LDC New Incentives Report | Página 68

ement actions – no major reshaping
Wilkinson et al. 2015)
farm, Brooks, pers. comm)
Remediation of active gullies- major works including reshaping
D
B
B
Negativ
e
H( 70 % effective ness, Wilkinson et al. 2015)
M but less well establis hed than for hillslope gullies
Zero to negative
N / A
$ 18 million($ 60,000 / ha and 300 ha gullies on a 20,000 ha farm( Brooks, pers. comm.)
Probably yes
Probably no
Streamb ank erosion
Management of stock on frontage country to achieve end of dry season ground cover targets
C
C-D( Park and Dickson, 2015)
C- B( Waterhou se et al., 2017)
B
L
H
M
M
L
$ 15,980 / km for fencing, off-stream water and natural regeneration( Bartley et al., 2015)
No or small – landholders should maintain fences
Yes
Regeneration of riparian frontage( large waterways)
N / A D B Assume tied to stock management 0 0 No
Engineered stream bank toe protection or bed protection
Engineering success will be highly dependent on upstream measures – best decided by NQDT or DNRME and not landholders
$ 143,880 / km for battering and up to over $ 5 million / km if major rock structures are needed( Bartley et al., 2015)
Probably yes
No
66 | Landholders driving change: Exploring new incentives