Protected Plants Compliance Plan 2014-15
Protected Plants Compliance Plan 2014-15
1. Purpose of this plan
This protected plants compliance plan (this plan) has been prepared by the Department of
Environment and Heritage Protection (EHP).
The purpose of this plan is to provide EHP staff undertaking compliance functions with information that
will deliver direction and assist decision making regarding compliance responses to alleged offences
involving protected plants.
2. Background
Queensland has over 8,000 native flowering plant species and more than 1,400 non-flowering plant
species (gymnosperms, ferns and mosses), with new species being discovered every year. More than
30% of these species are unique to Queensland.
Majority of Queensland's native flora species are not considered to be threatened. They are listed
as least concern which means, they are likely to survive in the wild. Of the total native plant species,
201 species are listed as endangered, 393 as vulnerable, 439 as near threatened, and 23
are presumed to be extinct in the wild. There are no known mosses, liverworts, hornworts, lichens or
fungi currently considered to be threatened or near threatened.
The review of the protected plants legislative framework arose out of a need to contemporise the
framework, and to assess its currency and effectiveness in achieving the conservation and
preservation of threatened plants. Businesses, landholders and other interested parties operating
under the framework identified that the existing legislation concerning protected plants is complicated
and burdensome, and difficult for operators to interpret and regulators to effectively implement and
administer. These factors have led to a lack of compliance with regulatory requirements and, in turn,
poor conservation outcomes for protected plants.
Changes to legislation include replacing the eleven types of licences, permits and authorities with
three licences and permit types. De-regulating the trade of protected plants, provided lawful records
are kept of trade and movement. Removing the regulation of least concern protected plants for
harvesting, growing and clearing activities where the plants do not form supporting habitat of
endangered, vulnerable or near threatened plants. Introducing a protected plant harvesting licence to
create opportunities for the harvest of whole plants and plant parts, where the applicant can
demonstrate the sustainability of the harvest, plus many more.
3. Strategic compliance focus areas
A clearly defined compliance program is essential to ensuring that the legislative framework for
protected plants is applied in a way that enables the harvesting and production of protected plants by
the public in a way that is ecological sustainable and does not affect the conservation of individual
species.
The EHP protected plants compliance program will focus on:
(a) actions that would potentially undermine the integrity of the approval framework for harvesting and
growing of protected plants:
-
Ensuring sustainable harvest of endangered, vulnerable and near threatened species and
least concern species can be demonstrated when undertaking harvesting. This must be
shown under a sustainable harvest plan.
-
Harvesting must comply with the Code of Practice for the taking and use of protected
plants.
-
Ensuring number of plants harvested does not exceed allowed amount.
-
Parties involved in trade of native plants must demonstrate that the plants are legally
sourced from the wild and traded legitimately. This is through self-regulated recordkeeping and attaching trade labels to plants and plant parts.
Page 2 of 6 • 140321
Department of Environment and Heritage Protection
Protected Plants Compliance Plan 2014-15
(b) wilful ‘take’ of protected plants which has not been authorised under the NCA.
(c) Clearing of endangered, vulnerable and near threatened plants in high risk areas without a clearing
permit.
(d) Ensuring flora survey trigger maps are checked prior to undertaking clearing activities.
(e) Ensuring flora surveys are undertaken where trigger maps make this a requirement.
4. Compliance responsibilities
4.1 General audits of licences
EHP is committed to ensuring licence holders uphold their legal obligations in respect to applicable
legislation. A common way of ensuring this is to conduct targeted desktop audits and site inspections
based on target sites and areas identified from analysis and risk assessment.
An annual audit target of:
25 of protected plants harvesting licences (other than sandalwood)
3 of sandalwood protected plants harvesting licences
10 of protected plant growing licences
20 of clearing permits
Audits done as a consequence of preliminary investigations contribute to the target.
4.2 Preliminary investigations
EHP’s Enforcement Guidelines state “In order to determine whether enforcement action will be taken,
EHP will investigate all significant breaches of the law and then exercise its discretion in a consistent
and logical fashion”. For the purpose of this plan any complaint or alleged offence which appears to
fall within the above strategic compliance focus areas is to be regarded as a significant breach of the
law (a significant breach).
However in all instances it will be necessary for a preliminary investigation to be conducted to assess
whether actions which are being or which have been taken constitute a significant breach, particularly
if the matter is brought to the attention of an EHP officer through a public complaint rather than by
direct observation.
Some preliminary investigations may be able to be undertaken on a desk top basis. However many
will need to involve a site visit by a Nature Conservation Services (NCS) conservation officer as
directed by the relevant Wildlife Management Regional Manager, or by a police officer, to ascertain
what is occurring or has occurred, particularly in circumstances where the alleged unlawful activity is
reported to be happening at the time e.g. clearing of endangered trees on a development site or
selling of unlawfully acquired plants at a weekend market.
A preliminary investigation which involves a site visit by an EHP Wildlife Management officer must be
approved by a Senior Ranger or higher level within that business unit.
All complaints (including alleged offences initially observed by EHP staff) are to be subject to
preliminary assessment through a risk based approach. The preliminary investigation should consider
factors such as:
Page 3 of 6 • 140321
Department of Environment and Heritage Protection
Protected Plants Compliance Plan 2014-15
 whether the reported or observed activities appear to be lawful on the basis of available
information.

the level of potential impact on protected plants, such as the likelihood that:
- conservation of individual plant species will be effected in the wild;
- harvesting, growing and trading will impact on the ecological sustainability of the species.

the level of actual or anticipated public and/or media interest.

the availability of supporting evidence.
Determination of whether a preliminary assessment indicates a significant breach or a lower priority
breach sits with the position EHP Wildlife Management Regional/Operational Manager or Director
Wildlife Management.
Examples of significant breaches and lower priority breaches are:
Significant breach
(a) Illegal take of endangered, vulnerable or near threatened plants from the wild.
(b) Clearing has occurred where a flora survey trigger map desk top assessment has not been
undertaken.
(c) Not undertaking a flora survey where a trigger map requires a flora survey to be undertaken
prior to any clearing commencing.
(d) Illegal harvesting of endangered, vulnerable, near threatened or special least concern plant
species by greater than 5% of the permitted harvesting limit, or where the harvester has
previously been given a warning letter about exceeding the harvesting limit in the past two
years.
(e) Harvesting endangered, vulnerable, near threatened or special least concern plant species in a
way that does not comply with the Code of Practice for the taking and use of protected plants.
(f)
The person trading in protected plants does not provide trade labels, official tags and records to
show the plants were legally sourced from the wild and traded legitimately.
(g) An approved offset is not implemented out by the wildlife authority holder, or not implemented
in a manner that is consistent with the offset plan.
Lower priority breach
(a) Exceeding the allowed amount to harvest on a protected plants harvesting licence for near
threatened or special least concern plant species by not more than 5% of the permitted
harvesting limit in circumstances where the harvester has not previously been given a warning
letter in respect to exceeding the harvesting limit within the past two years.
(b) An applicant not acting under an approved sustainable harvest plan.
(c) A trade label does not contain all the required information.
Where a preliminary assessment indicates a significant breach is occurring or has occurred, the
approach set out in 4.2 below is to be taken. A matter which has been assessed as a lower priority
breach is to be responded to in accordance with 4.3 below.
Page 4 of 6 • 140321
Department of Environment and Heritage Protection
Protected Plants Compliance Plan 2014-15
4.2.1 Interim intervention
In circumstances where an alleged offence has been confirmed to be occurring at the time, a
conservation officer may request the involved persons to cease any activity which constitutes a
breach while a determination is made regarding the compliance response (an interim intervention).
An EHP Wildlife Management Regional/Operational Manager or the Director Wildlife Management
may approve that Queensland police be requested to undertake an interim intervention. If a police
officer who is also appointed as a conservation officer decides to assist, the officer may choose to
respond under the NCA or the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (PPRA).
Police officers who are not conservation officers may respond under the PPRA.
Note: Where a police officer reasonably suspects that a place contains evidence of an offence
against the NCA and that the evidence may be concealed or destroyed unless the place is
immediately entered and searched, the police officer may enter the place without a search warrant
and exercise search warrant powers.
4.3 Responding to a significant breach
Any incident which appears to constitute a significant breach requires an investigation by EHP in a
timely manner having regard to factors such as its relationship to overall priorities and staff
availability.
Such investigations are to be initiated by the Director Wildlife Management using NCS conservation
officers/EHP investigators or Queensland police officers who hold an appointment as a conservation
officer.
At any point that an investigation which is being led by EHP appears likely to result in prosecution
proceedings or to necessitate EHP obtaining a search warrant, the investigation should proceed by
way of a Formal Investigation Request (FIR) 1 for consideration at the next scheduled meeting of the
EHP Compliance Steering Committee2, or at the first opportunity out-of-session for urgent matters.
Further procedural advice for investigating significant breaches are set out in Attachment 1.
4.4 Responding to a lower priority breach
A lower priority breach is to be responded to on a strategic basis having regard to factors such as its
relationship to overall priorities and staff availability.
Lower priority breaches are to be investigated as soon as practicable, unless on the basis of the
preliminary investigation it appears that there is a low likelihood of evidence being available.
An educative approach is ordinarily to be adopted for responding to lower priority breaches which
would not require formal interviews to be conducted with involved persons. However if the
circumstances indicate that an elevated response would be appropriate, such as the issuing of a
formal warning or an infringement notice, the procedures set out in Attachment 1, for investigating a
significant breach are to be followed.
4.5 Complainant advice
In all cases of a significant or lower priority breach being brought to the attention of EHP through a
public complaint, the complainant is to be advised of the outcome of the investigation at an
appropriate time while having regard to privacy considerations.
1
2
The NCS FIR procedure guide is available at http://steps/steps/references/pg-ncs-formal-investigations-requests.pdf.
The Compliance Steering Committee ordinarily meets fortnightly, but can operate out-of-season in urgent circumstances.
Page 5 of 6 • 140321
Department of Environment and Heritage Protection
Protected Plants Compliance Plan 2014-15
Attachment 1
Procedures for investigating suspected significant breaches
 If a suspected protected plant related offence appears to constitute a significant breach for the
purposes of this plan, a preliminary investigation should be conducted into the matter by NCS
Conservation officers (e.g. checking on any possible wildlife authorities that may apply,
securing preliminary statements from complainants or witnesses).
 Officer safety is to be the paramount consideration.
 If the preliminary investigation indicates that it is likely that a significant breach has occurred
the matter should proceed by way of a Formal Investigation Request (FIR) 3.
Procedures for investigating suspected lower priority breaches
 If a suspected protected plant related offence appears to constitute a lower priority breach for
the purposes of this plan an NCS conservation officer should:
-
advise involved persons of the relevant provisions of the legislation or if applicable, the
wildlife authority,
-
ask the person or persons to cease any activity which constitutes an offence, and
-
outline the options that are available to continue to conduct the work as a lawful activity,
-
having regard to the EHP Enforcement Guidelines, conduct an investigation to the extent
appropriate into the suspected offence apply an appropriate compliance response to the
circumstances such as education, a formal warning letter of a penalty infringement notice.
 The officer’s approach should to the extent possible be empathetic and courteous, but clear
and firm.
 Officer safety is to be the paramount consideration.
Procedural advice for compliance activities
NCS conservation officers who respond to significant breaches relating to protected plants
should consult their relevant Regional Manager Wildlife Management in respect to any policy
direction for dealing with particular circumstances they encounter.
Within the bounds of any policy direction that may be given by the relevant Regional Manager
Wildlife Management, procedural or technical advice relating to the compliance response may be
sought from the NCS Manager Compliance.
3
The NCS FIR procedure guide is available at http://steps/steps/references/pg-ncs-formal-investigations-requests.pdf.
Page 6 of 6 • 140321
Department of Environment and Heritage Protection