FIGHT FOR FAIR: Our investigation into Queensland vegetation management laws continues
This week we continue our series shining the spotlight on the impacts the Queensland vegetation management laws have on farmers.
WITH some of Queensland in flood and half suffering in drought, farmers say the vegetation management laws make it harder for an already struggling agriculture industry.
Grazier and earthmoving contractor Cameron Tickell said terminology like “land clearing” had become “a dirty word”.
Living on a property west of Charleville in southwest Queensland, Mr Tickell said the vegetation management laws were ruining the landscape and starving the agricultural industry.
After buying his property in 2012, Mr Tickell said they had been in drought ever since.
He said mulga meant he had been able to keep his breeding herd without the need to destock.
“(Mulga has) taken the stress off during the drought and let us keep our breeders,” he said.
“But because of the new laws, it’s looking like we might have to destock because our fodder reserves have been cut back.”
As part of his earthmoving business, Mr Tickell has specialised in harvesting regrowth for 23 years.
He said thickening of the vegetation was the biggest problem.
“The terminology of land clearing is like a dirty word. We’re managing the regrowth and the ecosystem,”
Mr Tickell said.
“Years ago, farmers could harvest 100 per cent of their mulga in the hard times, and it would rain and grow back. Then when the next drought came along they would harvest it again.
“They use that word ‘land clearing’ when it should be ‘regrowth control’. We’re
maintaining the ecosystem to its natural state, and feeding our livestock at the same time.”
Farmers in the mulga lands said the biggest issue was the change to the thinning code as part of the vegetation management law review.
“The beauty of thinning laws was we could go in with the dozers and harvest the mulga in between the big trees,” Mr Tickell said.
“Under a thinning permit you could harvest up to 90 per cent of the mulga.”
Under the new thinning code, farmers cannot clear within a 5m radius of remnant vegetation, which for most species is a tree 1.3m above the ground with a 20cm diameter and for eucalyptus a 30cm diameter.
Mr Tickell said the thinning laws were unworkable.
Now, using a selective fodder harvesting permit, graziers are only able to clear 50 per cent of mulga.
“It’s having a huge impact on people.
“Go and take away a percentage of anyone’s business or cash flow and see how they like it – if you had 100 bales of hay in the shed and the government has come along and said you can only use 50.
“Over 17 years we’ve gone from being able to use 100 bales to only being allowed to use half of that.”
Mr Tickell said the laws were stopping farmers from being able to manage a healthy ecosystem.
“By taking thinning away, there is a lot of country that doesn’t even have any mulga in it that gets overgrown and kills all the other vegetation,”
Mr Tickell said.
“On my property the regrowth has become so thick underneath the trees that all the big trees have been choked out.
“That’s the concept we’re trying to get through to environmentalists. They think letting all the trees grow is the solution.
“It’s the thickening of the vegetation that is really going to affect our regional ecosystems in Queensland.”
Mr Tickell said he was lucky a large part of his land sat under Category X, which means he is free to harvest the land as he pleases, but for landowners whose properties are mostly Category B, or land that requires a permit to harvest, the vegetation management laws are making it tough.
“All we’ve been doing since the thinning laws came back in in 2013 is using it to control regrowth and feed stock. It’s been a great method for people because they had so much more to feed their stock during the drought,” he said.
“It’s the uncertainty graziers get frustrated with. I think history repeats itself where every time there’s an election we lose more of our fodder reserves, which is in turn our livelihood.
“In our category B areas it’s (the landscape) getting out of control. It’s going to be 10-15 years until people stop looking through their green goggles and realise what they’ve done to the ecosystems.
“We need a tree-grass balance.
“They need to realise they’re causing major problems and starving our ag industry. Maybe Australia needs to starve first before they realise.”
Charleville farmer Scott Sargood has been an advocate for the mulga lands since the law changes were proposed.
He said he was being forced to destock 50 per cent of the cattle on his property.
“I still had Category X country I could feed, and I’ve been feeding off that up until now. But I don’t have enough Category X country to see me through the winter,”
Mr Sargood said.
“I have to reduce my stock numbers because the thinning code is unusable and the fact that fodder has been restricted.
“I won’t be able to maintain the current numbers, so basically I’ve been forced to reduce them.
“We can’t feed them adequately and comply with the rules and also be cost effective.”
Mr Sargood said people used the old thinning code on their properties for a number of reasons.
“We need to keep our timber under control and to help substitute fodder,” he said.
“With the thickening of the mulga, it’s killing habitat trees and everything.
“The grasses haven’t got a chance and habitat trees haven’t got a chance. It kills everything if it’s not managed.”
While the thinning code hasn’t been completely taken away, Mr Sargood said the cost and rules of the new thinning code made it unmanageable.
“The only reason they haven’t taken it away completely is so when the media come to them they can say, ‘Oh, well that’s a lie, they can still thin’.
“It was originally $3000 just to apply, and then we were told by a consultant it would be about $10,000 to do all the paperwork.
“And that doesn’t even guarantee you’ll get the
permit.”
Dirranbandi sheep and cattle farmer Don Perkins said they didn’t have any mulga in his district but the vegetation management laws were still causing degradation to local landscapes.
Mr Perkins said the most frustrating part about the vegetation debate was that all parties wished for a healthy landscape.
Queensland Government holds Grazing Land Management workshops to teach farmers how to maintain their land in Class A condition.
The criteria for Class A condition includes:
■ No sign or only early signs of woodland thickening;
■ Ground cover dominated by perennial, palatable and productive grasses;
■ Good soil condition, no erosion and good surface condition;
■ Few weeds and no significant infestations; and
■ Maximum moisture penetration.
“That’s exactly what I’d call a healthy landscape,” Mr Perkins said.
“They teach you in a drought to try and maintain ground cover, as country recovers from a drought much quicker if ground cover is maintained.
“Yet frustratingly there is another lot of bureaucrats advising the government on laws that make thinning virtually impossible, resulting in this landscape slipping into D Class condition where we have thickening timber, erosion, establishment of weeds and no ground cover – a very unhealthy landscape.
“We have areas of thick regrowth, no ground cover, lippia has been established.
“They don’t understand that there has to be a balance where you have the trees at such a density that allows good ground cover, no weeds, good moisture penetration and no erosion. We have no desire to knock over all the trees, it’s getting the balance right that is important.”
Overgrown vegetation and lack of ground cover will inhibit a graziers’ ability to prepare for drought, according to Mr Perkins.
“It’s the lack of the ability to maintain land in Class A condition. The lack of ability to thin will reduce our ability to prepare for a drought,” he said.
“The land will be covered in trees and there will be no pasture. We need to be able to thin to maintain ground cover and good pasture.”
Mr Perkins said different landscapes required different tree densities.
“We have no mulga here. We have areas of mitchell grass and black soil country. Our main issue is more on lighter-soiled country that has timber like sandalwood, wilga and box. The main issue is the thickening of sandalwood and box,” he said.
“The timber is constantly regrowing. This country is never going to be treeless.
“We had a mass of regrowth come in after the 2012 flood. I am spraying some now for the fifth time.
“Regrowth in this area is constant. There is far more timber here now than when white man first came here.”
A Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy spokesperson said the department was currently reviewing the Accepted Development Codes for Vegetation Clearing in conjunction with scientific advice from the Queensland Herbarium and CSIRO to ensure they aligned with the purpose of the Vegetation Management Act 1999.
“These codes ensure landholders continue to have the flexibility to conduct low-risk activities to manage their properties,” the spokesperson said.
“The Vegetation Management Act amendments are designed to ensure sustainable development.
“Fodder harvesting is still self-assessable, landholders can still harvest up to half the regulated mulga on their properties, as it was before the amendments.
“All thinning codes were withdrawn as advice from the CSIRO stated that thinning was not a low-risk activity that was suitable for selfassessment. Landholders can still thin by completing a development application.”
The department spokesperson said extensive consultation was undertaken regarding the amendments, which included 13,000 submissions to the State Development, Natural Resources and Agricultural Industry Development Committee.