soil-conservation-people-religion-and-land.pdf - South West NRM

CLEARING: WHO SHOULD DECIDE?
Brian Roberts, DDIAE, 1/8/89
The Situation
For decades, Queensland has been developing new crop land and
improving the carrying capacity of pastoral country at the
estimated rate of between 40 000 and 60 000 ha per annum.
Mechanical and chemical techniques of removing or killing
trees have become important tools in the development of the
State's potential. In recent years the problems associated
with injudicious clearing have been highlighted (Roberts,
1984) and landholders have accepted the need for careful
planning of future clearing programmes. The QDPI have
proposed a number of guidelines for ecologically sound
clearing (Anderson & Dowling, 1987) and a rational framework
for decision-making on clearing has been proposed (Roberts,
1989) since the use of new chemical methods have reached
political prominence.
One of the central questions requiring early consideration by
all concerned with sustainable production from ltimproved
country", is that of who should be responsible for decisions
on where and how land should be cleared. This, and associated
questions, is the substance of this paper.
Sustainable Pastoral Production
Indirect adverse effects of clearing may include influences on
microclimate and atmospheric C02, while lfnon-productivell
effects include such factors as a reduction in arboreal
wildlife and general aesthetic values. This paper makes no
value judgement on these potentially significant effects, but
concentrates rather on the relationship between clearing and
sustainable pastoral production. It does not assume that the
pastoral industry necessarily has priority over alternative
uses.
Producers justifiably ask, "What's the use of dense scrub
which is neither productive nor rare?" and point to the
apparently very stable kikuyu pastures carved out of dense
rainforest in North Queensland. In the Brigalow belt, some 4M
ha of "useless" scrub has been converted into productive
country since the 1960s. Has the Brigalow Scheme been a
success? Is it stable and sustainable or are the problems of
regrowth and nitrogen depletion symptoms of faulty planning
and ill-advised development?
Without attempting to answer these questions here, it should
be repeated that for any system to be sustainable it must:
1. Retain and protect the soil.
2. Maintain satisfactory levels of soil organic matter on
which productivity ultimately depends.
3. Sustain the required level of soil fertility in terms of
essential plant nutrients.