This article seems to contain contradictions such as the need to burn native forest for healthier trees and grassland, but surely burning creates CO2. The whole question of agriculture and emissions seems to be a vexed issue, particularly if more factors are added such as use of diesel and fertiliser and the creation of methane by grazing animals. Therefore I think there is no mileage in any form of extra financial reward for farming on account of trees planted or not cut down. The PM's long awaited carbon report may have other ideas, not necessarily correct.

Maybe the salvation is that farmers could do OK under business-as-usual. The world will have more hungry people and less reliable rainfall but then again oil based fuel and fertiliser is getting expensive. We'll just have to take it as it comes.

I take Don Burke's point that 'the land' is not where we should be looking for an environmental fix. However he neglects to mention a couple of points: first, historically farming is an explotative activity, although today's farmers are often very green and are fighting to overcome the foolish practices of the past that have led to soil degradation and dry-land salinity. Modern-thinking farmers don't clear wetlands, they farm in a way that the will allow the land to have value for their children.

Second, as for the 15% of farm area being turned over to 'greening', most often much of this is done on unuseable sections of properties (creek areas, roadside boundaries etc) and has little negative affect on a farm's productive capacity and often enhances it as green areas turn into wind breaks etc. Also, the government through various schemes rewards farmers for this 'sacrifice'. It makes good business sense.

I'm not much of a whale fancier although I'd not like to see a whale species (nor any species) go extinct. I think there is a shrillness to come conservation rhetoric. Likewise for Mr Burke to attribute the clearing of the Moree wetlands as an act desperation seems equally shrill. The clearing was not done by 'farmers' it was done by an individual and on a massive scale. Don Burke's defence of it leaves me wondering about his 'environmentalist' credentials.

Why use the word "bashing" in your title?
A typical right wing polarising ploy maybe?
And perhaps some or even many of our farming practices are unsustainable?
Meanwhile the Australian Environment Foundation is another "conservative" front organisation associated with the IPA which has as its purpose to counter and undermine the credibility of the environmental movement altogether and to lobby for the dismantling of environmental protection legislation altogether---let the "invisible hand" of the market rule!

Meanwhile these two books/websites give a completely different picture of how "free" the markets really are and the role of outfits such as the IPA in promoting the gospel of "I Shop Therefore I Am" or "When In Doubt: Go Shopping".

1. http://www.benjaminbarber.com
2. http://homepage.mac.com/herinst/sbeder/missionaries.html

Needless to say the two authors are loathed at the "right" thinking IPA.

Problems with the economic management of farms is long standing from the improper introduction of non-native species to the over subdivision of land with soldier settlement blocks to agarian socialism.

If provided said funding must be for change management and transition from the farms, rather than sustaining unproductive enterprise. In the nineties, thousands of white collar middle managers were dislodged, owing to the flating of organisational structure. These folk needed to re-skill. Some retrenched managers entered a second career path -at middle age- and others purchased franchises. The white collar workers adapted. Most adapted successfully, without the special help,as is so often provided to farmers.

1. Farmers should not be treated as a special class people.
2. Farmers need to adapt or at least differentiate their investments
3. Funding should not focused in a way that old uneconomic practices
are repeated over and over.

I came across these two references yesterday. One in Readings in Carlton and the other via an internet link.

1. http://www.blessedunrest.com
2. http://www.bioneers.org

The author of ref #1 is a successful businessman.
Altogether he praises the role of peoples activist groups and NGO's, including the multi-faceted anti-globalisation movement.
Needless to say the IPA ideological hacks promote the entirely contrary view. In the case of NGO's they argue that these organisation have hijacked "democracy"---a bit like the pot calling the kettle black especially in the light of the Consume and Free Market Missionaries websites I pointed to in my previous post.

I have known of the Bioneers for years when they were regularly featured in the marvellous Co-Evoltion Quarterly and Whole Earth Catalog published by Stewart Brand and the Point Foundation---way back in the 70's and early 80's.

Totally agree with the article. Those who actually live out on the land will recognise that this has been the case for some time, but of course, those who are actually in the area will be denounced as farmers or sympathisers, while the uninformed will continue to use farmers as a scapegoat, aided by the federal government.

The worst thing is that periodic clearing is necessary land management. Before settlers prevented or contained fires, bushfires would rage across the country and it was a necessary part of the land cycle.
Aboriginal elders who have been on the land for many years agree - they weren't averse to using fire to manage the land and see it prosper.
Yet now we refuse to do so based on outmoded principles which are damaging the land we seek to protect. Such stupidity.

Whats more, the federal government will now claim that they're meeting kyoto because of programs they have put in place - never mind the fact that it's this issue which is getting them there and it's farmers doing the heavy lifting without assistance.

Burke is totally right. We all like to look and think of cute little seals when it comes to the environment, but boring, practical measures that happen to be contrary to the ideals we've come to believe in are rejected as being the whinges of farmers, so it's just tuned out.