The Ladies Who Bake (and organize, lobby, raise funds & volunteer) come out against coal seam gas exploration, mining and production

The Country Women’s Association (CWA) of New South Wales came together for its annual conference on 22-25th May 2017 for the 95th time and debated policy.

Photograph: The Land, 25 May 2017

At this conference the CWA passed the following motion:

Maules Creek Branch (Namoi Group):

Preamble: The results of hosting unconventional gas on farms are properties devalued, mortgages refused, insurance covers rejected, destroys families, divides communities, drains aquifers and turns land into dead zones, sick children, suicide and mental breakdowns.

“That the policy of CWA of NSW shall be to support a ban on unconventional gas exploration, extraction and production”.

With the largest women’s organisation in Australia now having this policy endorsed by one of its founding chapters, NSW Nationals leader and MP for Monaro John Barilaro’s statement that he saw no reason why the coal seam gas industry should not be supported in areas of the state where it would not affect prime agricultural land is not looking as robust a proposition as he perhaps thought two weeks ago.

NSW nurses & midwives stand with Pilliga-Narrabri communities against Santos coal seam gas project

“Santos expects to build 850 production wells over the next two decades” within the mining lease. ABC NEWS, 10 April 2017, PHOTO: An aerial shot of the Santos CSG exploration project in the Pilliga. (Audience supplied: Dean Sewell)

Echo NetDaily, 19 May 2017:

Local nurses are voicing their concerns about the threat to health in a submission to the government objecting not only to the Santos Narrabri Coal Seam Gas Project, but to all CSG mining across NSW.

It was following a successful motion put forward by the Lismore Base Hospital branch of the New South Wales Nurses and Midwives Association that the a submission was lodged.

‘As nurses and midwives we believe that an ecologically sustainable environment promotes health and wellbeing. We are greatly concerned about the health of communities impacted by CSG’, said Heather Ryan Dunn, midwife and Vice President of the Lismore Base branch of the NSWNMA. ‘We also know that climate change is the biggest threat we are currently facing and that decisions made today will impact greatly on future generations.’

The 20 page submission which includes references to CSG well accidents and risks to human health via contaminated water and air pollution, is one of approximately 12,000 already submitted in response to the EIS, a record breaking and resounding ‘no’ from objectors to the project.

Australian Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources seeks to place farm lands and water security in jeopardy

This man is the Deputy Prime Minister, Leader of the National Party of Australia and Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources.

Photograph found at The AIM Network

Member for New England Barnaby Joyce is also the same man who is irresponsibly calling for the dismantling of the already inadequate protections afforded rural and regional lands and water resources when coal seam gas miners move into a district.

Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce has started dismantling Australia's sweeping ban on coal seam gas drilling, arguing a new scheme to divert a share of government royalties to farmers will overcome furious opposition in the bush.

Mr Joyce on Friday embraced a South Australian government plan to pay farmers 10 per cent of royalties in exchange for allowing gas wells on their land, saying the scheme should be rolled out nationally, with an exclusion of prime agricultural land.

The Agriculture Minister said lifting moratoriums and giving landholders a fair price in exchange for access would equate to "a substantial turnaround in attitude and that is a very good outcome".

"I can't see people who start making hundreds of thousands or possibly millions of dollars a year having a backlash," Mr Joyce told Fairfax Media.

"I think you'll probably find them onside."

Mr Joyce's comments could cause political problems in regional Australia and will be opposed by some MPs in the Coalition party room, where views about the environmental, social and electoral impacts of CSG remain mixed……

National Farmers Federation president Fiona Simson said moratoriums were "blunt instruments" but still needed "because of the lack of confidence the community, including the farming community, have in the way governments have regulated the gas industry in the past".

"Until we have absolute confidence these concerns have been addressed, then moratoriums will be part of the response," she said.

But Joyce said excluding prime agricultural land and productive aquifers from exploration would address most concerns….

Ms Simson said the National Farmers Federation welcomed the South Australian plan to "adequately compensate" farmers, but said "it's never been just about the money".

"The two things we can't and won't compromise on is the secure access to water and land," she said.

NSW Resources Minister Don Harwin said the state gas plan "makes clear that landholders and communities will share in the benefits of gas development, and the government has already made legislative changes to deliver on this commitment."

Since July 2016 companies have been able to apply to establish a Community Benefits Fund from which individuals and organisations can apply for grants for community initiatives.

NSW landowners are also entitled to compensation under a land access agreement struck with a company wishing to drill on their land.

"Further compensation may be payable to landowners if there is any loss or damage resulting from exploration or production," Mr Harwin said.

But opponents say this is insufficient as landowners still have no right to refuse access.

NSW Greens MP Jeremy Buckingham said of Mr Joyce's statement: "Barnaby hasn't got the message that farmers won't be bribed. Rural community know coal seam gas destroys land values".

This is what typical coal seam gas production wells, supporting infrastructure and access roads looks like on rural land.

ABC Four Corners, 3 April 2013

The relationship between Monsanto & US regulators

“For once in your life, listen to me and don’t play your political conniving games with the science to favor the registrants……For once do the right thing and don’t make decisions based on how it affects your bonus.” [then EPA senior toxicologist Marion Copley writing to Jess Rowland as quoted in Meridian Institute article, 8 March 2017]

Bloomberg, 15 March 2017:

The Environmental Protection Agency official who was in charge of evaluating the cancer risk of Monsanto Co.’s Roundup allegedly bragged to a company executive that he deserved a medal if he could kill another agency’s investigation into the herbicide’s key chemical.

The boast was made during an April 2015 phone conversation, according to farmers and others who say they’ve been sickened by the weed killer. After leaving his job as a manager in the EPA’s pesticide division last year, Jess Rowland has become a central figure in more than 20 lawsuits in the U.S. accusing the company of failing to warn consumers and regulators of the risk that its glyphosate-based herbicide can cause non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

“If I can kill this I should get a medal,” Rowland told a Monsanto regulatory affairs manager who recounted the conversation in an email to his colleagues, according to a court filing made public Tuesday. The company was seeking Rowland’s help stopping an investigation of glyphosate by a separate office, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, that is part of the U.S. Health and Human Service Department, according to the filing.

A federal judge overseeing the glyphosate litigation in San Francisco said last month he’s inclined to order Rowland to submit to questioning by lawyers for the plaintiffs, who contend he had a "highly suspicious" relationship with Monsanto. Rowland oversaw a committee that found insufficient evidence to conclude glyphosate causes cancer and quit last year shortly after his report was leaked to the press……

The plaintiffs’ lawyers say Rowland’s communications with Monsanto employees show the regulator who was supposed to be policing the company was actually working on its behalf.

The unsealing of the court documents "represents a huge development in public health," said Tim Litzenburg, one of the lawyers suing Monsanto. Regulatory agencies, scientists, consumers and physicians "can see some of what Monsanto was actually engaging in behind the scenes, and how they have manipulated the scientific literature to date. That’s important to their decision-making, not just our lawsuits."

After the phone conversation with Rowland, the Monsanto head of U.S. regulatory affairs, Dan Jenkins, cautioned his colleagues not to “get your hopes up,” according to an email cited in the court filing.

“I doubt EPA and Jess can kill this,” Jenkins wrote. He may have spoken too soon. Another internal Monsanto memorandum unsealed on Tuesday said the ATSDR, as the federal toxics agency is known, "agreed, for now, to take direction from EPA."…..

The ATSDR announced in the Federal Register in February 2015 that it planned to publish a toxicological profile of glyphosate by October that year. It never did. The agency’s press office didn’t respond to multiple phone messages seeking comment. EPA representatives also didn’t immediately respond to phone messages seeking comment.

Plaintiffs’ lawyers said in another filing made public Tuesday that Monsanto’s toxicology manager and his boss, Bill Heydens, were ghost writers for two of the reports, including one from 2000, that Rowland’s committee relied on in part to reach its conclusion that glyphosate shouldn’t be classified as carcinogenic.

The EPA “may be unaware of Monsanto’s deceptive authorship practice,” the lawyers said.

Among the documents unsealed was a February 2015 internal email exchange at the company about how to contain costs for a research paper. The plaintiff lawyers cited it to support their claim that the EPA report is unreliable, unlike a report by an international agency that classified glyphosate as a probable carcinogen…..

Note

Jess Rowland was Associate Director- Health Effects  Division, Office of Pesticides Program at the US Environmental Protection Agency. He appears to have retired in the first half of 2016.

As Australia enters Autumn 2017 eyes turn to the skies

Bureau of Meteorology (BOM), media release, 28 February 2017:

The El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) remains neutral. However, recent changes in both the tropical Pacific Ocean and atmosphere, and climate model outlooks surveyed by the Bureau, suggest the likelihood of El Niño forming in 2017 has risen. As a result, the Bureau's ENSO Outlook status has been upgraded to El Niño WATCH, meaning the likelihood of El Niño in 2017 is approximately 50%.

All atmospheric and oceanic indicators of ENSO are currently within neutral thresholds. However, sea surface temperatures have been increasing in the eastern Pacific Ocean and are now warmer than average for the first time since June 2016, while the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) has been trending downwards.

Seven of eight international models surveyed by the Bureau indicate steady warming in the central tropical Pacific Ocean over the next six months. Six models suggest El Niño thresholds may be reached by July 2017. However, some caution must be taken at this time of year, with lower model accuracy through the autumn months compared to other times of the year.

El Niño is often associated with below average winter–spring rainfall over eastern Australia and warmer than average winter–spring maximum temperatures over the southern half of Australia.

The Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD) has little influence on Australia from December to April. Current outlooks suggest a neutral IOD may persist until the end of autumn.

Climate outlooks – monthly and seasonal Issued: 23 February 2017 – Next issue: 30 March 2017:

Climate outlook overview

Autumn (March to May) rainfall is likely to be below average over the southern two-thirds of Australia.

March is likely to be hotter and drier than average across most of Australia, except the far north and west.

Warmer autumn days and nights are likely across most of Australia, except northwest Australia where days and nights are likely to be cooler than average.

The drier than average outlooks are likely a result of forecast higher than normal pressure across western and southern Australia, meaning fewer rain-bearing systems are likely to cross the coast (see the Climate Influences section for more detail).

NSW Forecast – chance of exceeding median maximum temperature in March to May 2017:

NSW Forecast – chance of above median rainfall in March to May 2017:

The Conversation, 1 March 2017:

Crop yields around Australia have been hard hit by recent weather. Last year, for instance, the outlook for mungbeans was excellent. But the hot, dry weather has hurt growers. The extreme conditions have reduced average yields from an expected 1-1.5 tonnes per hectare to just 0.1-0.5 tonnes per hectare.

Sorghum and cotton crops fared little better, due to depleted soil water, lack of in-crop rainfall, and extreme heat. Fruit and vegetables, from strawberries to lettuce, were also hit hard.

But the story is larger than this. Globally, production of maize and wheat between 1980 and 2008 was 3.8% and 5.5% below what we would have expected without temperature increases. One model, which combines historical crop production and weather data, projects significant reductions in production of several key African crops. For maize, the predicted decline is as much as 22% by 2050.

ABC News, 17 February 2017:

The impact of several heatwaves so far this year will be felt for some time by primary producers around Australia.

From crop damage, to livestock stress, the impact of these extreme temperatures is yet to be fully understood.

Meanwhile, farmers and wholesalers say they have had to come up with innovative methods of cooling their animals and produce.

But they are not the only ones to feel the impact of the heat; consumers will feel it in their wallets and in the quality available.

Baird may be gone but mining versus farming land conflicts remain

NSW Dept. of Industry: Energy and Resources:

On 1 December 2016, the Mining and Petroleum Legislation Amendment (Land Access Arbitration) Act 2015 was commenced to reform the land access arbitration framework. It introduced a range of improvements in line with recommendations of the 2014 Walker Report. Read more about the Walker Report.....

In line with the recommendations of the Walker Report, the Act requires the holder of the prospecting title to pay the reasonable costs of a landholder’s participation in negotiating the access arrangement (section 142).

To ensure these costs do not become uncontrollable at the stage of negotiation, they have been capped at $1,500 for exempt prospecting operations and $2,500 for assessable prospecting operations (both exclusive of GST). The explorer must pay the GST amount in addition to the landholder’s capped costs. Caps are set out in a Ministerial Order published in the NSW Gazette.

No cap has been set on the reasonable costs payable by an explorer at mediation and arbitration as these processes can vary substantially depending on the circumstances. The explorer must still cover the landholder’s costs in making the access arrangement during these stages of the process.

The particulars of each case at mediation and arbitration are to be considered in the determination of reasonable costs at these stages. Nothing in the legislation prevents a titleholder from paying an amount above these caps. If parties cannot come to an agreement on reasonable costs, the arbitrator or the courts will make this determination.

See: Mining and Petroleum Legislation Amendment (Land Access Arbitration) Act 2015 No 41

The Land, 9 December 2016:

NEW regulations to balance mining and gas development against private property rights threatens to cause perverse outcomes, pushing landholders to lock the gate and head straight to court.

An alliance of Cotton Australia and NSW Farmers, Irrigators and Country Women’s Association (CWA) hit out at the caps on costs to be borne by mining and gas explorers, saying they fall short, leaving landholders potentially thousands of dollars out of pocket.

The group issued a statement “calling out the NSW government” and putting it on notice ahead of a compulsory review of the new regulations, set to kick off in six months. 

“The caps announced by the NSW government are a far cry from the actual costs likely to be incurred,” said NSW Farmers president Derek Schoen.

NSW CWA president Annette Turner said “unfortunately, (the regulation) fails to live up to the promise of a balance between landholders and resource companies”.

To be continued.....

As 2016 draws to a close it is apparent that global greenhouse gas emissions are still rising - albeit a little slower than before

The Global Carbon Project was established in 2001 “to assist the international science community to establish a common, mutually agreed knowledge base supporting policy debate and action to slow the rate of increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere”.

It released its Global Carbon Budget 2016 this month.

Here are some of the Power Point graphs in this budget report:

NOTE: All the data is shown in billion tonnes CO2 (GtCO2 ) 1 Gigatonne (Gt) = 1 billion tonnes = 1×1015g = 1 Petagram (Pg) 1 kg carbon (C) = 3.664 kg carbon dioxide (CO2 ) 1 GtC = 3.664 billion tonnes CO2 = 3.664 GtCO2 (Figures in units of GtC and GtCO2 are available from http://globalcarbonbudget.org/carbonbudget)

Source: CDIAC; Le Quéré et al 2016; Global Carbon Budget 2016

In July 2015 The Climate Institute produced a fact sheet indicating that Australia was responsible for 1.4 per cent of all global greenhouse gas emissions, 26 tCO₂ annually per person (per capita) and 640 tCO₂ per unit of GDP.

Despite knowing these facts and despite having the effects of climate change literally in our face in Australia this last decade, the Turnbull Government is once again giving into short-term industry interests at the expense of the natural environment, soil quality and long-term water security - not just risking future domestic food shortages due to the degradation of a major food bowl but rather in a worst-case scenario risking widespread starvation as more and more land becomes hostile to reliable food production due to lack of sufficient environmental water flows keeping vital river systems alive.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 18 November 2016:

The federal government is consigning the Murray River to a "certain slow death" and killing the Murray-Darling Basin Plan by reneging on a promise to increase environmental water flows, South Australian Environment Minister Ian Hunter has said.

Before what was described as a heated meeting of the Murray-Darling Basin Ministerial Council in Adelaide on Friday morning, Mr Hunter called on the Prime Minister to sack his deputy, Barnaby Joyce.

"We saw what happened in the millenium drought. It's beyond shameful that upstream politicians would even consider consigning the South Australians to the same fate in the future," said Mr Hunter.  

Without extra water, the mouth of the Murray would dry up, he said……

Even before that environmental vandal NSW Premier Mike Baird further weakens state environmental law large scale land clearing is increasing

ABC News, 14 November 2016:

In a country with one of the highest land clearing rates in the world, laws making it easier for farmers to clear native vegetation from their properties are expected to be passed in New South Wales within days.

Earlier this month, a leading scientist advising the Baird Government on the proposed changes quit in protest.

Professor Hugh Possingham warned that rather than protecting biodiversity, the laws would allow a doubling of broad-scale clearing that would put some native animals at risk of extinction.

The current laws are supposed to prevent that kind of clearing without permits.

But a Lateline investigation shows the State Government's environmental watchdog has dropped investigations into illegal clearing, after direct political intervention…..

The shocking 2014 murder of environment officer Glen Turner by farmer Ian Turnbull highlighted the ongoing battle being waged in the bush, where huge economic pressure for higher returns clashes with the need to conserve native vegetation.

Australia now has the 5th highest rate of land clearing in the world.

In 2015, a study by NSW Parks and Wildlife found that 60,000 hectares was being cleared per year in the state — a four-fold increase on previous State Government figures……

For two years until end of 2015, the Priestleys collected evidence of alleged illegal clearing and sent it to the State Government watchdog, the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH).

Last year, without explanation, the OEH halted its investigation.

"I'm completely devastated," Claire Priestley said.

"I've grown up on that land, I've been out there my whole life. It's devastating to see that a large conglomerate can come into this community, it seems like they have a special privilege to just clear what they want."

Mr Priestley has photographed what he claims is the aftermath of broadscale land clearing, including images of several bulldozers and piles of smouldering native vegetation.

"You can virtually clear the size of the moon and get away with it but you can be in trouble for trespass by taking photos."

Approvals for native clearing are required to be on a public register.

The NSW Environmental Defenders Office recently searched for any approvals given to the Harris business to clear land on its properties west of Walgett.

"We have searched those registers. They're complex registers. You navigate through them by GPS coordinates," EDO chief solicitor Sue Higginson told Lateline.

"With the resources we've had available to us we have searched those registers and we have not turned up any approval for the native vegetation clearing that the Priestleys have witnessed on the Harris properties."

Lateline can also reveal that the Office of Environment and Heritage dropped an investigation into alleged illegal clearing by 12 farmers in the nearby Wee Waa area due to what it believed was the risk of a "catastrophic consequence" if environment officers entered farmers' properties.

The decision to suspend the Wee Waa investigation was the result of an email sent in May 2015 by Nationals state MP Kevin Humphries, urging the investigation be dropped because it was "too explosive" and "not warranted".

Mr Humphries, the Member for Barwon, warned that farmers were looking to blockade any attempt for an on-site visit by OEH and if the visits went ahead it would be "the start of something that will escalate very quickly between farmers from around the state and the authorities".

Despite Mr Humphries' email, there is no evidence that the farmers were planning to blockade OEH inspectors.

Mr Humphries denies the email perverted the course of justice…..

Former station manager Bill Keene has accused the OEH of being unwilling to stop big players in Australia's agricultural industry.

"No doubt they're monitoring it, they're just not doing anything. They're all noise," he said.

For 28 years Mr Keene managed Brewon station, now owned by P & J Harris & Sons.

He was invited by the OEH to be a witness in an investigation of the Harris company's alleged illegal clearing before the Priestleys complained to the agency.

Mr Keene claims he provided information of illegal clearing on Brewon station to the OEH based on satellite imagery of the property.

He left the area a decade ago but he has reviewed recent aerial footage of the Brewon station obtained by Lateline which he compared to a 2013 Google map.

"I've seen from one end to the other and I know the country inside out. All this country to the west has all been cleared and sown under wheat.

"There's been a massive expansion of clearing and to the best of my knowledge it's been done without permission."

"It's all wheat now. That country's fragile out there and I don't see why people should blatantly illegally clear things like the TSRs [trade stock routes].

"They're there for a reason, they're Crown land. They don't own them so why can they try and squeeze an extra few bags of wheat or whatever?"

Tony Graham, the manager who succeeded Bill Keene on Brewon, said the previous station owners would have loved the opportunity to farm more country.

"We did contact the relevant authorities to try and get that done but no permits were ever issued and under no circumstances was I aware we'd be able to do that.

"That's the reason why the Native Vegetation Act was put in place, just for the protection of that native vegetation."

When the Harris business bought the property in 2010, Mr Graham was told his service was no longer required.

A year later, the Office of Environment and Heritage asked him if he too would be a witness against the business.

"I was given some aerial maps, satellite imagery pre-2010 and post-2010.

"I was asked which country we had set aside for farming and for grazing and it was pretty obvious from those aerial images that it was chalk and cheese as to what had occurred to the country post my time as manager of Brewon.

"Just on those aerials in excess of 5 to 8,000 acres that we certainly didn't have anything to do with, country that I believe had been cleared."

After two years of consultations, Bill Keene and Tony Graham were told the Harris investigation would not go to prosecution.

Tony Graham: "I was very upset. I was very angry given the time myself and another of the previous managers put into it."

The Harris Business repeatedly declined interview requests, referring Lateline to its lawyers.

It denies all allegations of illegal land clearing.

It dismisses Chris and Claire Priestley as bitter losers, accuses the family of waging a vicious hate campaign, and highlights the fact the siblings' mother apologised for earlier defamatory statements, which she also retracted.

Clarence Valley councillors at work post 2016 local government election - everything old is back again

Clarence Valley Council considered Item 14.094/16 DA2016/0281 on 18 October 2016 – A Rotational Outdoor Free Range Piggery upon Lot 51 DP751382, 550 Tullymorgan Road, Lawrence .

The 161ha property at 550 Tullymorgan Road, circa April 2016:

[Images of the property which is currently listed for sale at realestate.com.au and was listed in The Daily Examiner in April 2016]

This current application by the Sisson Family Trust is for a 75 sow piggery producing up to 1,500 piglets each year.  A Council staff member is the landowner and presumably a potential beneficiary of the trust.

Bravo to Cr. Greg Clancy for pointing out during the debate the manifest deficiencies in both the applicant & council’s approach to this development application to date.

The site inspection for the purposes of environmental assessment completed on 23 July 2016 only lasting approx. 2 hours which were spent inspecting areas of the site by vehicle and allegedly on foot, including areas proposed for pig paddocks, areas within the 100m buffer to natural waterbodies and bushland in the northern part of the site where pig grazing is not proposed.

Cr. Peter Ellem agreed more rigour should be exercised in the area of environmental/
threatened species assessments. Cr. Andrew Baker urged further expert opinion on EP& A provisions pertaining to the development. 

The Grafton putsch left over from the last council term was gung-ho for approval forthwith and for cutting “red tape”.  In the process putsch member Cr. Lysault demonstrated his ignorance of animal husbandry and farming practices.

Disappointingly this development application received what some would still consider premature consent - with Mayor Jim Simmons, Deputy Mayor Jason Kingsley, Cr. Arthur Lysault, Cr. Richie Williamson  and, first-time councillor Debrah Novak, voting in favour of an application which by council's own admission contained not one contemporary, detailed on the ground flora & fauna field study.

Then there is the matter of the vote in the Chamber.

When the previous council considered this development application at the ordinary meeting of 9 August 2016 there were two declarations of interest by councillors:

By the 18 October ordinary meeting those declarations of interest had shrunk to none registered by Cr. Simmons and apparently downgraded to a Non-Significant Non Pecuniary interest on the part of Cr. Kingsley, allowing both to remain in the Chamber for consideration of and vote in relation to a larger piggery being established on land owned by a member of Clarence Valley Council staff.

In fact the participation of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor in this 5 to 3 vote allowed consent to be granted without further ado:

One would have thought that given the landowner is employed by council and both Crs. Simmons and Kingsley had previously declared an interest a mere ten weeks ago, as newly appointed mayor and deputy mayor they would have exercised an abundance of caution and again excused themselves from considering this item to avoid even a perception of potential bias in favour of the landowner.

Old habits are not necessarily good habits and I hope this newly-elected council will approach the matter of pecuniary and non-pecuniary interests with more diligence over the next four years.

For over 200 years in Australia we've been destroying the land that feeds us and we refuse to stop

"There's No Task Too Big · 24 Hour Service · Reliable Land Clearing · 25 Years Experience

Services: Crane Work, Land Clearing, Stump Grinding, Tree Surgeons, Tree Chippers, Tree Cutting,….."

[Online advertisement for an Australian business, 13 August 2016]

We have sand hills in Australia which were caused by overgrazing sheep and desert boundaries are slowly encroaching in semi-arid zones.

Two million hectares of land and 20,000 farms are affected by dryland salinity because of over clearing for cropping.

In 2000, some 1,600 km of rail, 19,900 km of roads, and 68 towns were at risk of damage due to salinity [Australian Bureau of Statistics, Measures of Australia's Progress, 2010].

Inappropriate land and water management resulted in exposure or drainage of acid sulfate soils on coastal floodplains and wetlands resulting in periodic outbreaks of fish disease and/or large fish kills.

Sections of the World Heritage listed Great Barrier Reef are being smothered by topsoil washing into the ocean from agricultural land.

These are just a few of the mistakes we have made in the last 220 years, yet knowing of the problems caused we still do this with very little thought of inevitable consequences………

WWF Australia, media release, 12 August 2016:

An analysis by WWF-Australia reveals that an estimated 40.7 million trees were destroyed in Queensland in 2014-15.

"That's more than one tree bulldozed every second," said WWF-Australia conservation scientist Dr Martin Taylor.

Crucially, 16.1 million of the destroyed trees were in Great Barrier Reef catchments increasing the amount of sludge flowing out to reef waters and harming coral and sea grass.

"Tree clearing is out of control. If we want to save the Reef and stop the decline of koalas we cannot continue to destroy trees at such an alarming rate," he said.

Dr Taylor said the official Queensland Government figures for clearing in 2014-15 contained a disturbing statistic: 71% of the clearing was mature forests that had never been cleared or bushland and forests over 28 years old.

Methodology for the estimate of the number of trees destroyed

Dr Martin Taylor examined the SLATS map and removed any area that was not forest or woodland before the 2014-15 clearing.

Dr Taylor also removed any area of trees destroyed by natural processes such as cyclones (which is categorised by SLATS)

Then Dr Taylor applied the peer-reviewed eco-regional tree density model of Crowther et al and calculated the number of trees cleared.

What 296,000 hectares looks like

On 3 May 2016 the NSW Government released a draft Biodiversity Conservation Bill and draft Local Land Services (Amendment) Bill.  These bills will repeal and replace the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, the Nature Conservation Trust Act, parts of the National Parks & Wildlife Act; parts of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the Native Vegetation Act.

NSW Shadow Environment Minister Penny Sharpe, 4 August 2016:

A report on vegetation clearing quietly released by the Baird Government has highlighted a disturbing trend of increasing illegal land clearing in NSW.

The data provides a report card on the status, regulation, protection and extent of native vegetation in NSW, and clearly shows the rate of land clearing is increasing even as Mike Baird readies his destructive reforms to weaken land clearing laws.

The report shows clearing skyrocketed from 40,500 ha in 2011/12 to 105,900 ha in 2012/13 (the most recent data available).

Illegal clearing that is defined as "unexplained" agricultural woody clearing is has increased, jumping by 52% in the last two years alone:

Year	"Unexplained" agricultural woody clearing (hectares)
2010/11	3,695
2011/12	4,269
2012/13	5,615

In 2012/13 there was 9,100 ha of clearing on private land, and a massive 60% of that clearing is unexplained.

Clearing is also increasing across the board, including clearing on farms, infrastructure, mining, forestry, and the impact of fire on vegetation.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 12 June 2016:

The state's farmers have lopped paddock trees at an accelerating rate in the past 18 months even before a new land-clearing law eases controls further, government data shows.

The new figures, which reveal the rate of clearing of paddock trees has more than doubled since November 2014, come as the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists wrote to all MPs to call for a reversal of "retrograde changes" planned in the new Biodiversity Conservation act.

NSW farmers used a new self-assessment code to remove 21,716 paddock trees – or more than 50 a day – over the past year and a half.

The rate, at an average of about 50 per day, was 140 per cent more than the average over the previous seven years, data from the Office of Environment and Heritage showed. Paddock trees, judged to be single or small patches of trees, make up 40 per cent of remaining woodland cover, OEH says.

Satellite monitoring by OEH would probably have detected even more clearing but the public has been left in the dark because the O'Farrell-Baird governments had failed to release a native vegetation report since 2013, Mehreen Faruqi, the Greens environment spokeswoman, said.

The Greens had also sought information on the number of applications OEH received and what if any compliance of the self-assessment codes they conducted, Dr Faruqi said.

"If almost 22,000 trees can be removed under the existing law, then it will be a disaster when new laws that further facilitate land clearing are brought in," she said, adding the latest tree-felling numbers were "the tip of the iceberg".

A spokeswoman for Niall Blair, Minister for Primary Industries, did not address the scale of tree clearing on farms, but said "the proposed Biodiversity Conservation package aims to reverse the decline of biodiversity in NSW because the current system isn't working".

‎"The NSW Government is currently seeking feedback on the draft reforms and stakeholders including environmental groups and farmers are encouraged to put forward a submission before June 28," she said.

Labor's environment spokeswoman, Penny Sharpe, said the figures "ring alarm bells on how far the current biodiversity laws have already been watered down".

"If these laws proceed in their current form, there will be a return to land clearing on a scale unseen for decades in NSW with catastrophic impacts on native animals, soil, water and greenhouse gas emissions," Ms Sharpe said.

Director and Member of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists Peter Crosier writing in The Guardian, 6 July 2016:

Laws to stop the broadscale clearing of large areas of native trees and plants in New South Wales have reduced land and water degradation, helped Australia meets its commitments to cut greenhouse emissions and slowed the rate of species extinction. The Baird government now plans to wind back all of these benefits.

At the 2015 election, the Baird government promised that a review of these laws would "enhance the state's biodiversity for the benefit of current and future generations." It was on this basis that the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists supported this review, because we saw an opportunity to modernise the current legislation leading to enhanced biodiversity outcomes, increased financial support for farmers to restore degraded land, while also promoting economic development across NSW.

However, the Wentworth Group has serious concerns about many of the changes announced recently. We believe that these changes, if not addressed, will breach the government's election promise.

Over-clearing of the landscape has resulted in NSW having some of the most degraded land in Australia, with only 10% of native vegetation across the state remaining in close to natural condition. The Native Vegetation Act was introduced in 2003 to address this problem.

This act has been remarkably successful in reducing the level of land clearing from as much as 100,000 hectares per year in the 1980s (the equivalent of half of Sydney's urban area) to less than 12,000 hectares per year now.

This legislation was supported by the NSW Farmers Association as well as environment groups such as WWF, because it brought an end to broadscale land clearing in a way that also promoted sustainable farming. As an example, since the Native Vegetation Act was introduced, approval has been given to manage over 7m hectares of native vegetation on farms across NSW (over 40 times the size of Sydney's urban area), including the eradication of weeds and management of invasive native scrub. This system was designed by farmers and scientists working together. It shows just how effective laws can be in securing the long-term protection of NSW's natural assets while also improving the viability of farming enterprises.

While some of the government's announced changes to these current laws are most welcome, we believe that other elements will substantially weaken existing protections. These retrograde changes risk overwhelming the positive changes, returning NSW to an era of unsustainable land clearing, resulting in more degraded land, more damage to river systems, increased carbon emissions, and the loss of habitat critical to the survival of threatened species.

This would not only be a clear breach of the government's election promise, it will also damage the reputations of those farmers who want to be good stewards, the vast majority of whom are unaffected by the current laws.

One of the positive elements of the announced reforms is a $240m five-year private land conservation fund. This money should be used to help farmers manage native vegetation of high conservation value that should not be cleared, and to offset the cumulative smaller losses that result from route agricultural practices, such as clearing along fence lines. It should not be used to subsidise the broadscale clearing that will result from weakening of the land clearing controls. That is simply a taxpayer subsidy to farmers to degrade land.

The increased greenhouse emissions that will result from these changes means that taxpayers will be hit twice, because it will make our national commitments to reduce Australia's emissions more difficult, resulting in higher costs to taxpayers and other sectors of the economy.

The vast majority of farmers in NSW are, or want to be, good stewards of the land – where healthy landscapes go hand-in-hand with a productive economy. A remarkable 93% of Australian farmers say they practice landcare on their farms.

There are many ways we can support our farmers to manage their land sustainably, by providing them with financial incentives to restore native vegetation on degraded land. This will improve the value of their farms, help reduce Australia's greenhouse emissions, slow the rate of species extinction, enhance rural productivity and create more prosperous rural communities.

We ask the Baird government to amend the draft legislation so that it truly does achieve their objectives of cutting red tape, facilitating ecologically sustainable development, and in doing so honour the promise to enhance the state's biodiversity for the benefit of current and future generations.

Written on behalf of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists