Very HighHigh Medium Low

Offsets for large For each large For each large or For each large No speciﬁ c offset old trees12 lost or very large old very large old tree or very large old required for the loss from patches tree removed as removed as part of tree removed as of old trees. of remnant part of permitted permitted clearing, part of permitted vegetation clearing13, 8 other 4 other large old trees clearing, 2 other affected by large old trees are are to be permanently large old trees are clearing. to be permanently protected and 20 to be permanently protected14 and 40 new trees are to be protected and 10 new trees are to be recruited. new trees are to be recruited15. recruited.

Location of the Gains must be within Gains must be within Gains must be within Gains must be within offset vegetation. the same bioregion, the same bioregion the same bioregion the same bioregion and within the same as the loss. as the loss or an as the loss or an priority landscape adjacent bioregion adjacent bioregion zone16 as the loss. if offsets are based if offsets are based on Very High or on Very High or High signiﬁ cance High signiﬁ cance vegetation. vegetation.

Timing of the Offsets to be initiated Offsets to be initiated Offsets to be initiated Offsets to be initiated offset. prior to the loss. as soon as possible as soon as possible as soon as possible but no more than but no more than but no more than 1 year after the loss 1 year after the loss 1 year after the loss occurs (seasonal occurs (seasonal occurs (seasonal requirements to be requirements to be requirements to be considered). considered). considered).

12Old trees, large or medium, are defi ned as individuals of key long-lived dominant tree species (as specifi ed in the relevant EVC benchmark) that are greater than certain diameters (for large or medium) at 1.3 m above ground level. 13These offsets are only required as a consequence of native vegetation clearing which requires and receives a planning permit, and not where tree removal is exempt from the requirement to have such a permit. 14Trees are protected if their security can be permanently increased by on-title conservation agreements, reservation of the land or other control that restricts the likelihood of future clearing. Protection of trees on land where they are already secure such as in existing reserves or where an effective measure to raise their security cannot be implemented will not constitute compliance with offset requirements. 15On a case-by-case basis, at the discretion of the planning authority, the requirement to recruit new trees may be either through plantings to a prescribed standard (eg. species composition, density, survivorship) and/or through regeneration associated with protection of other old trees. Recruitment should also meet the timing criteria below. Any plantings that have been undertaken by the landholder since 1989 and that meet all the relevant offset criteria can be used to meet this requirement. 16Identifi ed in local landscape-scale biodiversity action plans.

55 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 3. Appendices

3.4.3 Offset requirements for Where protection and recruitment is not required by Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management clearing old and Framework and there is no practical way to achieve scattered trees protection, a recruitment only offset may be applied. Recruitment only also applies where the scattered trees This appendix describes the formula that must be being cleared are smaller than medium old trees. Table used to determine the offset requirements for clearing 3.4C provides recruitment numbers for the region in the scattered trees of various ages, sizes and growth rates. recruitment only offset section. The replacement requirements for Tree Ferns and Grass Trees are also described. Recruitment may be achieved by promoting natural regeneration from other trees or adjacent remnant Section 1.3 of the Native Vegetation Plan discusses vegetation, through revegetation, using seedlings the values of scattered tree in the Port Phillip and or direct seeding or through a combination of these Western Port region. methods. At least 15 per cent of the plants to be established must be indigenous canopy trees, consistent The assessment of clearing applications for old and with the species and provenance of those being scattered trees, under Clauses 15.09 and 52.17 of removed. The remainder can be indigenous understorey planning schemes, should be based on the trees’ species. Revegetation must be guided by prescribed ecological values. While an assessment of the structural standards for species composition, planting density, soundness or the life expectancy of a tree may be survivorship, the spacing of species and planting relevant where risk to life or property is in question, it methods. is not a basis for assessing ecological value. Therefore assessments should be conducted by an experienced The objective of recruitment should be the best ecologist rather than individuals with arborist skills ecological outcome not aesthetic or amenity aims. alone. Scattered or isolated old trees, even in declining The recruitment plan should aim to re establish the health, with hollows, broken limbs and ﬁ ssures, usually full strata of species found in the original vegetation contribute more to habitat values, than younger trees type, relevant EVC or Floristic Community description. that are structurally sound. Planting that has been undertaken by the landholder since 1989 and that meets the relevant offset criteria Protection and recruitment may be used to contribute to these requirements. Where the destruction of old trees cannot be avoided, Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management: A Framework for Action provides for the replacement of those trees through the establishment and care of new trees and/or the permanent protection of existing trees. Whatever the situation, the priority option in this region wherever scattered old trees are to be removed, is to permanently protect other old trees of the same or higher conservation signiﬁ cance and then to establish the number of new trees to achieve the required offset formula.

As noted in 3.4.2 above, trees are protected if their security can be permanently increased by on-title conservation agreements, reservation of the land or other control that restricts the likelihood of future clearing. Protection of trees on land where they are already secure such as in existing reserves or where an effective measure to raise their security cannot be implemented will not constitute compliance with offset requirements.

Table 3.4C speciﬁ es the number of old trees to be protected and the number of new trees to be recruited to achieve protection and recruitment.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 56 3. Appendices

Table 3.4C: Offset Requirements for the loss of scattered trees of various ages and sizes

BIOREGIONAL CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE Very High High Medium Low ‘Protect and Very large old trees18 Protect 10 very Protect 5 very Protect 4 very Protect 2 very recruit’ offset (At least 1.5 times trunk large old trees large old trees large old trees large old trees requirements17 diameter of a large old tree and recruit 50 and recruit 30 and recruit 20 and recruit 10 as deﬁ ned by the relevant for scattered EVC benchmark) new plants new plants. new plants. new plants. old trees Large old trees (> 1.0 to Protect 8 large Protect 4 large Protect 2 large Protect 1 large <1.5 times trunk diameter of old trees and old trees and old trees and old tree and a large old tree as deﬁ ned by recruit 40 new recruit 20 new recruit 15 new recruit 10 new the relevant EVC benchmark) plants plants. plants. plants.

Medium old trees Protect 4 Protect 2 Protect 1 Protect 1 (> 0.75 to <1.0 x trunk medium3 old medium3 old medium3 old medium3 old diameter of a large old tree trees and trees and tree and recruit tree and recruit as deﬁ ned by the relevant recruit 20 new recruit 20 15 new plants. 10 new plants. EVC benchmark) plants. new plants.

‘Recruitment- Very large old trees1 Recruit 350 Recruit 180 Recruit 140 Recruit 70 only’ offset (At least 1.5 times trunk new plants. new plants. new plants. new plants. requirements diameter of a large old tree as deﬁ ned by the relevant for scattered EVC benchmark) old trees

Large old trees (> 1.0 to Recruit 240 Recruit 120 Recruit 65 Recruit 35 <1.5 times trunk diameter of new plants. new plants. new plants. new plants. a large old tree as deﬁ ned by relevant EVC benchmark)

Medium old trees3 Recruit 100 Recruit 60 Recruit 35 Recruit 30 (> 0.75 to <1.0 x trunk new plants. new plants. new plants. new plants. diameter of a large old tree as deﬁ ned by relevant EVC benchmark)

Smaller trees (<0.75 x See Figure 7 See Figure 7 See Figure See Figure 7 trunk diameter of a large and Table 3.4D and Table 3.4D 7and Table and Table 3.4D old tree as deﬁ ned by below below 3.4D below below relevant EVC benchmark)

Type of vegetation or habitat to be Trees must Trees must Trees can Trees can created by the offset belong to belong to belong to belong to the same the same any EVC in any EVC in vegetation/ vegetation/ the bioregion the bioregion habitat type habitat type OR to a very OR to a Very (EVC) as those (EVC) as those high or high High or High being cleared cleared OR to signifi cance signifi cance a very high vegetation/ vegetation/ signifi cance habitat in habitat in vegetation/ an adjacent an adjacent habitat in the bioregion2 bioregion2 same bioregion

17Where gains are achieved in vegetation/habitat of a higher signifi cance than the vegetation lost, then the amount of the offset will be proportionally reduced (eg. offsetting losses in medium conservation signifi cance with very high conservation signifi cance gains will reduce the amount of the offsets required by half, i.e. the medium multiplier divided by the very high multiplier) 18Old trees, very large, large or medium, are defi ned as individuals of key long-lived canopy tree species (as specifi ed in the relevant EVC benchmark) that are greater than certain trunk diameters at 1.3 m above ground level

57 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 3. Appendices

Table 3.4C: Offset Requirements for the loss of scattered trees of various ages and sizes continued

BIOREGIONAL CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE Very High High Medium Low Ecological and landscape and function Similar or Similar or Similar or more Similar or more of the vegetation to be created by the more effective more effective effective land effective land offset. ecological ecological protection protection function and function and function as function as land protection land protection impacted by impacted by function as function as the loss the loss impacted by impacted by the loss the loss

Location of the offset vegetation. Gains must Gains must Gains must Gains must be within be within the be within the be within the the same same bioregion same bioregion same bioregion bioregion, and as the loss. as the loss OR as the loss OR within the an adjacent an adjacent same priority bioregion bioregion landscape if offsets if offsets zone19 as the are in Very are in Very loss where High or High High or High considered signiﬁ cance signiﬁ cance appropriate by vegetation. vegetation. the responsible authority.

Timing of the offset Offsets to be Offsets to Offsets to Offsets to initiated prior be initiated be initiated be initiated to the loss. as soon as as soon as as soon as possible after possible after possible after loss occurs loss occurs loss occurs but no more but no more but not more than 1-year than 1-year than 1-year (seasonal (seasonal (seasonal requirements requirements requirements to to be to be be considered). considered). considered).

19Identiﬁ ed in local landscape-scale Biodiversity Action Plans

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 58 3. Appendices

3.4.4 Replacement ratios for Figure 7 below provides a guide for determining replacement ratios for individual trees smaller than scattered trees smaller than medium old trees with normal and slow growth rates. medium old trees and for slow-growing tree species.

The removal or destruction of trees that are Figure 7: Replacement ratios for individual trees reproductively mature, but smaller in diameter than smaller than medium old trees with normal and the common tree size for that EVC are also subject slow growth rates to specifi c replacement requirements. Specifi c replacement ratios also apply to tree species known to have slow growth rates. Tree species defi ned as having slow growth rates are listed below. Replacement rates required for each tree removed

35 Slow-growing trees • Black She-oak (Allocasuarina littoralis) 30 • Bull-oak (Buloke) (Allocasuarina luehmannii) Slow-growing trees • Coast Banksia (Banksia integrifolia) Average growth-rate 25 • Coastal Moonah (Melaleuca lanceolata)

• Bull Mallee (Eucalyptus behriana) 20 • Red Ironbark (Eucalyptus sideroxylon)

• Snow Gum (Eucalyptus pauciﬂ ora), and 15 • Gippsland Mallee (Eucalyptus kitsoniana).

It should be noted however, that other tree species 10 will also be slow-growing in exposed or coastal environments or on sites with shallow, infertile or stony soils. The benchmark for the EVC in which these 5 trees occur may deﬁ ne a large old tree as having a trunk diameter of less than 50 cm at 130 cm above 0 ground. Council or DSE may require trees growing in 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 such exposed, harsh conditions to be regarded as slow Diameter at breast height (130cm) of tree to be removed growing for the purpose of determining replacement ratios.

59 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 3. Appendices

Where larger numbers of trees must be removed (more than 50), it may be expedient to estimate replacement numbers using average ﬁ gures derived from a representative sample, rather than having to measure each tree. Use of this method must not lead to an underestimation of replacement numbers. First, determine the number of trees (smaller than medium old trees) in each class range. Multiply the number of trees in each category by the multiplier in row 1 of Table 3.4D.

Table 3.4D Replacement numbers using average ﬁ gures derived from a representative samples, where larger numbers of trees must be removed (more than 50)

Replacement number of plants to Diameter of Tree to be Removed ( at 130 cm above ground) be established for each small but reproductively mature tree removed Trees with average Slow growing trees or destroyed growth rates

1 plant per tree removed <15 cm <10 cm

5 plants per tree removed 15-24 cm 10-19 cm

18 plants per tree removed 25-40 cm 20-30 cm

30 plants per tree removed >40 cm >30 cm

3.4.5 Replacement ratios for grass If Grass Trees (Xanthorrhoea australis) greater than 100 cm tall or Tree Ferns (Rough Tree Ferns - Cyathea trees and tree ferns australis, Cyathea cunninghamii and the Soft Tree Fern - Dicksonia antarctica) greater than 200 cm tall Grass Trees (Xanthorrhoea australis and Xanthorrhoea (trunk height) are proposed to be removed, they are minor ssp.lutea) and Tree Ferns (Rough Tree Ferns to be regarded as Large Old Trees (LOTs). The offset - Cyathea australis, Cyathea cunninghamii and the requirements for large old trees (as speciﬁ ed in Table Soft Tree Fern - Dicksonia antarctica) and the genera to 3.4C) should apply. which they belong are Protected Flora and have legal protection under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 60 3. Appendices

3.4.6 Requirements for Harvesting Under all circumstances, only the following EVCs will be considered for timber harvesting in the Port Phillip and Timber from naturally- Western Port region: established Native Forest on Private Land Highlands – Southern Fall Bioregion • Lowland Forest Many areas of native vegetation on private land in the Port Phillip and Western Port region occur as relatively • Heathy Dry Forest small patches isolated from larger contiguous areas of • Grassy Dry Forest forest. These isolated patches are less likely to retain their conservation values after harvesting due to the • Shrubby Foothill Forest reduced likelihood of re-colonisation, particularly across • Herb-rich Foothill Forest agricultural land. • Damp Forest This section describes the requirements for timber • Wet Forest, and harvesting on private land. Where harvesting is permitted, the environmental outcomes sought for • Montane Wet Forest. regeneration and/or offsets are described in Table 3.4E. Victorian Alps Bioregion

General requirements • Damp Forest Timber harvesting on private land in EVCs of High • Wet Forest, and and Very High conservation signifi cance will generally • Montane Wet Forest. not be permitted. Exceptions will be considered if harvesting is simultaneously permitted on public land Strzelecki Ranges Bioregion in the same bioregion and in patches of vegetation of • Wet Forest similar size and equivalent conservation values. Central Victorian Uplands Bioregion Timber harvesting on private land in EVCs of medium • Lowland Forest and low conservation signifi cance may be permitted as • Damp Forest part of a sustainable land use program. • Shrubby Foothill Forest Harvesting must be in accordance with the Planning • Shrubby Dry Forest and Environment Act 1987 and the Code of Forest Practices for Timber Production 1996. The Code is a • Herb-rich Foothill Forest statutory code – part of section 55 of the Conservation • Heathy Dry Forest Forests and Lands Act 1987. • Grassy Dry Forest Forest types and plant species respond differently to • Box Ironbark Forest, and harvesting regimes. Clearfelling may not be appropriate for many species due to their particular regenerative • Montane Damp Forest. requirements. All harvesting applications must include a Timber Harvesting Plan. This should consist of a map Clearfelling will only be permissible where: identifying the area(s) to be harvested and a statement • the coupe to be harvested is no more than 30 per of conditions applying to the operation including the cent of the patch number, size and distribution of seed/habitat trees to be retained. The plan may apply to a single coupe or • the patch is at least 10 hectares in extent to an area in which a number of coupes are harvested. • the patch is less than two kilometres from the (Code of Forest Practices for Timber Production. nearest patch of greater than 10 hectares of the November 1996, Department of Natural Resources and same EVC (in private or public ownership). Environment.) It is strongly advised that professional guidance be sought on an appropriate harvesting method regime A risk management approach should be included in prior to lodging a permit application. any Timber Harvesting Plan that identifi es all possible risks involved in not achieving the target habitat score as well as identifying contingency measures to deal

61 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 3. Appendices

with these risks and the consequent need for additional • in EVCs classifi ed as Depleted or Least Concern precautions. where the current extent in that bioregion is less than 100 hectares. Exclusions Regeneration and/or offset requirements Harvesting will not be permitted: Regeneration and/or offset requirements for timber • in the parts of the Victorian Volcanic Plain, Otway harvesting in the Port Phillip and Western Port region Plain and Highlands – Northern Fall Bioregions in are provided in Table 3.4E. the Port Phillip and Western Port region • in EVCs classifi ed as Endangered, or in EVCs classifi ed as Vulnerable or Rare where quality is greater than 0.3 (habitat score), and

Table 3.4E: Regeneration and/or offset requirements for timber harvesting in the Port Phillip and Western Port region.

OUTCOME SOUGHT REGENERATION AND/OR OFFSET REQUIREMENTS

Vegetation or Same as harvested. habitat type

Landscape role Same as harvested.

Quality For selective harvesting Harvesting must not result in an immediate, post harvest reduction in site quality (habitat score) of more than 20% of the pre-harvest score for wet forests and of no more than 10% for dry forests. Regeneration must be managed so that it has the best opportunity to reach the pre-harvest quality less 0.05 (large tree component) within 10 years. The planning authority must refer all such proposals to DSE regional Flora and Fauna and Forest Management personnel. For clearfell harvest and regeneration Regeneration must be managed so that it has the best opportunity to reach a target of 50% of the quality of the vegetation that was harvested within 10 years, and ultimately the same quality (minus large tree component) as required by permit condition. Where large old trees are included in the harvest area, mitigation will be determined on a case- by-case basis ensuring sufﬁ cient seed and habitat trees for regeneration of the forest values. Where private land forest is not substantially contiguous with the public forest estate (eg. more than 1 kilometre from contiguous forest of more than 500 hectares in extent) greater retention of large old trees will be required. This must be determined on a case-by-case basis and speciﬁ ed in the Timber Harvesting Plan. The plan must include actions to: • assist the re-colonisation of forest-dependent fauna, and • ensure the on-site survival of existing plant species (ie. harvesting must not result in any overall loss of plant species to the coupe area).

Vicinity of offsets Same as harvested.

Timing Regeneration is to be initiated as soon as possible- preferably in the same season and before winter and no more than one year after harvesting (seasonal requirements are to be considered by planning authority).

Security Planning permit conditions to apply until the regeneration achieves the equivalent quality of the vegetation that was harvested (excluding the large old tree component). Planning permit conditions are to be recorded on DSE’s Native Vegetation Permit Tracking System for compliance purposes.

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 62 3. Appendices

3.5 Data, bioregional conservation status and targets for protection and revegetation of EVCs

This appendix includes tables of data, status and targets for each EVC in each bioregion.

The data is shown in maps and target tables for each bioregion contained in the CD attached to this plan. These show:

• EVC types (current extent and pre-1750 extent) • Bioregional conservation status, and • Target tables for each bioregion. The attached CD provides detailed mapping by bioregion. Two maps for each bioregion are provided, one illustrating the conservation status of vegetation in the bioregion and the second providing detail on EVCs mapped in the bioregion. They are pdf ﬁ les, and can be zoomed in but beware of the limitations in accuracy.

Sample of mapping by Bioregion

63 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 3. Appendices

Data table users guide Column AB The following rules have been applied in creating =IF(H9>=(G9*0.05),IF(H9>1.5,H9,1.5),IF(G9*0.05>1.5 the tables of EVC data for each bioregion, and have ,G9*0.05,1.5)) been provided for users of the tables to illustrate Is F greater than or equal to 5% of column E? assumptions made with generating the data. Yes, then is F greater than 1.5 Column X Yes, then AB equals F Is column F less than or equal to 10? No, then AB equals 1.5 Yes, then is column Q less than 1.5? No, then is 5% of column E greater than 1.5 Yes, then column X equals 1.5 Yes, then AB equals 5% of E No, then column X equals column Q No, then AB equals 1.5 No, then is column D equal to Endangered (E) Column AE Yes, then is column Q less than 15% of column F =IF(H9>=(G9*0.1),IF((H9>1.5),H9,1.5),IF((G9*0.1>1.5 Yes, then column X equals 15% of column F ),G9*0.1,1.5)) No, then column X equals column Q Is F greater than or equal to 10% of column E? No, then is either columns N or U less than 5% Yes, then is greater than 1.5 Yes, then is column Q less than 15% of column F Yes, then AE equals F Yes, then column X equals 15% of column F No, then AE equals 1.5 No, then column X equals column Q No, is 10% of E greater than 1.5 No, then column X equals column Q. Yes, then AE equals 10% of E Column Z No, then AE equals 1.5 =IF(S9>(H9*0.15),S9,IF(H9*0.15<1.5,1.5,H9*0.15)) Is Q greater than 15% of column F? Yes, then Z equals Q No, then is 15% of column F less than 1.5? Yes, then Q equals 1.5 No, then Q equals 15% of F

Portion of Sample target table

Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan 64 3. Appendices

Data limitations The map boundaries are based on the standard 1:100,000 map series. The maps in this plan are provided as a guide to the extent and type of native vegetation (EVCs) in the Port Where 1:25,000 data does not exist, 1:100,000 data Phillip and Western Port region. may have been used instead. This data is indicative only, and boundaries should not to be used for detailed It should be noted there will be some inconsistencies analysis or work where accuracy of boundaries is between the EVC mapping and the bioregional important. conservation status indicated.

Source and accuracy: The base and background data used to provide the maps (including those in the CD provided) is from the DSE Corporate Geospatial Data Library. The biodiversity datasets are often amended or added to with new data. For this reason updated maps should be produced from time to time to ensure currency of the data.

The mapping is at a scale where small areas of vegetation may not appear. These areas are inherently likely to be rare or severely depleted vegetation types, which would have a priority bioregional conservation status.

3.6 Bibliography

Craigie V, and Ross J. (1995), Grassy Ecosystem Goulding, M (1988), Aboriginal occupation of the Implementation Schedule (unpublished report), Grassy Melbourne Area, District 2. A report to the Land Ecosystem Reference Group. Conservation Council, Unpublished.

Department of Natural Resources and Environment Land Conservation Council (1999), Melbourne (2002), Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management: A Area District 2 Review – Final Recommendations. Framework for Action, Government of Victoria. Government of Victoria.

Department of Natural Resources and Environment Parks Victoria (2002), Linking People and Spaces, (2002), Biosites: Sites of Biodiversity Signifi cance A Strategy for Melbourne’s open space network, in Port Phillip and Western Port region Victoria, Governmen t of Victoria. Government of Victoria. Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment Management du Cros, H (1988), An archaeological survey of the Authority (2005), Port Phillip and Western Port Upper Yarra Valley and Dandenong Ranges. A Regional Catchment Strategy 2004-2009, Government report to the Victorian Archaeological Survey, of Victoria. Anvtech Pty Ltd. Walpole, S (1999), Pasture Production on the Gibbons, P & Boak, M (2000), The Importance Liverpool Plains. Pacifi c Conservation Biology. of Paddock Trees for Regional Conservation in Agricultural Landscapes. Discussion paper for Walpole, SC (1998), Catchment Benefi ts of Remnant consideration by the Riverina Highlands Vegetation Native Vegetation Conservation. Charles Sturt Committee, NSW National Parkes & Wildlife Service University, Johnston Centre, Albury. Southern Directorate. Zola, N & Gott, B (1992), Koorie Plants Koorie People, Gibbons, P & Boak, M (2002), The value of paddock Traditional Aboriginal Food, Fibre and Healing Plants trees for regional conservation in an agricultural of Victoria, Koorie Heritage Trust. landscape. Ecological Management & Restoration, 3, p205-210.

65 Port Phillip and Western Port - Native Vegetation Plan PORT PHILLIP AND WESTERNPORT CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY PO Box 48 Frankston Vic 3199 Phone: (03) 9785 0183 Fax: 9773 6521 Website: www.ppwcma.vic.gov.au