Just Grounds Community

For Like minded people who like to see-

WWF to Tell Australian Cattlemen How to be “Sustainable”

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...

UPDATE #1

Beef Central article, WWF: To engage or not to engage?

UPDATE #2

Follow up article by Brad Cooper published at farmonline, Sustainable beef plan under wraps

Tags: CCA, MLA, McDonalds, WWF, barrier, cattlemen, graziers, great, reef

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Joanne Rea on September 29, 2012 at 8:40am

Alan

We all essentially want the same sorts of things for the cattle industry and I am presently trying to familiarise myself with all the publicly available submissions to the restructure of Cattle Council including that of US of A.

Now might be the time to give Rob a gentle reminder that he had banned me from commenting on his cattle industry posts subject to certain conditions. Does he remember?

However, on to the subject at hand.

Back in about March Cattle Council ran a series of questions on the internet, one of which was to do with engaging with groups such as RSPCA and WWF.

Overwhelmlingly, respondants said that they did NOT wish to engage with WWF.

They mustn't have liked that answer because now they have a new consultation underway.

In this week's Country Life, Cattle Council's David Inall is still stating, "a wider issue existed that should be explored by Australian agriculture and that is-do we engage with any environmental or animal welfare groups who may have a different view to us?"

This question has already been answered and his view did not prevail.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rob Moore on September 29, 2012 at 10:12am

Hello Joanne,

I can't remember and can't imagine why I would have said such a thing.

Now might be the time to give Rob a gentle reminder that he had banned me from commenting on his cattle industry posts subject to certain conditions. Does he remember? ..................... but copy it in so I can please.

I just got rid of that pathetic cyber bullying post - as my wife said -why should this site come up in any google search when there is none going on here.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joanne Rea on September 29, 2012 at 10:33am

Rob

I think it was in a long-removed discussion and you wanted Action with a capital A, not moral support.

It may be obvious to some on here that I am prepared to play the long game if necessary. You thought it was a waste of time.

I think you underestimated in your bout of disillusionment just how influential the sum total of all the posts on here has been.

There is at least a review of Cattle Council happening and most of US of A's suggestions re more accurate levy collection are doable.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rob Moore on September 29, 2012 at 11:49am

I think we need both tactics. Call me impatient but it is only recently that Brad Cooper and the QCL would even dream about questioning the CCA, Agforce, NFF or the like after a decade of wearing the blinkers.

Lots of Govt and MLA money(same) comes their way and truth or bad news doesn't sell advert space.

They are feeling the pinch with all the online stuff happening everywhere now. The Cattlemans Union seemed to be a good thing but I as too young and busy to pay much attention . The merger of UGA -CU and Ian MacFarlanes Graingrowers was the end and this co-incided with John Andersons boys club structure being the current MLA. The foundations are crooked and their fantasy draft plans should be completley dismissed. Enough is enough - isn't 14 years enough for the long game ....

This is partly why I'm putting every effort into helping Smithy because with them rotten at the top - if he wins half the ALP will be either in jail or out on their arse. Case in point re PRA- it was a political solution that finally ended nearly all the threats that Goss to Beattie to Blight all who seem to be controlled by the boss of the AWU. PRA did a great job helping the victims but it takes something outside the square to shape history - not just be a commentator. I am no hero but I like being in a team that tries to make things happen. USA won't be the answer if it doesn't eventually get numbers but it is early days yet but the clock is TICKING>

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joanne Rea on September 29, 2012 at 11:59am

Rob

I wish you all the best but I need to get back on topic-commenting.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joanne Rea on September 30, 2012 at 9:01am

Great find Dale.

Andrew Forrest is so right.

I wonder how many people who support these groups have really thought through to the end result.

Farmers really are the best environmentalists but the green movement will never sincerely endorse that.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alyn Roule on September 30, 2012 at 12:42pm

Just more smoke and mirrors to distort information to service an opinion or campaign ?? Another term for this could be -; CORRUPTION ??

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Roger Rankin Crook on September 30, 2012 at 2:05pm

Actually, Twiggy is wrong, he hasn't read his history. The clearing of WA continued from the 1900 through to the 1980's 'in spite' of warnings from science that the land was already or would quickly go saline.

Just part of the story.

In 1917 Professor of Ag at UWA, John Paterson, trained at Edinburgh and Leipzig in agricultural chemistry undertook extensive testing of soils between Noresman and Esperance in the company of the Land Commissioners, during which time he took over seventy soil samples were taken. When he presented his report to the Commissioners he revealed some disturbing conclusions. Half the soil had salt concentrations too high for profitable farming; one sixth was of doubtful use and only one third was useful. This came as a blow to the ambitions of the Commissioners who were seeking a favourable set of findings.

The Commissioners tried to counter Patterson's findings and brought forward the evidence of one farmer, a James Lewis, who said there wasn't enough salt to cure a bullocks hide and he wanted more!

Then another farmer, Alexander Richardson, pastoralist and Trustee of the Agricultural Bank told the Commissioners;

'In the Eastern districts where salt is accumulating , owing to the clearing, is both wheat and grass die. Several salt pans in those districts which were not there originally have come of late years, and when the salt gets beyond the point of tolerance, not only will the wheat not grow, but the grass will not grow.

There was another, a Thomas Mann, another chemist, presented similar evidence going back to 1912. He too incurred the wrath of the Commissioners who were determined to see WA cleared and soldiers, irrespective of whether they had any experience of farming, settled on the land. Politics in this case and for many years, overruled science.

If you want the full story of WA try and get a copy of 'The Salinity Crisis' ISBN 1 876268-60-3 it's out of print, but I found a copy in a second hand book shop, there are, should be, copies in the Library system.

As far as the pastoral areas of WA are concerned there is no doubt that the early settlers 1880s capitalised on the natural grasses and abundant grazing available. There can also be no doubt that during the wool boom of the fifties many properties were overpopulated with sheep and so overgrazed, wool was a pound a pound, fortunes were made.

In the 1970's when I managed a station in the West Kimberley, it was evident that the Fitzroy River country had been overgrazed by cattle, simply because that was where the best feed and water was, there were also few fences and thousands of donkeys. These have now largely been eliminated, the donkeys that is. Shot. But don't tell anyone.

For those who don't know, 'Twiggy Forrest' is a decedent of the great explorer John Forrest who was later to become Sir John Forrest and Premier of WA. The story I like about John Forrest is the first time he traveled between WA and SA it took him three months on horseback, the second time he did it it took him three days, by train.

To be fair to Twiggy it was well after John Forrest's time that these finding on salinity were made. Still I am sure he told his audience what they wanted to hear.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joanne Rea on October 1, 2012 at 8:18am

Roger

There is no doubt that all governments wanted agricultural development until the 1980's-a bit like the CSG development now. The science that they were adopting, at least in Queensland was the science of productivity and if you didn't clear country you were just regarded as darn lazy.

Salinity is not a huge problem in Queensland and there are a few theories as to why. You know them all.

We do however have the problem of WWF accusing the farmers and graziers and only the farmers and graziers of damaging the Reef. The GBR is the real target of the sustainability program that we are presently discussing.

WWF uses a lot of "science" that is based on modelling to make their accusations and some of the assumptions are along the lines of "the biggest landowners are the biggest polluters" and "that tree clearing causes erosion and soil runoff" when rangeland scientists would argue that grasscover is better at preventing erosion than tree cover.

These exercises are sliced, diced and repackaged from time to time but not much new emerges and WWF never publicise the fact that the Burdekin and other dams act as giant silt traps.

In the first round of consultations when the Reef regulations were mooted (they only applied to the Burdekin catchment) livestock producers in the Desert Uplands (many hundreds of kms from the coast and low rainfall) were told they were losing 30 tonnes of topsoil per ha per year. The researchers eventually came back with revised calculations but by then it was too late.

Green groups on a winner rarely revise their "science" when new information becomes available.

So yes Twiggy was probably saying what his audience wanted to hear but we are still not as good at selective conclusions as the green groups.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rob Moore on October 1, 2012 at 9:34am

A map of key affected areas from the AgForce report, the full version of which can be viewed by clicking the image above.

Bush Telegraph
We broadcast to almost 50 stations across the country, from Mareeba to Mandurah. In a new network segment called The Bush Telegraph, Dan Mullins will bring stories from the bush once a week.
If you want to let Dan know what's happening in your neck of the woods and right across the country, email bushtelegraph@mrn.com.au

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joanne Rea on October 1, 2012 at 10:07am

Thanks Beverley

Alan

The selective science used by the Greens was supported and promulgated by both the State and Federal Labor governments.

Why use real observations by scientists when the modelling makes your case so much more strongly?

However the Hansard record shows that the opposition was in possession of plenty of evidence from reef scientists who were of a different opinion.

I will endeavour to put up some of the record during the week.

The map is very informative too Rob. it was originally produced by Agforce.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Geoff Hutchesson on October 1, 2012 at 11:38am

Hi Rob,

That map and text is bluddy frightening.

How current is it, in respect of the Labor proposal of the Border to Beach corridor? Surely Newman isn't going to let that happen, especially with the aquisition aspect.