A study commissioned by the Australian government on its biodiversity offset sites has found that 30% of the areas surveyed were in worse condition than before the projects started, and found missing, incomplete, and incorrect information in many of the projects’ documentation.

The Department of Climate Change, Environment, Energy, and Water engaged environmental consultancy Jacobs Group to collect “ground-truthing” data from offset sites established under federal environmental laws, the report, published Friday, explained.

The work was designed to boost confidence in offset integrity and monitoring capability, identify instances where inaccurate offset information had been provided to the department, and “assert a strong regulatory posture on environment assets”.

Twenty offset sites were selected – ten within southwest and central Victoria and ten in south-east Queensland  with field surveys conducted between July-Aug. 2023.

Ground-truthing found that 55% of sites sampled had maintained conditions, while 30% were worse off, 10% were improved, and the remaining sites were mixed, according to the report.

“These and other findings will inform longer-term activity to improve confidence in offset information and integrity,” the report said.

The surveys identified major inconsistencies with supporting the protected areas, known as Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES), at five of the 20 sites.

Four of the sites in Victoria had weed cover above thresholds for natural temperate grassland to grow, while one Queensland site had completed limited activity to establish habitats for grey-headed flying fox and Koala habitat, according to the report.

INCONSISTENCIES

Offset management was “generally occurring and being implemented across offset sites”, the report said. However, it noted erroneous and incomplete information leading to discrepancies being common through associated information.

“In some limited instances, site conditions as assessed were significantly different from those reported in the provided documentation, bringing into question the credibility of the information provided,” the report said.

It said offset site managers were “generally implementing management actions” but that some targets were difficult to achieve, particularly controlling herbaceous weeds across grasslands Victoria, which the report noted was difficult to manage and heavily influenced by recent years of high rainfall.

The Queensland sites achieved higher degrees of success due to it being easier to manage woody weeds, and revegetation of woody ecosystems was more effective in achieving gains than restoring grasslands.

However, the report also said monitoring of offset sites was “often incomplete or missing information to accurately assess progress towards targets”.

“Incomplete information and lack of detail in methods often made ground-truthing monitoring data difficult,” it said.

“The high amount of variation, incompleteness, and errors among provided documents and information was a considerable challenge in undertaking ground-truthing and affected consistency in provisions of offsets.”

The report reinforces the conclusions in a previous investigation by NGO the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF), which found the country’s environmental offset scheme took a ‘set and forget’ regulatory approach.

ACF told Carbon Pulse Wednesday that while it was encouraged the government had chosen to publish the latest report, its findings needed a complete overhaul as part of the ongoing reforms to the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.

“This report demonstrates that the conservation goals of offsets are a long way from the reality of what is happening on the ground,” ACF investigator Martine Lappan said.

“The government should stop relying so much on offsets and focus on better protection and enforcement. This could happen through a strong, independent, and well-resourced EPA.”

Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek told the Guardian the report was part of a broader audit on biodiversity offsets, which found 32 of 222 projects that were examined could be in non-compliance.

“I commissioned this audit because I was concerned about offsets,” she told the outlet.

“If people make a promise to protect nature, we expect them to keep it. If they don’t, there should be consequences.”

By Mark Tilly – mark@carbon-pulse.com

*** Click here to sign up to our twice-weekly biodiversity newsletter ***