Environmental offsets (was Re: [canberrabirds] preservation of birds and the sale of Block 9, Section 64 North Watson)

[Martin Butterfield <>]

I don't like the analogy.  

The Mona Lisa is unique and can't be reproduced (so perhaps is OK as an analogy for offsetting a fossil bed which can't be replaced).  With something like a patch of grassy box woodland its more like a Damien Hirst work, where with enough money and care (and waiting a while) the same (living) artist can produce an effectively identical replica.

The real problem comes when instead of getting Damien Hirst to reproduce the work in question (for a few million bucks) someone just ducks down to the fish market and comes back with a $10 Flathead.  And the 'decision maker' signs off on the deal.  IMHO that is a better analogy for what seems to have arisen in the case quoted on Background Briefing where an area of stringybark has been offered up as an offset to some high quality white box country.  

The real problem is not that the developers have tried to pull a swifty - that's just business as usual - but that the Minister has agreed to it.  Being extremely optimistic he will get punished for this in the next election.

Martin Butterfield

http://franmart.blogspot.com.au/

On 26 March 2014 16:31, David McDonald (personal) <> wrote:

Background Briefing 16 March 2014: The trouble with offsets http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/2014-03-16/5320906
quote
I'll say it's a furphy. To me it is akin to some guy going into that art gallery and pointing at the Mona Lisa on the wall and saying sorry mate we need that bit ... so the Mona Lisa has to go. But we will paint you another one.
We run the risk of trading something irreplaceable for the short term development gains with the mirage of having a good conservation outcome in the future through the activities of the offset.
unquote

David