Green hypocrisy and environmental vandalism

All this for outcomes that amount to environmental vandalism.

If this very substantial area of western NSW was pristine native forest that was being cleared, perhaps this campaign could be validated to some degree - but it is not - in the main, this vast area has been farmed for over 150 years and has had very limited tree cover. Extensive native grasslands were the natural landscape before white man arrived.

Farmers are willing to set aside up to 15 per cent of their own private property to provide more tree cover - this would be a massive increase on what has traditionally been an open landscape. This compromise has not been accepted to date by the Iemma Government.

The public forum heard from a number of speakers including the chair of the AEF Don Burke, himself a bird lover, who lamented the demise of the Superb parrot among other species from the area now covered by woody weeds.

Shadow Minister for Natural Resources, Adrian Piccoli advised that a coalition government would repeal key elements of the current legislation that has led to the environmental degradation depicted in slides shown at the forum.

These slides graphically displayed the loss of ground cover in the thick stands of woody weeds, showing the bare earth that was badly eroded by wind and water. Other slides showed the same landscape - previously covered in grasslands - with no sign of erosion and in obvious good health, with the occasional scattered clump of trees.

Apart from the environmental tragedy that is unfolding, there is the now obvious social tragedy that is occurring through the disempowerment of landholders to manage their own land.

Landholders have been stripped of the ability to manage their land productively as an agricultural enterprise by the state and are expected to manage it to a set of criteria that appeals to residents of far off Sydney.

If western landholders are required to manage their land for the benefit of the state then they should be compensated by the state for providing state prescribed “environmental management”.

To not do so is to dilute the property rights and private property value of a minority.

This is the crux of the debate which has bigger ramifications than the looming environmental disaster.

All around the country state governments, which by and large are city centric, are enacting legislation that bit by bit erodes the property rights of individuals, mainly in rural areas, to accommodate the agendas of a constituency that has no connection with the land and no practical experience with land management.