Drivers of land use change

Driver Research Phase Background Report No. 9

Land use policy

Department of Sustainability and Environment Department of Primary Industries Author John Ford

For more information about this publication contact John Ford, Social Research Officer, Department of Primary Industries, Office and Institute of Sustainable Irrigated Agriculture, Tatura, Victoria 3616. Phone: (03) 5833 5222 Email: [email protected]

Acknowledgements The author would like to thank regional agency staff and organisations for their assistance in the development of this report, in particular the Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority and Strathbogie Shire Council.

The Drivers of Land Use Change (DLUC) project is funded under the Ecologically Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (a joint initiative of the Department of Primary Industries and the Department of Sustainability and Environment).

© The State of Victoria, Department of Sustainability and Environment, September 2004

This publication is copyright. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced, copied, transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical or graphic) without the prior written permission of the State of Victoria, Department of Primary Industries. All requests and enquiries should be directed to the Nominated Officer, Copyright, 5/250 Victoria Parade, East Melbourne, Victoria, 3002.

ISBN 1 74152 100 9

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 flaw 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.

www.dse.vic.gov.au ESAI project 05116 Ecologically Sustainable Agriculture Initiative Drivers of land use change

Driver Research Phase Background Report 9

Land use policy

John Ford Department of Sustainability and Environment

September 2004 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

Contents

Summary ...... i

1. Introduction...... 1

2. Background...... 2 2.1 Study area...... 2 2.2. Objectives ...... 3 2.3. Scope of Study...... 3

3. Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority ...... 4 3.1. Role in the Honeysuckle Creek study area ...... 4 3.2. Current implementation of the Regional Catchment Strategy...... 5 3.3. Future implementation of the Regional Catchment Strategy ...... 7 3.4. Tension between community ownership and Government direction ...... 8 3.5. Interaction between Local Governments and the Goulburn Broken CMA...... 8 3.6. Key findings...... 9

4. Strathbogie Shire Council ...... 10 4.1. The wider context ...... 10 4.2. Purpose and function...... 11 4.3. Planning...... 12 4.4. Incorporating native biodiversity into the Municipal Strategic Statement review ...15 4.5. Roadside Management Policy ...... 16 4.6. Land Management Policy ...... 18 4.7. Future pressures ...... 19 4.8. Native Vegetation Retention Controls ...... 20 4.9. Discussion ...... 22 4.10. Key findings...... 24

5. Conclusions ...... 25

6. References ...... 27 Appendix 1 Honeysuckle Creek Study Area...... 29 Appendix 2 Strathbogie Shire Council planning permits by type...... 30 Appendix 3 Percentage area of each municipality covered by rural zones...... 31 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

Tables Table 1 Summary of goals and visions in the Goulburn Broken CMA Regional Catchment Strategy ...... 4 Table 2 Relationship between Goulburn Broken CMA and stakeholders...... 6 Table 3 Threatening processes and their corresponding land uses ...... 13 Table 4 Permit requirements described in zones and overlays for the rural areas of the study area, as they relate to activities that most threaten native biodiversity ..13 Table 5 Permit requirements for three common land use changes for each of the proposed environmental overlays...... 16 Table 6 Status of Roadside Management Plans in north-east Victoria ...... 17 Table 7 List of Community Land Management Goals for the Shire of Strathbogie...... 18

Figures Figure 1 The conceptual approach and the driver sub-projects ...... 2 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

Summary

This study has focused on the land use policies of the Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority (Goulburn Broken CMA) and the Strathbogie Shire. The land use policies of each organisation are changing over time, and it is likely that they will be even more different in another 10 years. The Goulburn Broken CMA plays an important role as a conduit for funds for on-ground works for both land and water management, but also as co-ordinator given its responsibility for the Regional Catchment Strategy (RCS). Community engagement in both planning and works is continues to be a major focus of the Goulburn Broken CMA. Biodiversity concerns are integrated across all aspects of the RCS, while it also has sections that deal with specific biodiversity issues. The Goulburn Broken CMA has several programs that relate to biodiversity, and significant gains are being made through their implementation. It is however unlikely that long term biodiversity goals, as set out in the RCS, will be achieved given current resource levels; as the Background Report No. 1 in this series makes clear, much work is still needed to address the processes that pose problems in the Honeysuckle Creek catchment. Processes established at state government level for addressing state and national priorities in natural resource management are important drivers of change for the Goulburn Broken CMA. The interests of local businesses and communities are also important drivers, as is the economic development agenda of all levels of government. The Goulburn Broken CMA has to reconcile these different drivers. It does so in part by having community engagement as an integral part of its processes. Important drivers of change for the Goulburn Broken CMA are:

• state government processes that address state and national priorities in natural resource management • the interests of local businesses and communities • the economic development agenda of all levels of government.

The Goulburn Broken CMA has to reconcile these different drivers. It does so in part by having community engagement as an integral part of its processes. The situation in local government is somewhat different. Local government has a long history in Victoria, however council amalgamations in the 1990s meant that the geographic scope and ratepayer base of each council was significantly enlarged. Traditional powers of local government over planning have been extended to incorporate environmental requirements set at state and regional levels. Biodiversity concerns arise on a daily basis at council when permits are sought for a change of land use or to remove native vegetation. However, councils are often ill-equipped and under-resourced to deal adequately with these requirements. Councils are driven by pressures that require them to focus on the ‘main game’ as perceived by dominant interests amongst ratepayers. In the absence of more funds from higher levels of government, devoting more resources to environmental issues clearly means higher rates or less money for other areas of activity. Nevertheless some councils do take positive initiatives, for instance rate rebates for positive environmental works. The links between the Goulburn Broken CMA and local government are growing. How this will play out is unclear, but it seems likely that local government will increasingly take account of regional priorities for natural resource management in its decision making. Taking the Goulburn Broken CMA and the shire together, there are large gaps in the regulatory powers of government. Much land use change occurs outside the scope of all levels of government. Education, incentives and market-based instruments only partly fill the gap.

i DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

1. Introduction

This report is one of several produced for the Drivers of Land Use Change (DLUC) project which is funded under the Ecologically Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (a joint initiative of the Department of Primary Industries (DPI) and the Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE)). The aim of the DLUC project is to develop an understanding of the drivers of land use change in agriculture that now affect native biodiversity, or are likely to, and to use that understanding to identify and implement improved ways of maintaining biodiversity. This project is thus a strategic one: it provides information to assist in developing policy that will maintain and enhance native biodiversity in the rural landscapes of Victoria, as well as achieve other policy goals related to agriculture. Phase 1 of the DLUC involves the preparation of the following background reports. Each one is the result of a small task that has been undertaken to provide the foundation for the policy phase of the project (i.e. Phase 2): Special purpose reports

1. Land use impacts on native biodiversity 2. Land Use Impact Modelling (LUIM) for native biodiversity risk 3. Methods

‘Core’ driver research

4. Understanding drivers of land use change associated with lifestyle farms 5. Personal drivers – interviews 6. Factors influencing agriculture, agribusiness, landscapes and regions 7. Mega-drivers of land use change—cropping 8. Mega-drivers of land use change—plantations 9. Land use policy

It is expected that a focus on drivers will result in new approaches for achieving native biodiversity outcomes in agricultural environments being identified, as well as ideas on modifying existing approaches. Policy currently focuses by and large on managing the sites where native biodiversity assets are found, with some exceptions such as Environmental Management Systems (EMS) and education in whole farm planning. The conceptual approach to understanding the drivers of land use change and their relationship to native biodiversity maintenance is shown in Figure 1. The figure also shows the sub-projects that are being undertaken as part of Phase 1 of the DLUC project; there will be a separate report for each of these sub-projects and the approach to each is summarised in a Methods report (Farmar-Bowers et al 2004).

1 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

2. Background

This report investigates the drivers behind the implementation of land use policy at a local level in the Honeysuckle Creek Catchment of North East Victoria. It acknowledges that land use is not always determined by the will of the landowner, and that there often are external policies and regulations established by governments about what can or cannot be done on land. Understanding the intentions and objectives of the organisations that influence land use will help in the subsequent stages of the DLUC project. While the focus of the DLUC project is native biodiversity maintenance and land use change, land use policy is established for many different and valid reasons and may have little to do with maintaining native biodiversity values. This report seeks to understand the impact that land use policies may have on native biodiversity in the context of a small case study area. This understanding will help policy makers to assess local scale implications of any change in land use policy. State and federal governments aim to influence land use through implementation of policy. A detailed study of each policy and organisation is well beyond the resources of this report.

Agribusiness research - cropping - grazing - plantations This report Land use policy research contributes to land use Mega-Drivers policy research Lifestyle property research Personal Drivers

Needs Landholder interviews Decisions

Local Area Modelling Land use & biodiversity impact research The Earth

Figure 1. The conceptual approach and the driver sub-projects

2.1 Study area This report is focussed on a study area located within the dryland areas of the Honeysuckle Creek Catchment (hereafter known as HSC) (see Appendix 1). The following two organisations have some influence over land use change that occurs at a range of scales

• regional CMAs (for this report limited to the Goulburn Broken CMA, refer to section 3) • local government (for this report limited to the Strathbogie Shire Council, refer to section 4).

2 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

For convenience, regulations and other mechanisms used to influence land use change by organisations will be referred to as ‘land use policy’ in this report. Goulburn Broken CMA and Strathbogie Shire Council provide case studies to investigate drivers behind land use policy. By focussing on these two organisations this report may miss unique drivers operating in other CMAs and Local Government Areas (for example the North Central CMA differs significantly in the implementation of its Regional Catchment Strategy [RCS]). Development of native biodiversity policy based on the findings of this reports based on the HSC study area will need to be aware of these differences.

2.2. Objectives The following objectives were identified during the preparation of this report:

• identify and describe the land use policies that relate to the land within the Honeysuckle Creek subcatchment study area • provide information on the intentions and direction of change in interpreting land use policy and in land use policy itself (this is likely to include information on the objectives of the organisations governing the policies) • discuss how these land use policies relate to native biodiversity maintenance in the study area • discuss the ‘drivers’ relevant to individuals and organisations implementing land use policy.

2.3. Scope of Study Research methods used to prepare this report were limited to gathering and studying current literature, and discussions with staff responsible for implementing land use policy. The following restrictions were placed on the study. That the study:

• be restricted to land use policy relevant to the HSC Study area • be restricted to government land use policy • not include agricultural and forestry strategies and projects related to production (like ‘Best Wool’) • include land use policy related to productive infrastructure, e.g. farm dams, water extraction, production infrastructures (e.g. piggeries) and small areas of public land (in respect to native biodiversity conservation and processes such as effluent discharge).

3 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

3. Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority

The objective of this section is to investigate the drivers behind the implementation of policy and legislation by the Goulburn Broken CMA in the HSC study area. This section does not investigate the appropriateness of policy nor does it undertake a detailed description and analysis of the legislation influencing land use change.

3.1. Role in the Honeysuckle Creek study area The Goulburn Broken CMA was the first Catchment Management Authority (CMA) to release a Regional Catchment Strategy (RCS) in 1995. CMAs were required to produce a Regional Catchment Strategy under the Catchment and Land Protection Act (1994) (CALP). The Goulburn Broken CMA has a strong focus on triple bottom line (i.e. the economic, social and environmental implications) outcomes of implementing their Regional Catchment Strategy (see Table 1) Both the goals and vision statements in the 2003 RCS are consistent and provide an indication that the Goulburn Broken CMA has a strong focus on developing the social and economic capacity within the region. Much of this capacity building has been (and continues to be) in the form of developing working relationships with stakeholders. Much of this capacity building has been (and continues to be) in the form of developing working relationships with stakeholders. Table 1 lists these stakeholders and provides a basic outline of the role they play in implementing the RCS. The Goulburn Broken CMA collaborates with stakeholders in both a formal and informal manner, expressed by good working relationships with stakeholders on Goulburn Broken CMA implementation committees, working groups and other forums. This is reciprocated by stakeholders with the inclusion of Goulburn Broken CMA in their own decision-making processes. Examples of this include the collaboration between Strathbogie Shire Council, Goulburn Broken CMA, DSE, Department of Innovation, Industry and Regional Development (DIIRD) and a range of other stakeholders in discussions about the Mangalore Food and Logistics Precinct and with the Shire Council inviting the Goulburn Broken CMA to comment on the review of the Strathbogie Municipal Strategic Statement.

Table 1. Summary of goals and visions in the Goulburn Broken CMA Regional Catchment Strategy (November 2003).

Triple bottom line goals Vision statements

To protect and enhance natural assets and their ‘the environmental footprint of irrigation and dryland ecosystem processes and functions in a way that farming will be significantly reduced with farmers provides benefits for native biodiversity, social and occupying less land and using less water whilst economic aspects. managing their resources more sustainably. New opportunities will rise for increasing the ecosystem services provided by the land retired from agriculture

Environmental and improved environmental flows’. To manage natural assets and their supporting ‘where community values contribute to the benefits infrastructure in a way that is responsive to the of abundant and well maintained resources’. visions and values of communities of interest, is what the community wants to achieve socially, and Social that recognises the opportunities for management presented by existing and evolving social networks. To manage natural assets and the supporting ‘the regions economy will be robust, with much of infrastructure in a way that is responsive to what the agricultural produce processed within the region’. the community wants and can afford to achieve economically and that recognises the opportunities

Economic for the further sustainable development of those assets.

4 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

3.2. Current implementation of the Regional Catchment Strategy The CALP Act provides the Goulburn Broken CMA with the authority to choose between a range of mechanisms to facilitate the implementation of the RCS anywhere on a continuum between passive and regulatory. The Goulburn Broken CMA major regulatory functions generally relate to waterways, as the Goulburn Broken CMA is a section 55 referral authority for all planning permit applications relating to waterways (i.e. it is a compulsory referral authority). Sections of the Water Act (1988) enables the Goulburn Broken CMA to issue permits for works on waterways, while it is also a section 55 referral authority for floodplain issues. The Goulburn Broken CMA has an important function in implementing the Victorian River Health Strategy (Department of Sustainability and Environment 2002)) through partnerships with land managers responsible for the management of streamside and riparian vegetation. The Victorian River Health Strategy proposes that the CMA become responsible for the administration of all streamside frontages. If this occurs it is proposed that the CMAs would be responsible for:

• renewing licenses (at their discretion) • enforcing the fencing-off of waterways (as a license condition).

The CMAs would also be able to insist on the preparation of a management agreement for any non-leased frontage. This is potentially a powerful proposal in terms of managing threats to native biodiversity as it may prevent degradation from grazing and fertiliser on riparian habitats.

5 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

Table 2. Relationship between Goulburn Broken CMA and stakeholders

Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) Department of Primary Industries (DPI) The DSE, through its responsibilities to the Minister DPI provides technical and extension support for under the Water Act and the CALP Act, provides developing and implementing the RCS. These services financial, policy and strategic support for developing and are provided through the Northern Irrigation and North implementing the RCS and its sub-strategies. The East regional offices. Of particular importance is the Department is also responsible for statewide land use research and development input provided by the planning and implementing the Planning and department’s research institutes. Environment Act. Parks Victoria (PV) Landcare Approximately 94 421 ha of the Catchment are managed Landcare groups enable the community to participate by PV as state or National arks. PV’s primary role is to directly in natural resource management, particularly by ensure the conservation values of the parks and reserves identifying and setting direction for on-ground works and network are protected. mobilising community involvement in their local area. Landcare groups and networks will continue to play a major role in implementing the RCS. Aboriginal Groups Local government The Aboriginal community possess knowledge of their The Catchment includes the municipalities of Moira, cultural history and the natural environment that is Campaspe and the City of Greater Shepparton in the SIR valuable in developing and implementing natural and the Benalla Rural City and shires of Mitchell, resource management programs. Over the coming five Mansfield, Murrindindi and Strathbogie in the dryland years the CMA will build on existing arrangements to part of the Catchment. Local governments are central to create an environment that promotes indigenous the Strategy’s implementation through their involvement, ownership and input. responsibilities for land use planning, development approvals, rates and a variety of services such as road construction and maintenance. Universities and TAFEs Goulburn Murray Water (G-MW) Universities and TAFE Colleges operating in the region G-MW provides irrigation, drainage, water supply and must continue to provide a high level of service and to management of specific water supply catchments. It produce graduates with an extensive knowledge of licenses surface and groundwater extractions, and plays natural resource management issues. They have an a major role in irrigation salinity management, water ongoing role in providing support to natural resource quality management and regional economic managers through student and staff involvement in development. It also contributes significantly to other Catchment initiatives. riverine health outcomes. Trust for Nature Urban water authorities Trust for Nature is a non-profit organisation that works Goulburn Valley Water and North East Water provide to protect threatened ecosystems. The Trust focuses on water and wastewater services to urban communities in its conservation covenant program and the purchase and the region. These authorities manage specific water re-selling of high conservation value land through its supply catchments and contribute to the water quality revolving fund. It helps community groups buy property, outcomes of the region by investment in improved provides information and seeks to add value to regional wastewater management services. research. VicRoads Environment Protection Authority (EPA) VicRoads is responsible for maintaining and improving The EPA co-ordinates all activities relating to the Victoria’s 22 240 km of arterial roads, and 4924 bridges discharge of waste into the environment, and the and major culverts. VicRoads is actively involved in generation, storage treatment, transport and disposal of developing roadside management plans for its major industrial waste. It seeks to control pollution and protect roads. These plans will assist in managing roadside the quality of the environment. The EPA’s efforts are environments and include sections on pest plants and guided by the State Environment Protection Policy animals, retention of significant roadside areas, Waters of Victoria. maintenance strategies and maintenance of firebreaks. Industry Environment groups Through its operating practices and peak industry These groups are major contributors to the outcomes of groups, such as Murray Dairy and the Victorian Farmers the RCS by either involvement in shaping its direction or Federation (VFF), industry is able to exert strong delivering onground works. The groups include the influence over natural resource management outcomes. region’s Environment Alliance Network, and the Goulburn Valley Environment Group. Landholders Achieving the Strategy outcomes requires changes in the 2. conserve soil; way we manage our natural assets. Under the 3. protect water resources; Catchment and Land Protection Act landholders are 4. eradicate regionally prohibited weeds; required to: 5. prevent the growth and spread of regionally 1. avoid causing or contributing to land degradation controlled weeds; and prevent the spread of and, as which causes or may cause damage to land of far as possible, eradicate established pest animals. another owner;

Source: extracted from Goulburn Broken CMA Regional Catchment6 Strategy (2003). DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

The interaction between the Goulburn Broken CMA and state government is promoted in Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management—a framework for action (2002) with the requirement by CMAs to develop a regional Native Vegetation Management Plan. This sets the strategic direction for native vegetation management in the Catchment and outlines targets, priorities and actions. It also provides regional guidelines for applying Native Vegetation Retention Controls (NVRC) through the planning permit process. Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management framework recommends a number of incentive mechanisms for individual landholders to protect remnant vegetation, streamsides or tree planting. The reason given for this approach is that incentives are the most acceptable mechanism to landowners (Denys Slee and Associates 1998) and that they are successful in facilitating changes in land use (Goulburn Broken CMA 2003d). Originally these incentive schemes were based on dryland salinity control, with higher priority given to strategic revegetation to control dryland salinity. The Goulburn Broken CMA has identified the protection of native biodiversity as a high priority in the Goulburn Broken Native Vegetation Management Strategy (2000). With salinity control still an important priority, it is the focus of collaborative research projects such as the Heartlands project (Goulburn Broken CMA 2003c). In terms of community involvement in co-ordinating the NRM activities in the dryland sections of the Goulburn Broken CMA there is an interesting contrast with the irrigated region. Local Area Planning (LAP) plays an integral role in formalising collaborative relationships between stakeholders in NRM and the community in irrigated districts. However in the study area and other dryland regions within the Goulburn Broken CMA available resources has limited the use of LAP. Instead the mid-Goulburn Broken Implementation Committee (MGBIC) has placed a greater focus on providing support to Landcare groups and on ground works.

3.3. Future implementation of the Regional Catchment Strategy Currently the Goulburn Broken CMA is involved in a range of collaborative research projects, some of which are focussed on the same study area as this project. In general these projects aim to increase the knowledge of the natural resource base and contribute to future implementation strategies. Much of this research has a focus on increasing the implementation efficiency of the Goulburn Broken CMA RCS. That will hopefully achieve the maximum Natural Resource Management (NRM) outcome with each unit of investment. It also aims to determine how best to protect and enhance native biodiversity by modelling benefits derived from various revegetation scenarios. The Ecosystem Services and Landscape Change projects recently completed in the Goulburn Broken Catchment have been more concerned with future policy direction than better focusing current implementation strategies. Both projects focus on future regulatory policy and market based instruments, with the Landscape Change project providing detailed recommendations on what regulatory policies could be developed to facilitate land use change (CSIRO 2003). The Ecosystem Services project is deliberately vague about how market based instruments will be developed for ecosystem services. Instead it focuses on defining ecosystem services and modelling them. In particular it models how revegetation within the project area will provide ecosystem services to protect biodiversity; and contribute to reducing recharge, catchment water yield and soil acidification. It identifies gaps in knowledge that must be filled before market based instruments are developed for ecosystem services. The next stage of this research is the Markets for Ecosystem Services project. This is also a CSIRO project, which is seeking to identify and build the regional capacities needed to initiate markets for ecosystem services.

7 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

3.4. Tension between community ownership and Government direction Community representation in CMAs give some degree of community ownership on how natural resources are managed within a region. The Goulburn Broken CMA recognises the need for the community to feel empowered and in control of its destiny. Much of the engagement is done via key stakeholders and community based committees. As CMA Board members are appointed by the Minister for the Environment, the role of the CMA is not easily separated from that of the state government. The links between the Goulburn Broken CMA and the RCS to processes at the state government level present additional barriers to community ‘ownership’. The CMA must be responsive to the statewide policies that establish priorities for natural resource management. The state government develops these policies on behalf of all Victorians. The Regional Catchment Investment Plan (RCIP) process is the new approach that the state and Commonwealth governments is using to fund what they see as priority projects, which in some instances will be different from priorities established by local communities. The RCIP process has meant that the Goulburn Broken CMA has had to review and reallocate its regional NRM priorities. As a result some projects are likely to receive additional funds, while others (perhaps favoured at a local level) will receive less. In the course of gathering information for this report, at least one extension officer within the region believed that there is less money available for incentive based programs because of the new process. The introduction of the RCIP process coincides with the most recent review of strategic priorities for the Goulburn Broken CMA, as the Goulburn Broken CMA has just completed its compulsory five yearly RCS review. Works programs are reviewed on an annual basis, which gives the Goulburn Broken CMA the flexibility to adjust to changing priorities. While the state and Commonwealth governments may exert significant pressure on the CMAs, mainly through funding processes, they have less direct influence over local government. The extent to which statewide policies are implemented by local government depends on the availability of resources. The failure of local government to act may not be a result of greatly differing priorities, but of difficult choices made for the allocation of scarce resources.

3.5. Interaction between Local Governments and the Goulburn Broken CMA There is a complex inter-relationship between the Goulburn Broken CMA and local government as both organisations are facilitators of land use change. Both the Goulburn Broken CMA and local governments interact when implementing the NVR, the development of a roadside management plan, in the planning permit process and strategic planning (or Municipal Strategic Statement). In 1997, a Ministerial task force, formed at the instigation of the Catchment and Land Protection (CaLP) Council recommended that ’the Department of Natural Resources and Environment and the Department of Infrastructure work together to develop guidelines for both CaLP Boards and local government to ensure consistency and assist the process of co- ordination’. The recommendation provided a starting point for consultation and discussion between CMAs and local government by providing a framework for co-operation. Subsequent discussions also identified a number of key issues of common concern. Since then a number of consultancy projects have compiled a list of possible options by which local government and CMAs could work together to achieve RCS objectives. Recent appointments (2002) to CMA boards have included current or ex-councillors. For instance, the current Goulburn Broken CMA board has two mayors and two councillors on its board of thirteen (including one DSE and one DPI representative). Since these are recent appointments it is still not apparent if these board members will encourage further links between the Goulburn Broken CMA and local government.

8 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

The Goulburn Broken Regional Catchment Strategy Municipal Implementation Plan is currently underway. This project picks up on the identified issues of common concern between local government and the Goulburn Broken CMA and is attempting to link RCS objectives to local government Corporate Plans. This is a collaborative project between Goulburn Broken CMA, local government, DPI and DSE. The project is complex and time consuming as it:

• requires the development of processes to form productive links between several sources of information and operational methods • provides responses to the integration and interaction of physical and living components • builds positive productive human relationships.

Despite the difficulties the project has been successful in identifying the following areas of ‘common concern’ (Melva Ryan, Project Leader, pers. comm.):

• Sustainable Regional Development—and secondary industry issues • floodplain management • protection of native biodiversity • management of irrigation and dryland salinity • sustainable land management practices • pest plant and animal control • waterway health • rural/urban interface • landscape change • Greenhouse / climate change • community engagement and principles for catchment management.

3.6. Key findings The Goulburn Broken CMA places a strong emphasis on achieving social and economic benefits as well as NRM outcomes. Currently there is no indication whether such an emphasis is more or less efficient at protecting biodiversity in the study area. Goulburn Broken CMA protects biodiversity by utilising both regulatory and voluntary incentive based mechanisms. The emphasis and application of these mechanisms has changed recently to increase the priority of biodiversity. Although current and future works are included on Geographical Information Systems (GIS) databases a better understanding of how well past policy has protected biodiversity is needed to be able to assess its efficacy. In contrast to other areas of the Goulburn Broken catchment, Local Area Planning did not play a significant role in the study area. Instead the CMA focussed on being involved in local community groups such as Landcare. The focus of future RCS implementation will be to more efficiently deliver NRM outcomes. There is a limit to the degree of community ownership in CMA regions (ownership within the actual CMA and its committees is good, but it may be harder to achieve in the wider community) and there is potential conflict between the community and the state because of conflicting expectations. Local government and CMAs interact at a number of levels, from strategic planning through to operational. Currently there is considerable work being undertaken to find common ground and build closer working relationships between the Goulburn Broken CMA and local government.

9 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

4. Strathbogie Shire Council

The following section deals with policy as it relates specifically to Strathbogie Shire Council (the local government responsible for most of the properties within the Honeysuckle Creek study area). The Strathbogie Shire Council administers the Victorian Planning Provisions that regulate land use change through the planning permit process. It also administers public land such as the non-declared road network that includes some of the most significant locations for native biodiversity in the study area. The drivers behind local government decision making and policy implementation are important for the successful retention of native biodiversity in the study area. As this report concentrates on policy drivers the following discussion does not describe in detail the Victorian Planning Provisions or what should be or should not be in a Roadside Management Plan.

4.1. The wider context There are a number of initiatives and reports into local government and environmental management over the past decade, which have been prepared from a broader local government perspective. Much of this is now being reflected in actions by councils throughout the state (for example, see case studies under http://www.deh.gov.au/biodiversity/toolbox/index.html ). The Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) has an environment policy and resources web page that has links to a range of relevant information (http://www.alga.asn.au). It outlines policy and resources under the broad headings of:

• natural resource management • sustainability • Greenhouse and climate change • waste and recycling • environmental management systems • strategic partnerships (the global program for local government, Agenda 21 is covered, Agenda 21 has an Australian website at http://www.ea.gov.au/esd/la21/.

Both the Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) (http://www.mav.asn.au) and the Victorian Local Governance Association (VLGA) (http://www.vlga.org.au/) are active in supporting councils on environmental issues. Shire of Strathbogie is a member of both organisations. Environs Australia, a local government environmental network (150 council members Australia-wide) also plays an important supporting role, however Shire of Strathbogie is not a current member. Benefits of membership are said to be ‘access to a vast Local Government network, actual examples of tools and on-ground sustainability projects, and the means to raise knowledge and awareness of the environment. Environs Australia has developed the Biodiversity Toolbox (see http://www.environs.org.au/) which provides ‘tools, resources and contacts to integrate biodiversity conservation into all aspects of Council operations’. A central feature is a Benchmarking Biodiversity Conservation Framework: ‘a five-step benchmarking system that allows councils to track performance towards conserving local biodiversity’. Many case studies of local initiatives and regional partnerships from Victoria and other states are provided. The ‘Integrating Local Land Use Planning & Regional Catchment Planning Project’ (commenced in 2000) (see http://www.mav.asn.au > Policy & Projects > Environment > Current Projects >Catchment Management and Natural Resource Management) is an initiative of the MAV and the Victorian Catchment Management Council (VCMC). The overall aim of the project has been to achieve greater integration of regional catchment management planning

10 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy and local land use planning by consistent interpretation of RCS in municipal planning schemes across Victoria. Various tools and model frameworks have been developed to assist local government. The objectives of this project were to:

• identify the natural resource/catchment management issues that are appropriate for inclusion in municipal planning schemes • examine the performance of the existing planning schemes in giving effect to RCSs • identify opportunities and constraints to integration of RCSs in municipal planning schemes • develop a consistent approach to the integration of RCSs in municipal planning schemes • develop an action plan aimed at achieving greater integration between regional catchment management and land use planning that includes consideration of requirements for preparation of RCSs, processes for integration, education and training and, development of partnerships between CMAs and local government.

The National Awards for Local Government includes an ‘Integrated and Regional Planning: Integration of Biodiversity Conservation into Local Government Planning and Management’ category (see http://www.dotars.gov.au/localgovt/nalg/factsheets/bio.aspx ). It is awarded for projects that:

1. integrate biodiversity conservation outcomes into local government planning processes 2. integrate biodiversity conservation outcomes into all aspects of local government operations 3. identify and incorporate local biodiversity conservation priorities in the context of regional biodiversity conservation priorities 4. involve the council collaborating with other regional planning processes to ensure biodiversity conservation is integrated into regional planning.

4.2. Purpose and function Local government is obligated to provide a wide range of services to the community. Schedule 1 of the Local Government Act (1989) defines the function of councils to include the following:

• general public services • health, education, welfare and other community services • planning and land use, including property services • recreational and cultural services • roads • any other functions relating to the peace, order and good government of the municipal district.

Local government is subject to the same social pressures as the community it represents, as it is governed by elected representatives from within the community. A study commissioned by the Goulburn Broken CMA that investigated the community values within the Goulburn Broken catchment (ref cited in Norman et al 2003) indicates that the community valued economic development more than addressing social issues, and solving social issues more than addressing environmental issues. It is no surprise council focuses on economic development provision of health services for an ageing population. This priority is logical in that the social profile of the Strathbogie Shire Council reflects a real need for increased economic growth and an increase in average income. Fifty percent of households have weekly incomes less than $400 and the shire has the second highest per capita debt of all 11 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

Victorian local government areas (Shire of Strathbogie 2003a). Half the population is over fifty suggesting that future household incomes will be further reduced with an increasing demand for social services (Shire of Strathbogie 2003e). The Strathbogie Shire Council recognises that both it and local communities have to build the capacity to cope with change produced by increasing social demands of an ageing and poorer population (Shire of Strathbogie 2003a). The Shire has recognised that its biggest social challenge is ‘a lack of community cohesion and shared vision’ that can only be achieved by a ‘sustained community reconciliation and education process’ (Shire of Strathbogie 2003a). It gives the reason for this as ’vested interests and divergence of views…many of these differences are based in history’ (Shire of Strathbogie 2003a). The Shire is initiating a Community Cohesion Process funded through Department of Industry. The principal aims of this process will be to:

• aim to maintain community motivation • develop a sense of belonging • care for and cultivate those things that contribute to health and growth of others and the environment • aim to produce outcomes for all, rather than for narrow interest groups.

This process presents an opportunity for native biodiversity conservation to be discussed and become understood by the community as a legitimate and important objective of council. It is also an opportunity to work with the community to develop understanding and acceptance of alternative views on the environment.

4.3. Planning Local government is invested with the power to control land use under the Local Government Act (1989) and the Planning and Environment Act (1987). It does this through the application of the Victorian Planning Provisions (VPP) in the planning permit approval process. The opportunity local government has to influence land use change is through use of zones and overlays (which guide land use decisions), and then at the point of land use change when a planning permit is lodged and assessed against those zones and overlays. (Note: While the NVRC are administered under the VPP they will be discussed separately in Section 5 of this report.) Although originally introduced to simplify the planning system the VPP are commonly criticised for their complexity and non-specific nature (Buxton 2002; Budge 2003). This report focuses on how the VPP relate directly to the study area and native biodiversity. Table 4 outlines how the Strathbogie Shire Council planning scheme regulates land use within the study area. As part of the planning referral process the Environment Protection Authority (EPA), Goulburn-Murray Water (G-MW) and DPI/DSE have significant influence (via its referral authority) over whether council grants a permit and what conditions are put on the permit. In particular, where an application is referred under Section 55 of the Planning and Environment Act, the advice of the Department (as the referral authority) must be heeded by council. In contrast, the referral authority's advice in response to applications referred under section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act need only be considered, not necessarily followed. Despite having power to influence the planning permit process the various government agencies have little control over the most threatening processes to native biodiversity within the study area (see Table 3). Of the threatening processes (such as grazing regimes, fertiliser use, timber-cutting and firewood collection) clearing native vegetation is the only process that can be controlled by the zones and permits (refer to Table 4).

12 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

Table 3. Threatening processes and their corresponding land uses.

Threatening process Corresponding land use Loss of understorey grazing clearing cleaning up fallen timber Removal of fallen timber clearing cleaning up Loss of nectar trees clearing grazing fertiliser application Degradation of riparian habitat grazing of riparian areas Clearing clearing Clearing—loss of prey items clearing grazing fertiliser application Loss of understorey/habitat grazing Degradation and clearing of large blocks grazing Weed invasion of remnants grazing fertiliser application

Source: Wilson et al (2003).

Table 4. Permit requirements described in zones and overlays for the rural areas of the study area, as they relate to activities that most threaten native biodiversity.

Grazing Clearing Cleaning up Grazing Fertiliser fallen riparian application timber areas Zones Rural

Overlays Erosion Management + Heritage + Land subject to inundation Public Acquisition + Rural Floodway Wildfire Management Environmental Significance +

Note: + indicates permit required; a permit is not required for all other activities Source: http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/planningschemes/strathbogie/home.html (Accessed 18–11–03)

Currently the only section of the study area with an Environmental Significance Overlay is a small area south-west of Violet Town, introduced as a buffer to an intensive land use, rather than to protect a site of identified environmental significance.

13 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

The relatively small areas in the study area that have been devoted to zones and overlays that protect native biodiversity or fauna habitat suggests this is a relatively uncommon practice for local government to protect environmental elements using this process. In part this difficulty is due to the lobbying by the VFF to exempt farming land from any environmental zones or overlays (Victorian Farmers Federation 2002 ). Apart from the urban areas of Euroa and Violet Town all of the study area within the Strathbogie Shire Council is zoned as ‘rural zone’. The rural zone has been commonly used throughout the state for rural land (Municipal Association of Victoria 2003). The conflict associated with having a zone with few restrictions applied to a wide variety of land uses has resulted in the Rural Zones Review currently being undertaken by the DSE Planning systems unit. The Rural Zones Review aims to improve decision making through strategic planning at a regional level (Rural Zones Review Reference Group 2003). In particular it will identify methods to protect fertile land from residential subdivision and it aims to protect the right of farmers to continue normal farming operations (Rural Zones Review Reference Group 2003). In contrast environmental objectives such as protecting native biodiversity will not receive the same priority (Rural Zones Review Reference Group 2003). It is unlikely that the rural community will accept the recommendations regarding rural subdivision because they may result in lower land values (Victorian Farmers Federation 2003). Other outcomes of the Rural Zone Review are difficult to predict. One of the possible recommendations from the review is a statement re-affirming Maunsell’s (2003) recommendation to incorporate RCS into the Municipal Strategic Statements of local government planning schemes. It is likely to be adopted, as this action does not appear to contradict the key stakeholders various points of view. A number of stakeholders have submitted recommendations to the review regarding native biodiversity (Victorian National Parks Association 2003). The lack of focus on environmental objectives in the ‘Rural Zones Review Reference Group Discussion and Options Paper, January 2003' is a major concern. It is possible that the review could be extended given the difficulty in resolving the polarised views of stakeholders. (See also http://www.dse.vic.gov.au > Planning > Planning Projects > Rural Zones Review) A review of the exemptions to the statewide Native Vegetation Retention controls is planned to occur this year with opportunities for public involvement. A broader review looking at other elements of the Victoria Planning Provisions relevant to native vegetation is also expected to commence during 2004. The intention of this review is to align the VPP with the policy goals set out in Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management Framework. It is anticipated that this review may have a significant impact in the way in which native vegetation is managed, and the way in which Councils administer Section 52.17 of the VPP. There is a potential that the VPP review will provide the opportunity to create regulatory policy to help control the big threats to native biodiversity (i.e. grazing and fire wood collection) (Wilson et al 2004). Whatever policies are in place, the review will also need to address the resources and expertise required for implementation and, particularly, compliance. The major opportunities for local government to better manage biodiversity can be summarised from the above discussion as being:

• use environmental zones and overlays to control threatening processes (such as grazing regimes, fertiliser use and timber-cutting and firewood collection) on remnant vegetation and scattered trees • use other environmental overlays, for other environmental features, such as watercourses and wetlands • introduce zones other than 'Rural’ for areas with higher concentrations of biodiversity and environmental assets • provide more resources, data and information to local government considering environmental issues.

14 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

Community involvement in the planning process Community environment groups such as the Euroa Environment Group or Benalla Environment Group are sent details for planning permit applications within their local area by council staff. The planning staff at Strathbogie council indicated that including community environment groups in the planning permit process led to fewer objections to permit applications. Local government is the level of government that looks after the day to day services such as rubbish collection, road maintenance and home help services. It is therefore the level of government that is most conspicuous and that communities have the most access to. Community members can easily attend council meetings, they can generally run for council without having to align themselves with a political party and they probably know their local member of council by their first name: most communities have a high degree of ownership in local government. As well as a vested interest the community also has a considerable degree of power in local government as council has to vote on whether to accept or impose conditions on planning permit applications. It is no surprise then to find that local government decision making is either a compromise between divergent interests within the community or a triumph for the group who lobbies most successfully. Budge (2003) suggests that those most influential in local government in rural Victoria are older conservative males and that the application of the states planning controls have been heavily influenced by this group. This possibly explains why there has been limited application of environmental zones and overlays across the state. The milieu of interests and opinions that local government has to deal with requires clear definitions of the rights and responsibilities to avoid conflict. Unfortunately the VPP are often vague and open to interpretation even though their original intention was to provide a consistent interpretation of planning policy across the state (Buxton 2002). As a result of this the planning system has become more adversarial with more and more planning permit applications being referred to Victorian Civil Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). A more adversarial planning system has significant implications for biodiversity. It could mean that a winner takes all approach could be applied to planning permit applications. It could also mean that the responsibility to protect biodiversity could move from local government and referral authorities to VCAT.

4.4. Incorporating native biodiversity into the Municipal Strategic Statement review The Strathbogie Shire Council Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) is currently being reviewed by an independent consultant, and it is intended that this review will recommend amendments and additions to the way in which the MSS deals with native biodiversity. As part of this process, several overlays that aim to specifically protect biodiversity and environmental assets are being prepared with a view to them being exhibited. The proposed overlays are:

• Environmental Significance Overlay for Significant Vegetation • Environmental Significance Overlay for Wetlands and Major Watercourses • Vegetation Protection Overlay for Roadside Vegetation • Environmental Significance Overlay for Potable Water Supply Catchments

These overlays establish objectives for land use; with the nature of the environmental assets described and defined, and through the application of permit requirements and decision- making guidelines, these land use objectives may be achieved. The decision guidelines in particular are more comprehensive and ensure that the council has to consider potential

15 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy environmental impacts, as well as impact upon the landscape, before granting a permit (Table 5.).

Table 5 Permit requirements for three common land use changes for each of the proposed environmental overlays

Environmental Significant Landscape Vegetation Protection Permit required for… Significance Overlay Overlay Overlay - vegetation clearing Yes Yes Yes - construct building Yes Yes No - subdivision Yes No No

Source: M. Sheahan pers. comm. (2003)

The protection of native vegetation and habitat is still not absolute if these overlays are incorporated into the planning scheme. Permit applications can still be made and considered, however, a number of exemptions available under the NVR Controls (s52.17 of the VPP) are not available under the overlays. In his discussion paper to Strathbogie council, Mark Sheahan (pers. com. 2003) lists the exemptions to controls on native vegetation clearance as follow:

• Exemptions available under NVRC but not under an overlay: • ‘Site area’ • ‘Dead vegetation’ • ‘Planted vegetation or harvesting’ • ‘Rural activities’ • ‘Stock movement on roads’ • ‘Buildings’ • ‘Utility services’.

Exemptions in the overlays but not included in the NVRC:

• If a schedule to this overlay specifically states that a permit is not required. • If the vegetation has been planted for pasture, timber production or any other crop.

While regulation may limit the incidence of deliberate clearing and tree removal, the management of many threatening processes relies on ‘positive actions’ being undertaken by land managers, such as weed control—and it is not plausible for local government to regulate for ‘positive action’ (see also Weed incentive programs under 4.1.5 Land Management Policy). Nevertheless, the implementation of these overlays would signify that the Strathbogie Shire Council has a long-term view about achieving environmental objectives, and is prepared to implement current best planning practice for protecting native biodiversity assets.

4.5. Roadside Management Policy At first glance roadside management policy could be considered irrelevant to land use change. However, roads must be able to accommodate any increased traffic and heavier or higher loads are usually associated with changes in rural land use. As roadsides are often the primary location of native biodiversity assets within the study area (Wilson et. al. 2003) small changes in how a roadside reserve is managed has the potential for significant impact on biodiversity.

16 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

This report has concentrated on the drivers behind the implementation of the Strathbogie Roadside Management Plan and not on what should be incorporated in this or any other plan. (See Ballarat University, 2003 for a detailed description of roadside management policy and its effect on biodiversity.) As Strathbogie Shire Council has responsibility for the management of all but four roadsides in the study area (Shire of Strathbogie 2003b) the role of council policy on the maintenance of biodiversity values is considerable. While local government has no actual statutory authority to manage roadsides for biodiversity outcomes (Andrew Straker pers. comm.), there are general ‘duty of care’ provisions under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act (1988). However, council recognises that it has a responsibility to manage roadside biodiversity values, and this has resulted in collaborative efforts by the council, community and DPI/DSE to identify and manage roadside assets (e.g. the classification of roadsides in terms of conservation value) (Shire of Strathbogie 2003b). As a result, action on roadsides usually results from community expectations, rather than being core business of local government. Strathbogie Shire Council has not adopted its draft Roadside Management Policy (1996) because its implementation requires resourcing (which has yet to be identified, either as part of council budget allocations or from external sources). Currently this draft plan is being reviewed to incorporate the latest information on vegetation classification. When discussing the implementation of a roadside management policy the council expressed frustration over juggling its competing obligations in terms of road maintenance, risk management, fire prevention and conservation. This highlights the conflicting points of view and recommendations often made by the Country Fire Authority and DSE on how native vegetation on roadsides should be managed. The council also described the increasing pressure to manage public liability risk and the role roadside vegetation played in increasing that risk. Note: there is a proposed Road Management Bill that is likely to address this liability issue (Andrew Straker pers. comm.). Despite the difficulty of finding a compromise between stakeholders it is positive to note that five out of the eleven councils in north-east Victoria have completed a Roadside Management Plan (RMP). A further three are actively working toward the completion of their RMP, while the remaining three councils have made little progress toward completion in the last twelve months. The completion and adoption of an RMP could be seen as reflecting the priority status that management of roadside biodiversity assets has in these councils. In general, councils with environmental officers involved in roadside conservation have been more successful at finishing and implementing plans as considerable time has to be spent working with stakeholders (Gaye Furphy and Mark Sheahan, pers comm.) (See also Table 6.)

Table 6 Status of Roadside Management Plans in north-east Victoria

Completed and Actively working Little or no progress actively implementing toward completion toward completion Moira Benalla Rural City Mansfield City of Greater Shepparton City of Wodonga Murrindindi Mitchell Towong Strathbogie Wangaratta Indigo

Source: Gaye Furphy and Mark Sheahan, pers. comm.

17 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

4.6. Land Management Policy The Strathbogie Shire Council can require landowners to control noxious and regionally restricted weeds on individual properties or along roadsides adjacent to private land under compliance provisions contained in the CALP Act (Shire of Strathbogie 2003d). It has funded an incentive scheme (known as the Land Management Program) to encourage landowners to control the noxious and regionally restricted weeds listed in the Goulburn Broken CMA Regional Catchment Strategy (2003e). Approximately 2000 land managers took part in the scheme in the 2002/2003 financial year (Mel Eddy, pers. comm.), indicating a high level of acceptance and participation by the community. However this incentive scheme does not necessarily protect remnant vegetation from weed spread. Most of the weeds that invade remnant vegetation are not noxious or regionally restricted but common pasture plants (Wilson et. al. 2004) or ‘environmental weeds’, which the incentive program does not target. Landowners have an existing obligation under the CALP Act to control noxious and regionally restricted weeds growing on their properties or adjoining roadsides. Incentive scheme funds are currently being allocated to enable land managers to comply with existing ‘statutory’ obligations rather than encouraging them to control environmental weed spread in remnant vegetation. The landowners, through a public consultation process, currently nominate how to spend the incentive money (Shire of Strathbogie 2003a). While this encourages community ownership in the incentive scheme, changing the emphasis of the program to control environmental weeds without the support of the community may discourage weed control within the community. The implementation of the Rural Land Rate Policy has resulted in approximately 2000 shire landowners meeting (or attempting to meet) the Community Land Management Goals (Melissa Eddy, pers. comm.) described in Table 7 (Shire of Strathbogie 2003e). Although the weeds being managed under this policy are primarily agricultural weeds, the scheme has potential if it broadens out to include the environmental weeds that have the potential to significantly influence the ongoing viability of biodiversity. This change in emphasis could be important as weed spread is one of the most threatening processes to biodiversity in the study area.

Table 7 List of Community Land Management Goals for the Shire of Strathbogie.

Pest Plant or Animal Eradication or Control Goal Prairie Ground Cherry Eradicate Prairie Ground Cherry within 5 years. Rabbits Reduce rabbit populations. Paterson’s Curse Prevent the growth and spread of Paterson’s Curse (this includes maintaining a 10 m buffer zone free of Paterson’s Curse along all waterways and around the perimeter of the property adjoining other landholders). Bathurst Burr Prevent the growth and spread of Bathurst Burr. Saffron Thistle Eradicate Saffron Thistle within 10 years. Stinkwort Prevent the growth and spread of Stinkwort. Blackberry Prevent the growth and spread of Blackberry. St John’s Wort Eradicate St John’s Wort within the next 5 years. Horehound Prevent the growth and spread of Horehound. Source: Shire of Strathbogie 2003c

18 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

4.7. Future pressures At present the shire has to plan for divergent changes in population and land use. It's population is going to become more aged, with many retirees moving to the region for lifestyle benefits. In most of the shire the dominant land uses will become less agricultural and more lifestyle or amenity based. However along the Hume corridor agricultural land uses will intensify to include intensive animal industries. Both the farming and rural population of Strathbogie are ageing rapidly (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2001; Barr 2003). As the shire has the responsibility to provide services for the aged it must plan for the increased demands of an older population. The author suggests that an older demographic profile itself would not affect biodiversity. However in terms of funding priorities the Strathbogie Shire foresees increasing demands for expensive services that could drain resources that would otherwise be used for other council functions such as protecting biodiversity (Shire of Strathbogie 2003a). High current land values suggest that the continuation of farming as currently practised in the study area is unlikely, and that the current generation of farmers are likely to be replaced by landowners seeking a rural lifestyle (Barr 2003). Given that almost all of the rural land in the Shire of Strathbogie is currently zoned rural, much of the shire could be subdivided into farmlets as has been the case in the neighbouring shire of Mitchell (subdivision applications are the second most common planning permit application, see Appendix 2). Even if the maximum lot sizes are adhered to this could lead to habitat destruction (Mark Sheahan, pers. comm.). It follows that the shire has to have the appropriate planning controls, such as the overlays mentioned earlier, that will enable it to manage development and ensure a net gain in habitat. The existence of more stringent planning controls could also lead to alternative developments such as the ‘village farm’ (Atkins 2003). The shire is currently in the process of facilitating the development of a large intensive animal industry precinct near Mangalore. This is consistent with statements within its MSS that promote the region as an alternative to the Mornington Peninsula for intensive animal industry development because of its proximity to Melbourne and the Hume freeway. If the Mangalore project is a sign of things to come there is potential to get biodiversity gains from such developments as both the shire and developers are working closely with DSE and the Goulburn Broken CMA. In doing so it is hoped to minimise environmental impact and use the opportunity to plant indigenous buffers around each development. If this collaborative approach is successful it is likely that future development projects will also take a similar collaborative approach. Finding common ground between the Shire of Strathbogie and the Goulburn Broken CMA in terms of the RCS will be essential to increasing the priority of NRM in both the councils strategic and day to day decision making. Having staff both in the Goulburn Broken CMA and council whose role it is to build the relationship between the CMA and council will make this process easier. The existence of staff specialising in local government in the Goulburn Broken CMA and the recent appointment of a new planning team at Strathbogie suggests that there is the capacity to build a good working relationship. Recent meetings between these staff suggest that there is also the will to build this relationship.

19 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

4.8. Native Vegetation Retention Controls A long history of habitat removal and extinction of native species in Victoria led to the implementation of the NVRC, introduced in 1991 as an amendment to the Planning and Environment Act (1989). Further amendments resulted in a set of controls implemented through local government planning schemes to control native vegetation clearance. This section is not a detailed history or description of the NVRC and how controls are applied but an attempt to identify the main drivers behind the NVRC at a local level and how these drivers influence native biodiversity. The relationship between NVRC and land use change is indirect but still important. Land use changes in the study area, whether it is broadacre agriculture, intensive agriculture or rural residential can potentially result in the removal, lopping or destruction of native vegetation on both private land and on roadsides. The NVRC are an important means by which land use change can be influenced in a manner that protects native biodiversity. At a local government level the NVRC are administered through the planning permit process by implementation and enforcement of planning scheme controls in relation to native vegetation retention. This includes the issuing of permits (see Table 4 for list of where NVRC controls apply). The referral authority for the NVRC is DSE. The Department is a Section 55 referral authority (i.e. a compulsory referral authority) in certain circumstances and as such has the power to object to the permit and can apply conditions to the permit. Not all permit applications are Section 55 referrals, nonetheless many shires (including Shire of Strathbogie) still refer all applications as Section 52 referrals to relevant personnel in the department for comment even if the activity may be exempt (Mark Sheahan, Shire of Strathbogie, pers. comm.). As a Section 52 referral the DSE does not have the power to refuse or to impose conditions, however it still provides the opportunity to negotiate with the applicant and council in the planning permit approval process. The incorporated document that departmental officers in the referral process and local government use to determine how to process native vegetation clearance applications is Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management—A Framework For Action (2002). Otherwise referred to as the ‘Framework’. The primary goal of the Framework is: A reversal, across the entire landscape, of the long-term decline in the extent and quality of native vegetation, leading to a ‘Net Gain’. Net Gain is the outcome for native vegetation and habitat where overall gains are greater than overall losses and where individual losses are avoided where possible. One of the objectives of the Framework is to ensure consistent application of the NVRC across the state (Gaye Furphy, pers. comm.). The Framework also gives a standard methodology for assessing native vegetation and its conservation significance, as well as a suggested response to clearing based on conservation significance. On a regional level the Goulburn Broken CMA has incorporated the Framework in its own regional guidelines (Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority 2000). If clearing is permitted the Framework allows for flexibility in the options for offsets including ‘recruit only’ or ‘protect and recruit’ or a combination of both. The concept of ‘Net Gain’ in the Framework is flexible in that there is scope to negotiate over the nature of the offset to any vegetation clearance. Offsets can be in the form of recruitment of new trees (generally planting sometimes regeneration) and the protection of similar remnant vegetation. Similarly negotiation occurs over where the offset will be located. Despite the flexibility outlined in the Framework there was a perception by planners and department staff who were spoken to as part of this study that the most common offset for native vegetation clearance was tree planting (recruitment of new trees). The possible reason for this discrepancy could be the complex nature of the NVRC and the difficulties associated with negotiating offsets, or lack of remnants to ‘protect and recruit’. It is also possible that the lack of operational guidelines

20 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

(soon to be published) for the implementation of the VNVF has caused some confusion over how offsets are to be negotiated. This report attempted to obtain information on:

• how many planning permit applications were granted in the Strathbogie Shire Council • how much native vegetation was altered or cleared as a result • what were the negotiated offsets • whether offsets had been implemented.

Unfortunately the only information available was the table described in Appendix 2, which describes the proportion of all planning permit applications in the Shire of Strathbogie that were made for native vegetation removal in 2002/2003. Without this information it is not possible to objectively determine whether the NVRC have been successful at implementing the ‘Net Gain’ objective of the VNVF in the study area. On a more positive note this issue is currently being addressed by the development of a statewide database that is going to record the details of all NVRC planning permit applications (Gaye Furphy, pers. comm.). The native vegetation permit tracking system will be turned on when the Operational Guidelines are released. This will allow the tracking of permits involving vegetation removal by the Department but also local government as it is progressively rolled out to local government work centres. As part of the referral process other legislation must be considered before recommendations or conditions are put onto an application to clear native vegetation. The Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act (1988) is one such piece of legislation and is commonly referred to because a number of endangered species occur throughout the study area (Wilson et. al. 2003). The flora and fauna conservation and management objectives listed on the DSE website are:

(a) to guarantee that all taxa of Victoria's flora and fauna can survive, flourish and retain their potential for evolutionary development in the wild; and (b) to conserve Victoria's communities of flora and fauna; and (c) to manage potentially threatening processes; and (d) to ensure that any use of flora or fauna by humans is sustainable; and (e) to ensure that the genetic diversity of flora and fauna is maintained.

Another piece of legislation commonly referred to in planning permit applications is the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (1999) (EPBC). The DSE website describes how the EPBC Act works as follows: The EPBC Act provides that a person must not take an action that has, will have or is likely to have a significant impact on a matter of national environmental significance, except where certain processes have been followed and/or certain approvals obtained. Penalties for unlawfully taking such an action include a fine of up to $5.5 million or up to seven years imprisonment. Matters of national environmental significance under the EPBC Act are:

• World Heritage properties • wetlands of international importance (Ramsar wetlands) • listed threatened species and communities • listed migratory species • protection of the environment from nuclear actions • marine environment (Commonwealth marine areas).

21 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

There is a wide range of exemptions to the NVRC in the Victorian Planning Provisions. These combined with provisions within planning schemes that elevate certain land uses above others can make prosecution for illegal vegetation clearance difficult. ‘Bad news stories’, such as the recent case at the Shire of Campaspe where the shire had to pay $60 000 damages, do not help change local government’s perception that illegal clearing of native vegetation is difficult to successfully prosecute. Even though the loop-hole that allowed this to happen has now been closed. Prosecution of offenders is also made difficult by the lack of information available on what vegetation existed before clearing. For example mapping the location of native grasslands and their habitat value in the study area began in 2003 (Jenny Wilson, pers. comm.). It is generally easier to prosecute against the illegal removal of trees and other more obvious vegetation types as it is easier to show that they once existed through aerial photographs or other evidence. The contrast between the ease of prosecution for the illegal removal of different vegetation types probably influences the perception of departmental officers and local government that standing trees are better protected by the NVRC than other types of vegetation. The NVRC has little control over the incremental loss of habitat through grazing or cropping of or in close proximity to remnant vegetation, where incremental loss could be through the lack of recruitment or the impact of herbicides and fertilisers. As the land uses responsible for the incremental loss are ‘as of right’ land uses in the planning scheme the resulting loss of habitat is incidental and not deliberate. The incremental process of habitat loss is also over long periods of time, again making it difficult to prove that there has been species removal.

4.9. Discussion The Strathbogie Shire Council currently has a planning scheme that facilitates changes in land use from traditional farming to intensive agriculture, rural living and tourism (see also Appendix 2). Each change in land use has potentially good and bad biodiversity outcomes— the outcome will depend on where and how the change is implemented. A shift toward closer rural living and intensification of rural industries (for discussion see 4.7. Future pressures) will create a greater demand for services such as telecommunications, transport and energy. As these services rely on roads or roadside reserves any works to install or upgrade telecommunications, powerlines, gas pipelines or road widening has the potential to damage roadside habitat. The trend towards rural living throughout the shire could also lead to increased dam construction for domestic water supply and road building for access. Even though both activities are controlled through the planning permit process they have the potential to damage habitat through erosion, alter water flow in streams and distribute weeds (EPA 2003). Exemptions also exist in the NVRC for access roads, supply of services and the construction of dwellings and associated buildings, potentially leading to the removal of remnant vegetation as more houses are built throughout the study area. According to the Strathbogie planning department most enquiries they receive to remove or lop native vegetation are exempt from the NVR controls, and since permit applications for housing outnumber all other permit applications it is probable that habitat is lost in this manner. The combination of greater population densities and private assets such as houses, sheds or businesses throughout the rural sections of the shire has the potential to alter the Municipal Fire Prevention Strategy. As it is the duty of the CFA to protect life and private/public assets, increased fuel reduction activities by the CFA, landowners and the shire on road sides or public/private land could damage habitat. While on private land, higher population densities in rural regions of the shire could mean that more labour is available for fire prevention leading to more ‘cleaning up’ on private land and the removal of habitat.

22 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

Rural living also has the potential for significant biodiversity benefits. The new rural landowners are often retiring professionals or other city folk moving for a ‘sea change’ with more spare time and disposable income than the farming families that they are replacing (Neil Barr, pers. comm.). They also have a vested interest in maintaining landscape amenity, as it is why they have moved from the city. Irrespective of disposable income tree planting is correlated with spare time (Wilson et. al. 2003), hence the combination of more spare time and the motivation to maintain and improve amenity could lead to an increase in habitat on rural living properties throughout the study area. Intensive agricultural businesses such as piggeries and broiler farms do not have the same incentive to maintain amenity that rural residential landowners do. They are not motivated to move into the study area for amenity but motivated by proximity to the Hume freeway and a rural work force (Shire of Strathbogie 2003b). Currently these industries have little impact on biodiversity apart from the removal of vegetation for shed building. They are located on flat land north of the highway, generally with a large buffer zone of cleared land surrounding the business. Their potential to pollute both land and waterways is controlled through the planning approval process and the EPA. Since the buffer zones surrounding these industries contribute little to the overall business, the Goulburn Broken CMA has recognised the potential these businesses have for providing habitat through tree planting and remnant protection in their buffer zone (Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority 2003). Other land uses encouraged in the Strathbogie Shire Council planning scheme are tourism and equine industries, in particular the shire markets itself as the equine centre of Victoria. Both industries have the potential for negative impacts such as over-grazing, removal of native vegetation for construction and pollution. However both industries rely on landscape amenity for their success. Lightly rugged healthy horses set against a backdrop of forested hills and shelter belts may well attract more buyers than heavily rugged horses set against a grim landscape of dying trees and bare eroding hills. Similarly businesses centred on tourism such as Bed & Breakfasts or Farm Stays may have trouble marketing themselves in a visually degraded landscape. There is correlation of rural population growth and increased firewood demand (http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/dse/nrenfor.nsf/). As the population of the Shire of Strathbogie is increasing annually at one percent (Shire of Strathbogie 2003b), demand for firewood also increases. The proposed overlays that are to be placed on many of the roads within the study area will potentially control firewood getting on roadsides. However this depends on the acceptance of the overlays by council and the willingness of the community to report offenders and council to prosecute offenders.

23 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

4.10. Key findings

• Local government has to compromise between divergent views in the community as well as balancing compliance requirements of different government department policies. • Biodiversity has to compete with other community priorities such as welfare and employment. • It appears likely that the Shire of Strathbogie will adopt environmental overlays over the most important habitat in the study area. If this happens, decision-making processes will be improved in terms of biodiversity protection and some of the most threatening processes (such as the removal of dead and fallen timber) can be controlled where these overlays occur. • The strategic approach by local government toward land use change is changing to include closer relationships with the CMAs. • Planning permit applications to clear native vegetation are as common as subdivision applications. • Consistent application of the NVRC has been difficult in the past, partly because of this the VNVF has been introduced to ensure more consistent application of the NVRC across the state. As part of the VNVF the concept of ‘Net Gain’ is both flexible and negotiable. However there appears to be a perception in local government that suggests Net Gain is only replacement tree planting. • Successful prosecution of the NVRC is difficult because there often is little information on what vegetation existed before illegal clearing. There is also little historical information available to determine how successful the NVRC have been in the study area in protecting habitat and ensuring ‘Net Gain’.

These key findings for local government suggests that it may be important to increase the importance of biodiversity from the communities perspective through application of:

• the use of zones and overlays • allocating resources for implementation and compliance • aligning the targets of the RCS to the planning scheme and individual planning decisions.

24 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

5. Conclusions

Both the shire of Strathbogie and the Goulburn Broken CMA cannot control the most threatening processes to biodiversity on private land, (eg vegetation clearing). The Goulburn Broken CMA does have some influence with its incentive schemes, but these are reliant on the landholder participating voluntarily, which is a good thing from the perspective of obtaining long-term commitment. The most powerful control that government has over land use and land use change is through the planning permit process, as planning permits are usually required for significant changes in land use. It is within this process that the referral authorities (Goulburn Broken CMA, Goulburn Murray Water, EPA and DPI/DSE) have some control over local government decision making. Biodiversity is not necessarily the most important consideration in local government decision making. Managing other issues such as rural poverty, economic development, community conflict, and an ageing population and maintaining assets such as roads and sporting grounds, are just as important to council as biodiversity conservation. As well as these overarching issues common to much of rural Victoria, council must also seek solutions that satisfy vested interests within the community. The outcomes are likely to be better for biodiversity where the solutions are creative rather than simply involving compromise. For both the Goulburn Broken CMA and the Strathbogie Shire, responsibility for decision- making relies on appointed or elected members of the community. Although influenced by CEOs, and other staff, the community and other experts; ultimately the responsibility lies with the CMA board or the council. Councillors are elected and are responsible to the community, while the government appoints CMA board members who ultimately are responsible to government rather than to the local community. However, both groups are members of the community; they do business, play sport and socialise with the community that they represent. These people will to some extent reflect the values of the community from which they come. Budge (2003) describes many rural councils as being parochial, and easily influenced by vested interests within the community. This is no surprise as both the Goulburn Broken CMA board and the shire are actively lobbied by people with vested interests within the community. The influence of staff in both council and the CMA cannot be understated. However the reality is that they have to be sensitive to community politics and do their best to find a satisfactory compromise. These staff also have their own limitations, none more so than local government planning departments. Most rural planning departments are understaffed (Budge 2003), they cannot attract specialist rural planners (Budge 2003) and are often forced to use untrained staff to carry out duties that would otherwise be done by trained planners (Colin Kalms, pers. comm.). It is not surprising that many of the local government submissions to the Rural Zones Review were reluctant to carry out the strategic planning mentioned in the discussion paper. They just do not have the staff resources or expertise. Although mentioned in the shires Local Planning Policy Framework, the role the shire is supposed to play in implementing the RCS is not mentioned on its website. In contrast all other services are mentioned in detail. If local government is to be used as a means of implementing the RCS and achieving biodiversity benefits with land use change, then the definition of core business will have to change for local government to include the active implementation of the RCS. The direction of change in policy interpretation by the Goulburn Broken CMA is more directed at targeting areas within the catchment to achieve the most outcomes for each dollar invested. Part of this change in policy interpretation is to incorporate the RCS into local government decision making. Both local government and the Goulburn Broken CMA are focussing on enhancing community involvement. How far these processes represent

25 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy opportunities for any citizen who wants to actively participate, by contrast to engagement only with major stakeholders, remains to be seen. The Native Vegetation Retention Controls are widely assumed by the rural community to effectively control habitat removal. This is not the case, as they do not include provisions for protection of dead trees and also have broad exemptions that make incremental clearing of vegetation possible. These exemptions also make prosecution difficult and when prosecution is successful fines are relatively small. Policy, its interpretation and the drivers behind individuals and organisations that implement it are dynamic. Following is a list of research topics that might provide a better understanding of how community values and future policy could address biodiversity issues within the Honeysuckle Creek area.

• What does the community understand about biodiversity, including how important is it and how people might become involved? For example, is it possible for communities to protect roadsides against ‘cleaning up’, wood getting and inappropriate fire prevention methods. • What are practical ways to enhance community participation in biodiversity conservation, and what difference might this make? • What are the most effective means of incorporating RCS into local government decision- making processes, and what role should the state government play in helping to bring this about? • How will the final outcomes of the Rural Zones Review affect land use change/biodiversity in the study area? • To what extent can referral authorities be used to influence local government decision making? In particular, to what extent can they insist local government implement the RCS?

26 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

6. References

Alexandra & Associates Pty Ltd. (2003). Landscape Change in the Goulburn Broken Catchment. Report to the Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority, Shepparton. Atkins, P. (2003). “Subdivision as an intermediate scale planning processes for combined agricultural and biodiversity outcomes.” In Crosthwaite, J., Farmer-Bowers, Q. and Hollier, C. (eds.). Land Use Change—Yes!—But will biodiversity be OK? Proceedings of a conference at Attwood, Victoria, August 2002. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2001). 2001 Community Census—Basic Community Profiles and Snapshots. Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra. Barr, N. (2002). “Social Trajectories for Rural Landscaping.” Connections: Farm, Food and Resource Issues, Vol. Autumn 2002. Retrieved: [10-09-2003], from http://www.agrifood.info/10publications_connections.html Budge, T. (2003). “The Victorian Statutory Planning System; Working For or Against Biodiversity? Land use change and the planning process in rural and regional Victoria.” In Crosthwaite, J., Farmer-Bowers, Q. and Hollier, C. (eds.). Land Use Change—Yes!—But will biodiversity be OK? Proceedings of a conference at Attwood, Victoria, August 2002. Ballarat Universtiy (2003). Roadside Vegetation Survey and Management Prescriptions. Report to VicRoads. Centre for Environmental Management, University of Ballarat. Buxton, M. (2002). ‘The land use planning system: potential and problems for biodiversity’ In Crosthwaite, J., Farmer-Bowers, Q. and Hollier, C. (eds.). Land Use Change—Yes!—But will biodiversity be OK? Proceedings of a conference at Attwood, Victoria, August 2002. CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, (2003). Exploring Options for Enhancing Ecosystem Services in the Goulburn Broken Catchment. CSIRO, Canberra. (www.ecosystemservicesproject.org) Denys Slee and Associates. (1998). National Research and Development Program on Rehabilitation, Management and Conservation of Remnant Vegetation, Research Report 2/98. Denys Slee and Associates, for the South Australian Farmers Federation, Victorian Farmers Federation and NSW Farmers Association. Environment Australia, Canberra. Department of Sustainability and Environment. (2002). Victorian River Health Strategy. Department of Sustainability and Environment, East Melbourne. EPA. (2003). How clean (and green). is your rural residential block. Environment Protection Authority, Sydney, New South Wales. Retrieved from: http://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/envirom/ruralblock.htm. Farmar-Bowers, Q. (2004). ‘Driver Research Phase Background Report 5: Personal drivers – interviews.’ In J. Crosthwaite, J. Callaghan, Q. Farmar-Bowers, C. Hollier and A. Straker (eds). Land Use Changes, their Drivers and Impact on Native Biodiversity – Driver Research Phase 1: overview report. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne. Goulburn Broken CMA. (2000). Goulburn Broken Native Vegetation Plan. (this includes Volume 1 Goulburn Broken Native Vegetation Management Strategy and Volume 2 Draft Guidelines for Native Vegetation Retention Controls in the Goulburn Broken Catchment. Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority, Shepparton. Goulburn Broken CMA. (2003a). Environmental management grant guidelines for the Goulburn Broken Catchment Management. Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority, Shepparton.

27 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

Goulburn Broken CMA. (2003b). Waterway grant review—Discussion paper. 1–22. Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority, Shepparton. Goulburn Broken CMA. (2003c). In the Heartlands, Honeysuckle Creek Catchment focus. Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority, Shepparton. Goulburn Broken CMA. (2003d). Mid Goulburn Broken Implementation Committee annual report 2000–2001. Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority, Shepparton. Goulburn Broken CMA. (2003e). Goulburn Broken Regional Catchment Strategy. Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority, Shepparton. Maunsell (2003). Integrating Local Land Use Planning & Regional Catchment Planning Project. Municipal Association of Victoria, Melbourne. (http://www.mav.asn.au/catchment/content/ProjectRec_implem.htm) Municipal Association of Victoria. (2003). The Rural Zones Review Reference Group Discussion and Options Paper. Municipal Association of Victoria, Melbourne. Norman, K., Sampson, K. and Canobie, A. (2003). Community Involvement in Successful Catchment Management Shepparton Irrigation Region, Victoria, Australia. ANCID Conference Shepparton. (http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/environ/pubgood/sub206e2.pdf) Rural Zones Review Reference Group (2003). Rural Zones Review, Discussion and Options Paper. Department of Sustainability and Environment, East Melbourne. Shire of Strathbogie. (2000). Municipal Fire Prevention Strategy. Shire of Strathbogie, Euroa. Shire of Strathbogie. (2003a). Community Building. In Council Meeting Minutes 15 / 04 / 03, retrieved [23 / 07 / 03] from http://www.strathbogie.vic.gov.au/Page/page.asp?Page_Id=157&h=1. Shire of Strathbogie, (2003b). “Community Building”. In Shire of Strathbogie Council Minutes. Retrieved: [23 / 8 / 2003], from http://www.strathbogie.vic.gov.au Shire of Strathbogie. (2003c). Land Management Program. Shire of Strathbogie, Euroa. Shire of Strathbogie. (2003d). Land Management Program, Weed Management Responsibilities. Shire of Strathbogie, Euroa. Shire of Strathbogie. (2003e). Strathbogie Planning Scheme. Department of Sustainability and Environment. Shire of Strathbogie, Euroa. Victorian Farmers Federation. Submission to Rural Zones Review. Victorian Farmers Federation, Melbourne. Victorian Farmers Federation. (2002). Right to Farm, Victorian Farmers Federation State Election Policy. Victorian Farmers Federation, Melbourne. Victorian National Parks Association. (2003). Submission to Rural Zones Review. Victorian National Parks Association, Melbourne. Wilson, J., Ford, J., and Lavis,, T. (2004). ‘Driver Research Phase Background Report 1: Land use impacts on native biodiversity.’ In J. Crosthwaite, J. Callaghan, Q. Farmar-Bowers, C. Hollier and A. Straker (eds). Land Use Changes, their Drivers and Impact on Native Biodiversity – Driver Research Phase 1: overview report. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne. Wilson, A., Jansen, A., Curtis, A., and Robertson, A. (2003). Understanding landholder management of riparian zones in the Goulburn Broken Catchment. Johnston Centre, Charles Stuart University, Report No. 177. Charles Stuart University, Wagga Wagga, NSW.

28 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

Appendix 1 Honeysuckle Creek Study Area

29 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

Appendix 2 Strathbogie Shire Council planning permits by type (1 July 2002 – 30 June 2003)

PLANNING PERMIT TYPES FOR 1 JULY 2002 TO 30 JUNE 2003

57.83%

60.00% Native Vegetation Removal

50.00% Rural/Residential Subdivisons 40.00%

Agricultural 30.00% Practices

10.87% 10.87% PERCENTAGES 20.00% 10% 8.70% Dwellings & Sheds

10.00%

Other 0.00% 1

PLANNING CATEGORY

30 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

Appendix 3 Percentage area of each municipality covered by rural zones

Greater Campaspe Mitchell Murrindindi Moira Strathbogie Mansfield Benalla Rural Shepparton

Rural Zone 82% 89% 68% 54% 87% 89% 30% 72%

Environmental Rural Zone 7% 1% Less than 1% Less than 1% Less than 1% 1%

Rural Living Zone 2% 1% 1% Less than 1% Less than 1% 3% 1%

PUBLIC LAND ZONES

Public Conservation. & Resource 8% 4% 11% 44% 11% 8% 63% 19%

Road - 2 categories Less than 1% 1% 1% Less than 1% Less than 1% 1% Less than 1% 1%>2%

ENVIRONMENT AND LANDSCAPE OVERLAYS

Environmental Significance 5 schedules 4 schedules 1 schedule 1 schedule 2 schedules 2 schedules

Vegetation Protection 2 schedules 2 schedules 1 schedule 1 schedule 3 schedules

Significant Landscape 3 schedules 2 schedules 1 schedule 2 schedules 1 schedule

Source: Ryan, M. pers. comm. (2004)

31 DRIVERS OF LAND USE CHANGE Driver Research Phase Background Report 9: Land use policy

www.dse.vic.gov.au 32