For Like minded people who like to see-
The Queensland Country Life today carried a story entitled “WWF sinks hooks deeper into beef industry” by Brad Cooper which makes it beyond doubt that WWF is to project manage beef sustainability courses at the behest of Mc Donalds and with the full co-operation of CCA and MLA.
WWF, through their influence with the Greens in Queensland have been responsible for Vegetation Management laws implemented without ‘just terms’ and with no carbon credit for avoided deforestation. Those were stolen by the government to meet its Kyoto commitments.
An early task force reviewing damage to the Great Barrier Reef wanted to say that the reef was in good shape. However they bowed to the protests of the WWF representative and highlighted the small areas that appeared slightly damaged. WWF have claimed ever since that farming and grazing are damaging the reef in spite of lack of research and knowledge that urban centres are actually causing more alleged pollution.
All green groups have been involved in Wild Rivers legislations and declarations and possible World Heritage listing claiming on the one hand that the areas are either pristine or retaining most of their natural values and on the other denigrating the cattlemen who have lived there for more than 100 years for degrading the landscape and it therefore needs protection.
This legislation has put those graziers in a time warp whose effects will not be felt immediately but over time as it becomes impossible to adopt the results of modern research they will start to bite. One of the great lies told is that declaration will protect the areas from mining and CSG exploitation.
The greatest harm of all has been to our reputation, our self esteem and sense of worth that comes from knowing that you are doing a worthwhile job-feeding the people of the world.
WWF and others have taken the flawed findings of ‘Livestock’s Long Shadow” and publicised them to the point where vegetarian celebrities, authors, journalists, governments and research organisations including our own National Health and Medical Research Council have urged limited or zero meat intake on environmental grounds.
The upshot is that our credentials have been damaged as part of a campaign by environmentalists to discredit those of us who live by the land in order to set themselves up as the environmental gods and the only people deserving of dictating policy and receiving funding and even big business has fallen for the scam.
Be aware that when you respond to that beautifully worded invitation to an Ausgraze workshop your presenter will be in the employ of WWF and the “voluntary” course will soon become mandatory.
Have CCA and MLA let us down once again by not highlighting the science that is on our side instead of responding to the dark green Mob.
The table below is found at page two of the document, Naked extortion? Environmental NGOs imposing [in]voluntary regulations on consumers and business found at the IPA web site. To read the entire document click on this link.
PRECEDING DISCUSSION - http://justgroundsonline.com/forum/topics/international-green-group...
Beef Central article, WWF: To engage or not to engage?
Follow up article by Brad Cooper published at farmonline, Sustainable beef plan under wraps
I urge everyone on here who has ever so much as enjoyed the smell of a steak on the barbie and who may never have commented on anyting and may never comment ever again to at least comment on this.
It is important.
Thank you for raising this important issue. I will be campaigning on environmental issues, and the impact of the urban vote on the bush.
Very well written Joanne... Good for you. As per usual - 'follow the money trail'
Thank You Ruth and Josephine.
Tony I can't quite decide which animal we have here but at the moment I'm tending towatds plague locust.
Ian, I hope you thoroughly enjoy your chops and bacon.
The Environmental Risk Management Plans you refer to Greg are unnecessary and unnecessarily slander the reputations of livestock owners and farmers.
Why do we fall for this again and again.
Livestock owners as far West as Alpha/Jericho were told at the beginning of the ERMP process that they were losing 30t of soil per hectare per year. The rainfall to acheive this was huge and this is a semi arid area. The calculations were later corrected but the damage was done.
It seems to be a recurring tactic to come up with huge, unrealistic figures, give it publicity and then retract.
Of course the retraction barely raises a whimper.
Here are some links from Dr. Jennifer Marohasy and Dr. Walter Stark who are both credible non-alarmist commentators on the reef. It is not in bad shape but "good shape"
does not elicit government funding nor donations.
Greg Blackmore said:
Also ridiculous is the Reef Protection Plan that requires graziers as far inland and away from the coast (by river) at Alpha and Jericho to subscribe to some strict controls and submit a plan for approval. This area comprises natural, native forest country with native grasses and some development of smaller Brigalow stands to improved grasses. There is no agriculture/farming for crops in this area, so no farming chemicals at all, and the only soil disturbance may be for regrowth control. Also overlooked is the effectiveness of the "big silt trap" on the Burdekin River.
I am not the least bit understanding of the betrayal by CCA and MLA. If they were truly representing their shareholders and not stakeholders there are steps they should have been taking and spending some of their $170m budget on.
They should have been aware of the pain inflicted on our industry by WWF, much of it based on believable
We are not a third world country.
The programme for Ausgraze is not even fully developed so it will be a moving feast. In other words something we cannot critique.
MLA is supposed to work according to stock exchance rules with primary concern for its shareholders.
None of the other companies in which I own shares in treats me like this.
If MLA whose charter we are told is "research and marketing" was doing its job it would have made somethimg of the errors in "Livestock's Long Shadow"
It would have pointed out the many aspects which do not apply to Australia.
It could even have said we deserved credit for avoided deforestation and pastureland.
It could have told the multinational companies who are succumbing to the blackmail of the green groups that Queensland producers have been persued and demonised by WWF.
And there is so much more.
Greg Blackmore said:
I can see why the CCA and MLA may have justified their involvement on the basis of that "if you can't beat them - join them". We all know that arguments on the basis of facts and science are not going to change the minds of the "green movement" as we are dealing with a belief, religion or cult, that has nothing to do with facts but feeds on perceptions alone. By being involved in a joint process, CCA and MLA may believe that the industry is seen to be "responsible" about their intentions and co-operative so that some of the heat may go away. The risk of course is that, like so many other joint projects and even Landcare, that was producer initiated, the whole process becomes hi jacked by the "Cult". Maybe if we can convince the "cult" that doomsday is nigh they may all drink from the one chalice and we can move forward and produce food for a starving world.
It would appear that only New Zealand and Canada have any will to recognize the true character of these groups.
Tony Howard said:
It does't really matter which we equate them to, the obligation on the landowner to control them is in legislation.The manner of the control technique is all that is in question for me. It would appear that reasoned debate and scientific fact are not effective controls.
For some reason I am feeling less than charatible towards those who would destroy our industry, lifestyle and income, of late.
Please put both of these two maps up on your screen side by side and compare.... mpeormap_ed13.pdf (2.20 MB) and ReefPlan.pdf (309 KB)
The great barrier reef robbery - http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/great-barrier-reef-robbery/story...
The results from consultation reveal that Agforce and the Regional Groups Collective support for banning unacceptable practices although this comment was not provided with an understanding of the exact practices that are proposed to be prohibited.
Consultation with key stakeholders such as the World Wildlife Fund and the Queensland tourism Council support the concept of targeted regulation. Industry groups including Canegrowers and individual canefarmers do not support any legislative approach. "
The above is just a small sample of Josephine's docx document above.
Nowhere in all of the documentation is mention made that regulating farming and grazing without regulating towns and mining is a waste of time. Maybe that is an acknowledgement that it is all a waste of time and the reef really is in good shape.
Josephine Heading said:
This is the document where those pages come from:-