Can offsets really compensate for habitat removal? The case of the endangered red-tailed black-cockatoo

Maron, Martine, Dunn, Peter K., McAlpine, Clive A. and Apan, Armando (2010) Can offsets really compensate for habitat removal? The case of the endangered red-tailed black-cockatoo. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47 2: 348-355. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01787.x

Author Maron, Martine
Dunn, Peter K.
McAlpine, Clive A.
Apan, Armando
Title Can offsets really compensate for habitat removal? The case of the endangered red-tailed black-cockatoo
Journal name Journal of Applied Ecology   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0021-8901
Publication date 2010-04
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01787.x
Volume 47
Issue 2
Start page 348
End page 355
Total pages 8
Place of publication Oxford, United Kingdom
Publisher Blackwell
Collection year 2011
Language eng
Subject 0501 Ecological Applications
0502 Environmental Science and Management
0602 Ecology
Formatted abstract
1. Habitat offsets are increasingly used in attempts to avoid the impacts of permitted habitat removal on biodiversity, but their ability to achieve a genuine compensatory effect is a matter of debate. Approaches to offsetting typically aim to achieve ‘no net loss’ of habitat over time, yet few evaluations exist of whether this outcome is feasible.

2. We investigated the potential of offsets to mitigate the impacts of habitat removal in the long term using a case study of future scenarios of habitat availability for an endangered bird, the south-eastern red-tailed black-cockatoo Calyptorhynchus banksii graptogyne. Important food resources for this species include scattered large buloke Allocasuarina luehmannii trees which are under threat of removal for agricultural intensification. We projected availability of large buloke trees over a 150-year period, initially using recent rates of decline to inform a ‘business as usual’ scenario, then examining alternative scenarios reflecting different offset strategies.

3. All scenarios suggested that numbers of large trees will continue to decline for at least 100 years. Because of time lags in resource maturation, offsets were unable to achieve no net loss in the medium-term, and the most plausible offset scenarios were inadequate to compensate for habitat loss at year-100, when resource availability was lowest.

4. To minimize the temporal extent and severity of this future resource bottleneck, offsets must include both replanting and protection of other large, at-risk trees, with a high ratio of protected trees to trees cleared.

5.Synthesis and applications. The success of habitat offsets in cases where there is a significant lag between habitat loss and replacement of resources for a threatened species is likely to be low, because resource bottlenecks become a significant threat to the persistence of the species. In order to identify habitat protection options that will genuinely offset habitat removal, it is essential to estimate explicitly the ‘avoided loss’ of habitat attributable to its protection.
© 2010 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2010 British Ecological Society
Keyword Biodiversity offsets
Future scenarios
Habitat loss
Red-tailed black-cockatoo
Resource modelling
Scattered trees
Agricultural landscapes
Southern Australia
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: School of Geography, Planning and Environmental Management Publications
Official 2011 Collection
Ecology Centre Publications
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 32 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 31 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Sun, 28 Mar 2010, 00:04:27 EST