Guidelines for selecting an appropriate currency in biodiversity offset transactions.

When designing biodiversity offset transactions, selecting the appropriate currency for measuring losses and gains to biodiversity is crucial. Poorly designed currencies reduce the likelihood that the proposed offset will sufficiently compensate for the development impact on the affected biota. We present a framework for identifying appropriate offset currencies for terrestrial biodiversity features, either vegetation communities or particular species. The guidelines were developed based on a review of issues and solutions presented in the existing literature, including government policies and guidance. We assert that while benchmark-based condition scores provide a suitable offset transaction currency for vegetation communities, this approach is also commonly applied to individual species based on the often-unproven assumption that vegetation quality is a proxy for the value of a site to that species. We argue that species are better served by species-specific currencies based on either species abundance, or the suitability and amount of the habitat available. For species where it is practical and meaningful to measure the abundance on site, an abundance-based currency using either directly observable or proxy indicators is the most representative measure of the net impact on the species. In other instances, such as when species are difficult to locate, or not reliably present on site, a currency based on the quality and amount of habitat is preferable. The habitat-quality component should be measured relative to its value for the species, with the most important attributes weighted accordingly. Ensuring the currency used in biodiversity offset transactions is practical to measure, and relevant to the species or vegetation community is an important step in minimising the net biodiversity losses from unavoidable impacts.

Linear infrastructure impacts on landscape hydrology.

The extent of roads and other forms of linear infrastructure is burgeoning worldwide, but their impacts are inadequately understood and thus poorly mitigated. Previous studies have identified many potential impacts, including alterations to the hydrological functions and soil processes upon which ecosystems depend. However, these impacts have seldom been quantified at a regional level, particularly in arid and semi-arid systems where the gap in knowledge is the greatest, and impacts potentially the most severe. To explore the effects of extensive track, road, and rail networks on surface hydrology at a regional level we assessed over 1000 km of linear infrastructure, including approx. 300 locations where ephemeral streams crossed linear infrastructure, in the largely intact landscapes of Australia's Great Western Woodlands. We found a high level of association between linear infrastructure and altered surface hydrology, with erosion and pooling 5 and 6 times as likely to occur on-road than off-road on average (1.06 erosional and 0.69 pooling features km-1 on vehicle tracks, compared with 0.22 and 0.12 km-1, off-road, respectively). Erosion severity was greater in the presence of tracks, and 98% of crossings of ephemeral streamlines showed some evidence of impact on water movement (flow impedance (62%); diversion of flows (73%); flow concentration (76%); and/or channel initiation (31%)). Infrastructure type, pastoral land use, culvert presence, soil clay content and erodibility, mean annual rainfall, rainfall erosivity, topography and bare soil cover influenced the frequency and severity of these impacts. We conclude that linear infrastructure frequently affects ephemeral stream flows and intercepts natural overland and near-surface flows, artificially changing site-scale moisture regimes, with some parts of the landscape becoming abnormally wet and other parts becoming water-starved. In addition, linear infrastructure frequently triggers or exacerbates erosion, leading to soil loss and degradation. Where linear infrastructure densities are high, their impacts on ecological processes are likely to be considerable. Linear infrastructure is widespread across much of this relatively intact region, but there remain areas with very low infrastructure densities that need to be protected from further impacts. There is substantial scope for mitigating the impacts of existing and planned infrastructure developments.

Under the radar: mitigating enigmatic ecological impacts.

Identifying the deleterious ecological effects of developments, such as roads, mining, and urban expansion, is essential for informing development decisions and identifying appropriate mitigation actions. However, there are many types of ecological impacts that slip 'under the radar' of conventional impact evaluations and undermine the potential for successful impact mitigation (including offsets). These 'enigmatic' impacts include those that are small but act cumulatively; those outside of the area directly considered in the evaluation; those not detectable with the methods, paradigms, or spatiotemporal scales used to detect them; those facilitated, but not directly caused, by development; and synergistic impact interactions. Here, we propose a framework for conceptualising enigmatic impacts and discuss ways to address them.