10 March, 2017
Offsets are being used to greenwash mining and property developments that destroy wildlife habitat: study
The use of biodiversity offsetting schemes in NSW is adding extinction pressure to the very species those schemes are supposed to protect, a new report has found.
Biodiversity offsetting lets a developer clear bushland if they buy, protect and improve bushland elsewhere.
“In theory, offsetting is supposed to ensure there is no loss in biodiversity values,” said Nature Conservation Council CEO Kate Smolski. “In practice, offsetting is pushing species to the brink.”
A report compiled by NCC titled Paradise Lost: The weakening and widening of biodiversity offsetting in NSW, 2005-2016 examined case studies where offsets have been used in association with major developments across the state. It found in 75% of cases, offsets resulted in “Poor” or “Disastrous” outcomes for wildlife and bushland, while only 25% resulted in “Adequate” outcomes. None resulted in “Good” outcomes for nature.
“The use of dodgy offsets is a new form of greenwash that gives extremely harmful developments a veil of environmental credibility they don’t deserve,” Ms Smolski said.
“The design of the state’s biodiversity offsets schemes has been distorted to meet the demands of industry and are now a massive eco-con that adds extinction pressure to the very species these schemes are supposed to protect.
“The new scheme the government is proposing to bolt on to its new biodiversity and land clearing laws in coming months is the weakest and most environmentally dangerous scheme of them all.
“Rather than closing the loopholes in existing schemes, the government’s proposed Biodiversity Assessment Methodology (BAM) will open them even further, with potentially disastrous consequences for our native species.
“The BAM weakens the ‘like-for-like’ principle, which requires that habitat in offset areas be the same as the habitat being destroyed. It fails to provide absolute protection for even the rarest and most precious habitats, and has no mechanism to ensure offset areas are protected in perpetuity.”
The report makes 13 recommendations required to ensure the proposed new scheme provides adequate environmental protections.
Report findings
- Biodiversity offsetting schemes have failed to protect threatened native animals and plants, as promised.
- Biodiversity offsetting schemes have become weaker and more widely available.
- The proposed new scheme is the weakest and potentially most harmful scheme so far.
Report: http://www.nature.org.au/media/250550/bio-offsetting-report_v14.pdf
Tags
Forests and wildlifePlanning and DevelopmentNSW ParliamentRivers and wetlandsCoal and gas
Let others know about this issue