Stage 2: Vegetation Management Frameworks amendments – new vs. old

In Brief

• On 2 December 2013 Stage 2 of the Vegetation Management Framework amendments was put into motion with the release of the Vegetation Management Framework Amendment Regulation 2013 (VMFR 2013) and the new mapping, assessment codes and policies.
• The VMFR 2013 introduced several new exemptions including small (<5 ha) developments, minor vegetation clearing and clearing under pre-approved plans. It also introduced nine self-assessable codes to do with rural property management and clearance of regrowth (that is still mapped as category C and R).
• Assessable vegetation clearing is now dealt with through State Assessment and Referral Agency (SARA) under State Development Assessment Provisions (SDAP) Module 8 Native Vegetation Clearing.  Module 8 reflects the performance outcomes of the previous Regional Vegetation Management Codes but the acceptable outcomes have changed, becoming less limiting on clearing and providing more opportunities to apply offsets.
• Two new relevant purposes have been included in Module 8; high value / irrigated high value agriculture and necessary environmental clearing. The development assessment process will include assessment under SDAP as well as the provision of an agricultural development plan or environmental clearing management plan.

Full Article

In May 2013, the Government passed the Vegetation Management Framework Amendment Act 2013 (VMFA 2013) that saw a range of changes to the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (VM Act) and its administration. Some of these changes came into force in July 2013, whilst other changes were proposed to occur later in 2013 after the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM) updated regulations and policies accordingly. Just to recapitulate, the major changes to be brought about by the VMFA 2013 were:

1.  New mapping system for ‘regulated vegetation’, which identifies category A-C, R and X.
2. High value regrowth (HVR) repealed from freehold and indigenous land, except for category C (where the Minister decides to keep the designation) and R (regrowth watercourses in the Great Barrier Reef catchment area).
3.  Relevant purposes to include ‘high value agriculture’ and ‘necessary environmental clearing’.
4. Self-assessment of rural land management, such as weed/pest control, fodder harvest, thinning, encroachment and property infrastructure.
5.  Changes to the penalties and enforcement systems.

These changes have been discussed in detail in my earlier article (https://gaiaenviro.com.au/2013/07/vegetation-management/).

The changes to the enforcement of the VM Act took place in July 2013.  On 2 December 2013 those remaining changes were put into play with the Vegetation Management Framework Amendment Regulation 2013 (VMFR 2013), the release of the new mapping, assessment codes and policies.  As per usual, the devil is in the detail and the following aims to discuss some of the most important changes contained within Stage 2 – Vegetation Management Framework amendments and compare them to the preceded system.

New exemptions

The VMFR 2013 introduced a number of new exemptions from the assessment of clearing under the VM Act.  Most of the pre-existing exemptions remain in place – some with a change in wording that relaxes or tightens controls on vegetation.  For example changes in the clearing extents for tracks and some other infrastructure and an exemption inclusive of all ‘resource activities’ (as opposed to just mining under Chapter 5A of the Environmental Protection Act 1992).  The most significant changes, however, are the new exemptions referring to clearing of land generally, which include:

•  clearing for material change of use (MCU) or reconfiguration of a lot (RaL) if the property is <5 ha;
•  clearing for disaster abatement (although a similar policy had been released in January 2013);
• clearing as per an ‘Area Management Plan’ (one of six pre-approved clearing plans regarding thinning, fodder harvesting and weed management across central and western Qld);
•  clearing forestry land for quarry works under the Transport Infrastructure Act 1994;
•  clearing for community infrastructure (any facility intended primarily to accommodate government functions and designated as such);
•  clearing for cadastral or geotechnical survey, providing the area is no more than 10m x 10m and access is <10m wide;
•  clearing for remediation of contaminated land;
•  clearing for activities authorised on abandoned mine sites; and
•  clearing under self-assessable codes.

All clearing of regulated vegetation that is not subject to an exemption is ‘assessable clearing’ under the VM Act and will be subject to assessment by the Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning (DSDIP) under the new centralised system.

New method for assessment

State Assessment and Referral Agency (SARA) is the new centralised development assessment agency in Queensland that sits within DSDIP. SARA relies on the use of State Development Assessment Provisions (SDAPs) and additional support from the relevant government agencies (e.g. DNRM) for the assessment of development applications.  A new native vegetation clearing SDAP was released with the VMFR 2013.  ‘Module 8: Native Vegetation Clearing’ provides one code for all assessable vegetation clearing in Queensland and incorporates a vegetation offset policy.

The structure of ‘Module 8’ is similar to the superseded Regional Vegetation Management Codes (RVMC) in that the assessment criteria are set out in tables according to the purpose of the clearing, e.g. public safety, infrastructure, extractive industry etc. However, some elements of the code have been split into differing requirements for coastal and non-coastal regions to reflect differences between the bioregions.  There are also new assessment tables for the additional relevant purposes; high value agricultural clearing (8.1.6) and necessary environmental clearing (8.1.7).  The old MCU and RaL policies have been dealt with succinctly in two additional tables (8.1.1 and 8.1.3), one of which addresses ‘general clearing’ and the avoidance of clearing in areas subject to permit disputes or offsets.  Within the assessment tables; the performance outcomes have been recycled from superseded codes, but the changes to the acceptable outcomes are quite extensive and the most significant of these are shown in the Table 1.  Generally speaking, the new codes allow for more intrusion into wetlands, waterways, endangered RE, of concern RE and essential habitat provided offsets can be supplied.

Table 1 Summary assessment tables relevant to clearing for development

Table 1 only discusses public safety, infrastructure, coordinated projects, extractive industry, high value agriculture and necessary environmental clearing because encroachment, fodder harvesting, thinning and weed management are now largely dealt with in self-assessable codes.

Self-assessment codes

There are nine new self-assessable codes reflecting rural property management purposes, they are:

1.  Managing fodder harvesting
2. Managing weeds
3. Managing encroachment
4. Managing thickened vegetation in the Mulga Lands
5.  Native forest practice
6.  Managing category C regrowth
7. Managing category R regrowth
8.  Managing clearing for necessary property infrastructure
9. Managing clearing to improve the operational efficiency of agriculture

Previously clearing for these purposes was all assessable development under the VM Act and applications were processed through DERM (now DNRM). In general, the new self-assessable codes are far more detailed and provide prescriptive guidelines to the landholders with regards to the limitations on clearing and other management methods.  The first five self-assessable codes reflect activities likely to be undertaken as agricultural land management, for example maintaining paddocks or providing an additional feed source to stock.  The detail of these codes has not changed substantially, however, in some instances where RE’s are listed as areas where activities can occur, the lists have changed slightly.  For example, fodder harvesting is now allowed in some Of Concern RE’s.  Further, the fodder harvesting cannot reduce the total area of the RE on a Lot to <50% of its extent within a 10 year period (previously 30% in 12 months). 

The new self-assessable codes for Category C and Category R regulated vegetation simply provide access to these areas for some form of controlled clearing.  The self-assessable code provides tables of assessment for all the clearing purposes identified in Module 8, e.g. thinning, necessary environmental clearing, extractive industry, necessary infrastructure etc.  The self-assessable codes contain elements of the superseded Regrowth Vegetation Code and still require ‘exchange areas’ for clearing of >2 ha of endangered or of concern regrowth (Category C).  However, exchange area requirements have been reduced to equal size to the cleared area or a minimum 1 ha, as opposed to 2:1.  Development in Category R is more restrictive and exchange areas are not acceptable solutions.

The self-assessable code for property infrastructure provides more detail around previous exemptions for fences, fire management and tracks and allow some limited clearing in of concern and endangered RE’s. Some slight changes have been made to these, for example, clearing for a fire break in non-coastal areas can be 30m (previously 20m), allowance of necessary tracks (up to 5m wide) and other infrastructure (with defined limitations on size) in endangered or of concern RE.

The self-assessable code for agricultural efficiency deals with situations where agricultural land may contain ‘islands’ or ‘irregular margins’ of native vegetation that may hinder the efficiency of farm operation. Amounts cleared under this code are limited to 5 ha or 10% of the cropped area (to a maximum of 100 ha) of low risk (i.e. not in a wetland/waterway or on steep land etc.) least concern RE.  Clearing of endangered and of concern RE’s is allowed if an exchange area is provided.

If you are clearing in accordance with a self-assessable code, the only requirement will be to notify DNRM and there is an online process for this.   If the clearing cannot be undertaken in accordance with the self-assessable code, then a development application will need to be lodged (provided there is a fitting relevant purpose) and the application will be assessed against the relevant assessment table in Module 8.  However, if the application cannot meet the self-assessable codes it is highly unlikely to satisfy the development assessment tables that are generally the same with a few minor exceptions (e.g. fodder harvesting in essential habitat can be offset and weed and pest management can result in opening the tree canopy provided it is limited to the extent necessary).

New relevant purposes

There are two new relevant purposes:

1. Clearing for high-value and irrigated high-value agricultural land (e.g. broadacre cropping, annual horticulture, perennial horticulture, grazing and plantation forestry)
2. Necessary environmental clearing (e.g. restore the ecological condition of the land, natural channel diversion, preparation for natural disaster and decontamination)

A development approval will be required for these activities and will ultimately be assessed against the codes in the SDAP Module 8 (discussed earlier). However, in addition to meeting the SDAP requirements a development plan (for agricultural purposes) or environmental clearing management plan will need to be prepared.  In both cases, DNRM recommends pre-lodgement meetings (arranged through SARA) to discuss the suitability of the application.

The environmental clearing management plan represents a rehabilitation strategy showing the area to be cleared and methodology for reinstatement.  However, the agricultural development plan is a bit more in depth requiring:

• Clearing location / extent and proof of no suitable alternative
• Water entitlements for irrigated projects
• Land suitability assessment (from available map data or report prepared by a suitably qualified person referencing ‘Guidelines for agricultural land evaluation’, ‘Land evaluation frameworks’, ‘Australian soil and land survey field handbook’ and ‘Guidelines for surveying soil and land resources’)
•  Financial viability (business plan prepared by a suitably qualified person)

Some of the data around land suitability is available through the Queensland Government’s new mapping system.

New mapping and removal of HVR

In late 2013, the Queensland government released the new mapping system for ‘regulated vegetation’.  The HVR is all but gone (with the exception of the new category C and R areas), but all other pre-existing information is available and the status of some RE’s has apparently been updated by the Queensland Herbarium.  There are also a couple of data layers for ‘high value agriculture’ indicating land suitability and potential crops, which is essential for a development application for agricultural purposes. 

The data is available through ‘Queensland Globe’.  The Queensland Globe uses Google Earth as a base for overlaying vegetation data but searches can still be performed through the DNRM website as well.  This represents an improvement in the ease and speed with which data can be accessed.

In conclusion, the changes made to the VM Act over the past year have relaxed the legislation and opened up more areas of native vegetation to clearing for a variety of purposes (particularly agriculture).  The changes have been met with mixed reviews. In relinquishing restrictions on regrowth vegetation and opening remnant vegetation to assessable agricultural development, the government seems to have gained the support of the farming industry.  However, conservation- minded people have been left feeling like the legislation has lost 20 years of traction.  Whether the VM Act is still able to achieve its original goal of ‘halting broadscale clearing in Queensland’ will become evident with the monitoring of clearing data, as the focus of DNRM is now able to switch to monitoring and enforcement.