A VAGUE report on land clearing in Queensland which fails to take into account the ongoing drought has further deteriorated the trust between farmers and the government, producers say.
The latest Statewide Landcover and Trees Study (SLATS) released by the state government analyses data from 2016-17 and 2017-18, before the Palaszczkuk Government’s new vegetation management laws were introduced.
Deputy Premier Jackie Trad said the figures painted a picture of the devastation uncontrolled land clearing in Queensland caused.
“The data shows that in 2016-17 and 2017-18, before our laws came into effect, tree clearing was still continuing at a rate more than 1000 football fields every day,” Deputy Premier Jackie Trad said.
The data has been summarised into a four-page document, but provided no context about why the land was cleared. It also fails to mention regrowth rates over this period.
AgForce general president Georgie Somerset accused the government of using ‘selective science’ to justify their heavy handed laws and said they were ‘scare-mongering.’
“The Government’s heavily edited version of the SLATS report doesn’t mention that most clearing is done to provide feed to prevent livestock from starving during drought and to maintain land, including controlling weeds and invasive species that compete with native species,” Mrs Somerset said.
“The four-page summary cherry-picked by the Government from the full 100-page document only tells half the story.”
Ms Somerset said the ‘football fields’ of cleared land represented just 0.2 per cent of Queensland’s total land area.
“It also doesn’t mention that around 40 per cent of this area has already been cleared and is simply being maintained,” she said.
Central Queensland cattle producer Peter Mahony runs the 14,000 hectare Gyranda Santa Gertruis Stud near Theodore.
He said the failure to disclose the full report would further destroy the trust between farmers and the government.
The report shows 392,000 ha of clearing had taken place in the last year, compared with 356,000 in 2016/17 and 390,000 in 2015/16.
“This is normal land maintenance and represents only 0.2% of the Queensland land area,” Mr Mahony said.
”That Mulga clearing was essential to the survival and management of a big chunk of Queensland that science shows it’s sustainable.
“If they did report the regrowth, history suggests that it would be a lot higher than the area cleared so we actually have more trees today than last year.
“Intentional politicking like this further erodes any trust between land stewards and government which is a lose/lose for all concerned.
“Without stewards being onside, best practice simply cannot be implemented.”
LNP Natural Resources spokesman Dale Last accused the government of secrecy and cover-ups.
"The selective summary fails to mention that during the time of reporting, Queensland was more than 80 per cent drought declared,” Mr Last said.
"In times of drought, farmers use vegetation to feed their livestock and there is no mention of fodder harvesting in the selective summary.
"Previous SLATS reports failed to properly explain the full picture of vegetation in Queensland.
"The SLATS report doesn't measure regrowth and vegetation rejuvenation that would provide important context.
"This has been a constant point of contention for landholders who have been frustrated that Labor Governments have continued to use the SLATS report out of context for political gain at the expense of farmers.”
But environment minister Leeanne Enoch said the best available science had been used to paint a picture of tree clearing in Queensland.
“This science is peer-reviewed and has been described as being “of international standard” and “deserves an international science profile”.
She defended the structure of the report and said it had been released within 30 days of it gaining Herbarium approval.
“We have changed the way SLATS is released. Instead of releasing a report that features data that is about a year old, we have moved to ensure Queensland has access to the most up-to-date information as possible. That is why this report covers two years.
“The new format of the SLATS report has not compromised the analysis in any way and the information that was in the previous reports is still available.”
