|
Remediation of active gullies- minor works / management actions – no major reshaping
Remediation of active gullies- major works including re-shaping
|
Maybe or no
Maybe or no
|
The comments as for hillslope gullies. Incentives need to be on the basis of an assessment of benefits and costs and whether the landholder can meet requirements associated with maintaining the benefits( binding agreement extending to future property owners). If these can’ t be agreed, then another mechanism or no action would be more appropriate. |
|
Streambank erosion |
Management of stock on frontage country to achieve end of dry season ground cover targets |
Yes |
Yes – if there are high public benefits, low private benefits. Landholders would be expected to maintain fences and would need to agree( binding agreement and accept that compliance measures are an important part of the agreement). Demonstrating that there are sufficient off-stream watering points could be an important part of assessing whether stock management on frontage country will achieve the public benefits benefits, otherwise there is potential for a perverse outcome( more paddocks for grazing management but without stock exclusion from waterways). |
Regeneration of riparian frontage( large waterways) |
No |
No – the primary means of achieving riparian regeneration is through grazing management. |