Vegetation Management Amendment

The Vegetation Management Framework Amendment Bill 2013 was referred to the Qld State Development, Infrastructure and Industry Committee for consideration.  The committee was headed up by the Honourable David Gibson.  

A report was tabled to the House on Tuesday 14 May 2013, recommending the Bill be passed.

The Bill proposes to remove regulations regarding regrowth control on freehold and indigenous land, these regulations will still apply to leasehold land and in reef watercourses.

While it seems inevitable that this legislation will be passed by the Qld LNP Majority Government any day now, it would be nice to have some sensible discussion of the issues.

At one end of the spectrum, the World Wide Fund for Nature are running television and radio advertisements, which they say aims to prevent one of the largest environmental rollbacks in Australia’s history.

At the other end: AgForce's reinstated the AgForce Vegetation Management Committee have been gathering information on their perceived limitations of the current Vegetation Management Act 1999. AgForce are seeking public support for farmers in their bid to sustainably produce food. AgForce are painting Vegetation Management legislation as an unworkable administrative burden.

A letter to the Natural Resources Minister on Land Clearing

The Honourable Andrew Cripps

Minister for Natural Resource Management

cc: The Premier and the Member for Brisbane Central and VM Enquiries

Dear Minister Cripps,

Twenty-seven academics from universities across Queensland with expertise in biodiversity conservation and sustainable development are urging Premier Campbell Newman to reconsider proposed changes to the Vegetation Management Act.

The scientists are expressing grave concerns about the future impacts of proposed changes to Queensland’s Vegetation Management Act and theWater Act. There are warnings of devastating habitat and species loss if changes to the state’s land clearing laws go ahead.

The concerned scientists believe amendments will include allowing a new category of broad scale native vegetation clearing and remove the protections which previously prevented clearing of mature regrowth of threatened plant communities and of vegetation along many watercourses.

I understand that you are assuring Queenslanders that the package of reforms will maintain key environmental protections such as buffer zones along creeks and rivers in sensitive reef areas.

My concerns about the changes to Vegetation Management include:

·       Land clearing is the greatest current threat to Australia’s biodiversity,

·       Vegetation loss is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions,

·       degradation and reduced water quality in waterways and estuaries,

·       dryland salinity and

·       lost ecosystems.

I realise the changes the Qld Government are proposing to make to vegetation management laws are intended to support growth in agricultural production, provide jobs and boost regional economies. However, restoration of lost ecosystems can cost more than $20,000 per hectare. Avoiding the loss of ecosystems in the first place is far more cost-effective.

The World Wide Fund have produced a report that provides the first estimates of environmental values potentially placed at-risk of renewed clearing due to the proposed changes to land clearing legislation in Queensland.

I would appreciate a response to my concerns and those of the 27 Qld academics.

your's sincerely,

Rowan Barber

Vegetation Clearing and Enviro Offsets

Vegetation Clearing Legislation

Twenty-seven academics from universities across Queensland with expertise in biodiversity conservation and sustainable development are urging Premier Campbell Newman to reconsider proposed changes to the Vegetation Management Act.

The scientists are expressing grave concerns about the future impacts of proposed changes to Queensland’s Vegetation Management Act and the Water Act. There are warnings of devastating habitat and species loss if changes to the state’s land clearing laws go ahead.

The concerned scientists believe amendments will include allowing a new category of broadscale native vegetation clearing and remove the protections which previously prevented clearing of mature regrowth of threatened plant communities and of vegetation along many watercourses.

However, Minister Cripps claims the package of reforms will maintain key environmental protections such as buffer zones along creeks and rivers in sensitive reef areas.

The concerns of the Scientists about the changes to Vegetation Management include:

·       Land clearing is the greatest current threat to Australia’s biodiversity,

·       Vegetation loss is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions,

·       degradation and reduced water quality in waterways and estuaries,

·       dryland salinity and

·       lost ecosystems.

The changes the Qld Government are proposing to make to vegetation management laws are intended to support growth in agricultural production, provide jobs and boost regional economies. However, restoration of lost ecosystems can cost more than $20,000 per hectare. Avoiding the loss of ecosystems in the first place is far more cost-effective.

Green groups are coming under fire from the Minister for Natural Resources and Mines for opposing these changes.

The World Wide Fund have produced a report that provides the first estimates of environmental values potentially placed at-risk of renewed clearing due to the proposed changes to land clearing legislation in Queensland

Successive Qld Governments in the 1990s to 2009 bought in laws which provided strong protection for bushland. Before the Vegetation Management Act came into effect Qld was experiencing some of the highest rates of clearing in the world – similar to Brazil’s clearing of the Amazon. Once the new laws started to take effect clearing rates declined from a massive 750,000ha a year before laws were introduced in 1999 to 77,590ha in 2009-10.

An amendment bill was introduced into parliament in March and referred to the parliamentary committee for State Development, Infrastructure and Industry, which is due to report back on this week.

Environmental Offset Policy Review

Environmental offsets were originally established to replace environmental values lost through development.  At the moment, the Qld Government has five Environmental Offset Policies:

·       Qld Government Environmental Offsets Policy (administered by Department of Environment and Heritage Protection –offsets@ehp.qld.gov.au)

·       Qld Biodiversity Offset Policy (administered by Department of Environment and Heritage Protection –offsets@ehp.qld.gov.au)

·       Offset for Net Gain of Koala Habitat in South East Qld Policy (administered by Department of Environment and Heritage Protection - seqkoala@ehp.qld.gov.au)

·       Policy for Vegetation Management Offsets (administered by Department of Natural Resources and Mines –vmenquireis@dnrm.qld.gov.au)

·       Marine Fish Habitat Offset Policy (administered by Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries)

General information about offsets and the policies can still be found on the EHP website, however there is currently a review of the department’s web material, which has resulted in some documents being unavailable at this time.

In relation to the future of Qld’s offset policies, the Qld Government committed, through the Six Month Action Plan July to December 2012, to review the overarching framework for the Biodiversity Offsets Policy. The review will create a single policy that incorporates requirements of all five existing Qld Government offset policies.

The Department of Environment and Heritage Protection is leading this review.

The single policy will address all Qld Government offset requirements and could be adopted as the foundation for local government offset policies if desired by councils.

The review seeks to reduce costs for government and industry; promote strategic biodiversity outcomes; and provide for shelf ready products that enable rapid approvals for projects.

This review is not linked to the review of assessment requirements or triggers under legislation. These are being undertaken separately to development of this policy.

However, where there is a State assessment requirement to avoid, mitigate and offset impacts – the single State Government Environmental Offset Policy will provide how this offset is to be achieved.

Until this review is completed, all current offset policies remain in effect.

WWF vs Andrew Cripps

No this is not wrestling.

The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) coming under fire from the Minister for Natural Resources and Mines.

Successive Queensland governments in the 1990s to 2009 bought in laws which provided strong protection for bushland in Queensland.   This followed major campaigns from Queensland conservation groups supported by the great majority of Queenslanders. 

Before the Vegetation Management Act came into effect Queensland was experiencing some of the highest rates of clearing in the world – similar to Brazil’s clearing of the Amazon!

Once the new laws started to take effect clearing rates declined from a massive 750,000ha a year before laws were introduced in 1999 to 77,590ha in 2009-10. 

In an election-eve letter to WWF’s CEO, Dermott O’Gorman, Campbell Newman promised that the “LNP will retain the current level of statutory vegetation protection”. The letter was sent just 10 days out from the 2012 state election. He made a similar commitment in a letter to the Queensland Conservation Council representing a wide membership of conservation groups across Queensland.

Proposed reforms to relax Vegetation Management laws have been referred to the State Development, Infrastructure and Industry parliamentary committee. 

WWF believe that despite this public commitment Minister Cripps in the Liberal-National Party Government is now proposing to water down protection.   

The following is a media release from Minister Crisp.....

Media Statements

Minister for Natural Resources and Mines
The Honourable Andrew Cripps

Tuesday, April 30, 2013

WWF wrong on vegetation reforms

The Newman Government has rejected claims by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) that common sense changes to Queensland’s vegetation management laws will damage the environment.

Minister for Natural Resources and Mines Andrew Cripps said proposed changes to the Vegetation Management Act were well-considered and maintained critical protection measures for vegetation adjacent to watercourses in Great Barrier Reef catchments.

“Green groups are at it again, spruiking ill-informed and alarmist rhetoric in an attempt to stay relevant and grab media headlines,” Mr Cripps said.

“If WWF CEO Dermot O’Gorman properly read our proposed legislation, he’d discover that the Newman Government will retain 50-metre buffer zones alongside rivers and streams in reef catchments to protect water quality in these environmentally-sensitive areas.

“I notice also that the WWF supports the introduction of industry-led Best Management Practice programs as the primary way of boosting agricultural production.

“However if the WWF was genuine, it would acknowledge that the LNP Government has committed $5.4 million to progressing BMP programs in the grazing and cane industries.”

However, Mr Cripps emphasised that while industry BMP programs played an important role in supporting sustainable farming practices, they would not deliver the productivity gains or economic growth in regional Queensland to achieve the Government’s agricultural production targets.

“The Government has made it clear it plans to double the value of agricultural production in Queensland by 2040, and these reforms are a vital component to achieving that goal,” he said.

“The proposals contained in the Vegetation Management Framework Amendment Bill 2013 will allow sustainable vegetation management activities to occur, to support the development of high value agriculture in areas with appropriate land and available water.”

Mr Cripps said the amendments would restore a long-overdue balance to Queensland’s vegetation management framework, while retaining key environmental protections.

“Consecutive Labor Governments had, in the past, enforced radical green policies upon landholders that threatened their ability to effectively manage their farm businesses and maintain productivity,” he said.

“In contrast, we are creating an opportunity for farming businesses to expand cropping operations and build infrastructure without the burden of unnecessary regulation.”

Mr Cripps stressed that environmental values would be protected through these reforms.

“These reforms do not mean landholders can indiscriminately clear land. Inappropriate vegetation management practices that show no regard for the environment will not be supported. Monitoring will still occur and penalties for illegal clearing of vegetation still apply.”

More information on the amendments is available under Vegetation Management at:www.dnrm.qld.gov.au/home

[ENDS] 30 April 2013

Media contact: Jane Paterson 0417 281 754 or Paul Sutherland 0428 868 237

Land clearing

Vegetation Management

The Qld Government has announced proposed reforms to state vegetation management laws which are intended to pave the way for development of new agricultural areas in Qld’s Gulf Country but has implications across the state for agriculture, mining and property development.

In 2006, clearing of remnant vegetation to create pastures for agriculture was the principal activity that was stopped and which previously accounted for the vast majority of land clearing.

The high rates of land clearing and habitat fragmentation prior to 2006 in Australia, particularly in Qld, have been identified in State of the Environment reports as the single most significant threat to terrestrial biodiversity in Australia and Qld. For example, the State of the Environment Queensland 1999 reported:

The factor contributing most to the loss of biodiversity in Queensland has been and continues to be the destruction of native habitat by broadscale land clearing. Immediate effects on biodiversity include the removal or killing of species, the most obvious being plants, and the rapid reduction in habitat for other species. Habitat loss is a major factor in loss of woodland bird diversity in Australia: it has been estimated that 1000–2000 birds die for every 100 ha of native bushland cleared

Broadscale land clearing not only reduces the extent and diversity of natural ecosystems but also fragments them into remnant patches that, in many cases, are too small and too isolated to maintain viable populations of species.

In 2012, AgForce reinstated the AgForce Vegetation Management Committee to gather information on the limitations of the current Vegetation Management Act 1999.  The Committee has been assisting the Qld Government understand what AgForce considers to be the key failings of the Act.

The Agforce Committee has overseen a consultation process with their members across the state to provide feedback on the legislation, its regulation and associated codes and has suggested changes to the legislation.

Now amendments are proposed in the Vegetation Management Framework Amendment Bill 2013 will allow land clearing activities to support the development of high value agriculture in areas with appropriate land and climate characteristics.

The clearing of native vegetation in Queensland is currently regulated by the Vegetation Management Act 1999. The Act currently sets down the rules and regulations that guide what clearing can be done, and how it must be done to meet the requirements of the law.

The act currently regulates clearing of remnant vegetation on a regional ecosystem and remnant map on freehold and Indigenous land and State tenures. Regulated regrowth vegetation on freehold and Indigenous land and leasehold land for agriculture and grazing is also protected. On some other State tenures native woody regrowth may also be protected.  The Qld Government proposes to introduce self-assessable codes for routine vegetation management activities such as weed and pest management, fodder harvesting and thinning.

Clearing for some activities are already exempt. These include most routine activities like fence lines, yards, firebreaks and burning off.

Clearing remnant vegetation on a regional ecosystem or remnant map, if not exempt, can currently only be done under a permit. Landholders wanting a permit must apply to the department of Natural Resources and Mines. The department assesses applications against regional vegetation management codes. These codes are also used to assess applications to clear native woody regrowth on State tenures other than leasehold land for agriculture and grazing.

Permit are not required to clear regulated regrowth. However, landholders currently need to notify the department that they intend to clear and any clearing must comply with the regrowth vegetation code.  The proposed amendments will remove these requirements.

The Bill proposes to remove regulations regarding regrowth control on freehold and indigenous land, these regulations will still apply to leasehold land and in reef watercourses.

The Qld Government proposes to detect inappropriate vegetation management practices that show no regard for the environment through satellite monitoring.

Key reforms proposed under the Vegetation Management Framework Amendment Bill 2013 include:

· The introduction of new clearing purposes under the Act for high-value agriculture and environmental works (such as land rehabilitation)

· The removal of regrowth regulations on freehold and indigenous land, but the retention of controls on regrowth control on leasehold land and in reef watercourses

· New provisions to allow for the creation of self-assessable codes for routine management activities such as weed and pest management, fodder harvesting and thinning

· The creation of simplified statewide vegetation maps to clearly define areas where regulations will apply

· The removal of the guide to sentencing under the existing Vegetation Management Act to ensure more consistent and equitable penalties in cases of inappropriate clearing

These proposed reforms will now be referred to the State Development, Infrastructure and Industry parliamentary committee for thorough examination and full public consultation.  More information on the amendments and how to make submissions to the Parliamentary Committee is available under Vegetation Management at: www.dnrm.qld.gov.au/home.

Interstate Waste, DERM, Vegetation (VMA), Water

What a Waste!

ASBG in its submission notes that when the Queensland Government repeals the $35/t waste levy, it will make it economic sense for NSW businesses to avoid Sydney landfill levies by sending their waste north over the state border. This will occur for back filled loads this year and for one-way trips probably next year. The question is does Qld want NSW’s wastes under it competitive approach between states?

ASBG is calling for collaboration between jurisdictions on waste levies across State borders. It also recommends support for steel and paper recycling.

DERM is Dead

On 30 March 2012 the Queensland Government announced machinery-of-government changes for departments. The functions of the former Department of Environment and Resource Management will now be delivered by the following departments:

Department of Environment and Heritage Protection
Minister: Andrew Powell
Director-General: Andrew Chesterman

Department of Natural Resources and Mines
Minister: Andrew Cripps, Assistant Minister: Lisa France
Acting Director-General: Dan Hunt

Department of National Parks, Recreation, Sport and Racing
Minister: Steve Dickson
Acting Director-General: John Glaister

Department of Energy and Water Supply
Minister: Mark McArdle
Acting Director-General: Tim Spencer


Vegetation Clearing

Those of you with responsibilities for vegetation management should note that the new Queensland Government is reviewing current investigation & enforcement processes for alleged illegal vegetation clearing.
The Qld Government is undertaking a thorough review of the way that the penalty provisions of the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (VMA) have been applied to alleged breaches of the Act.

There will be a comprehensive review of the application of the provisions of the VMA to alleged breaches over the next six to eight weeks. The review will initially be undertaken independently of the Department by Crown Law, to determine whether or not a wider external review is required.

Approximately 100 cases of unlawful clearing have been prosecuted in Queensland since the commencement of the VMA in 1999.

A review of Water Licensing

The Acting Director-General of the Department of Natural Resources and Mines: Dan Hunt, has referred to the Crime and Misconduct Commission findings by the Land Court on inconsistencies in the way water licences have been awarded by the department formerly known as the Department of Environment & Resource Management (DERM).

The new Minister for Natural Resources and Mines: Andrew Cripps wants to ensure the new department uses robust, peer-reviewed science and that it follows proper process. Minister Crisp has instructed the new department to commission an investigation into the integrity of the implementation of water resource plans, which oversee water licensing to ensure there is transparency and accountability in the process.


The Case for Water Efficiency

One can be proud of the fact that we (as a society) made some wholesale behavioural changes and achieved a permanent reduction in water consumption (and wastewater generation). The Qld Government is reviewing red tape and promising to reduce the cost of water for consumers.

Within the next 76 days the LNP Government proposes to appoint the Gasfields land and water Commissioner to better oversee the relationship between rural landholders and the CSG industry. At the same time, the Qld Government shall start processes to amalgamate bulk water entities as part of their Four point plan to reduce water prices.

The future of the Queensland Water Commission (QWC) is under a shadow. The regulation and legislation for home and business water efficiency may be revoked by the new Qld Government in an attempt to be seen to be cutting Red Tape. The QWC is an independent, statutory authority established by the previous Qld Government. The QWC is (or was) responsible for achieving safe, secure and sustainable water supplies in South East Queensland and other designated regions.

The draft Position Paper – The Case for Water Efficiency - has been developed by members of the Australian Water Association (AWA) Water Efficiency Specialist Network Committee to advocate for the continued role of water efficient policies and practices in Australia’s future urban water supply and demand management.

The Position Paper makes the argument that water efficiency is a necessary and effective way of maintaining a secure water supply into the future and should be a high priority in a suite of measures to achieve water security.

The case for water efficiency, will be presented and discussed at the AWA’s Ozwater'12 Water Efficiency workshop The Future Role of Water Efficiency in Australia: Developing and Promoting a Common Approach.

The Qld Government is making plans to write down or write off (so-called) non-performing water grid assets. There does not appear to be any appetite in the Qld for commissioning the Western Corridor water purification scheme for the purpose it was designed and constructed.