PARK WATCH Article March 2025 |

Louise Costa, Goulburn Valley Environment Group (GVEG), looks at the continuing failure of native vegetation protection in Victoria

It’s almost 35 years since regulations prohibiting unauthorised clearing of native vegetation on freehold land were introduced. By then, Victoria had already lost close to 60 per cent of its original tree cover. Since then, another 300,000 hectares of native vegetation has been cleared – the regulations are clearly not working.

This ongoing loss is mostly on freehold land, much of it unregulated and unlawful. The loss includes Victoria’s most imperiled ecosystems: a reduction of 89,000 hectares of seasonal wetlands, 76,000 hectares of native grasslands and derived grasslands, 52,000 hectares of shrublands and 37,000 hectares of scattered trees.

Altogether, these losses represent almost 10 per cent of the total extent of native vegetation estimated to remain in Victoria on freehold land. In the Goulburn Valley, where our group is based and where at least 90 per cent of native vegetation has been removed since European colonisation, the ongoing losses represent the final wounds to our scarred ecosystems.

There are many other examples across Victoria of unauthorised native vegetation loss on freehold land, including:

  • An estimated loss of 6000 hectares of native grasslands on the Northern Plains west of Echuca since 1990, with about 500 hectares illegally cleared in the last year.
  • Up to 45 per cent increase in cropping of shallow wetlands since 2010.
  • Removal of multiple, government-funded habitat works established to help threatened wildlife in the Goulburn Valley such as Superb Parrots, Squirrel Gliders and Grey-crowned Babblers.
  • The rise of commercial logging on private land in central west, Central Highlands and East Gippsland.

In an area in the Goulburn Valley where GVEG has reported illegal clearing, the extent of tree cover has decreased substantially since 2018. A year on from our reporting of multiple incidents of native vegetation removal, there’s been no formal response and no action taken against the landowner.

Using statistics from DEECA’s annual reports on native vegetation removal, between 100 to 500 hectares of native vegetation is being approved for removal each year. However, Land Cover Time Series data indicates about 10,000 hectares per year is cleared – testimony to the stark reality that most clearing isn’t happening through formal processes.

In its 2022 report Offsetting Native Vegetation Loss on Private Land the Victorian Auditor-General’s Office concluded that ‘Victoria is not achieving its objective of no net biodiversity loss from native vegetation clearing on private land.’

The report further stated that ‘…DELWP, which is responsible for setting policy and regulations, including reporting on the no net loss objective, has been slow to address known issues to support councils’ implementation of the regulations’. The report made some excellent recommendations including for better data collection and real-time monitoring of clearing activity across the state. It concluded by suggesting a better strategic approach is needed to effectively manage native vegetation clearing on private land.

GVEG believes it’s the development of this strategic approach which is lacking. In our native vegetation protection policy, we have proposed that:

  • Mapped native vegetation on a property should become a standard part of Section 32 sale documents.
  • DEECA and councils should establish planning overlays for native vegetation that’s mapped as part of identified threatened vegetation communities or habitats protected under Victorian and federal environmental laws.
  • Use of the ‘critical habitat determination’ mechanism in the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act should be expanded to help conserve land with significant habitat features is critical to the survival of listed plants, animals and fungi.

We also think the compliance function needs to be centralised and managed either by a separate agency or a statewide enforcement branch. In parallel, the government’s commitment in its Biodiversity 2037 Plan to a whole-of-government approach to implementing that Plan (Priority 19) needs to be applied to all public authorities involved in native vegetation management.

Finally, the process of enforcing the regulations where there’s been alleged illegal clearing needs to be simplified to increase the effectiveness as a real deterrent.