GREENS & NSW GOV'T DECLARE WAR ON DISSIDENT FARMERS

G’day Agmates,

Due to a few technical problems we have not published so far this week so there’s a lot to get through.

We have changed our format to make it easier for you to read the news on Agmates

Agmates Comments:

It just stun’s us that the mainstream rural press have once again ignore the civil disobedience “tree chop” campaign by farmers in QLD, NSW, Vic and SA. Reading either paper you would not know it was going on or more importantly the issues behind it.

The only article was by Canberra reporter Lucy Skuthorp “Choppers Barking up the Wrong Tree”. The article appeared in both the Land & Queensland Country Life”.

This article was based on an interview with David Crombie NFF president and again shows why the NFF is not fit to be the peak lobby group for farmers. Quotes taken from that article show all that the NFF can produce is dribble.

Mr Crombie (pictured)said there was no denying land clearing bans had impacted unfairly on a lot of producers and ‘the chop a day’ campaign had risen out of desperation.
He said – I just don’t think going and chopping down trees is the way to go about it.

I think it just sends a whole lot of wrong messages to the broader community.
What we are doing at the NFF is trying to put forward the outstanding record of farmers in terms of environmental management and the extent to which farmers have contributed to the reductions in emissions which has been for the community benefit in Australia.
_______________________________________________________

Agmates Comment:

No mention from Mr Crombie about the NFF actually trying to do something about farmers being compensated for government taking of their trees (land) and carbon credits.

No mention of NFF’s efforts to remove the tyrannical Native Veg Laws in each state of Australia.

No mention of fighting the Fundamentalist Green’s sponsored Native Veg Laws in each state which remove land holders property rights whilst achieving little or nothing for the environment.

The NFF as a Lobby group are a joke. The rural media as a means of keeping up to speed on “real issues’ are a failure.

Todays articles are a selection of stories the media could have run this week but chose not to – No wonder farmers rights are being eroded in this country every day. Australian farmers Peak lobby group is a joke and the mainstream media who are supposed to be the eyes and ears of the bush are asleep.
________________________________________________________________________
IN TODAYS ISSUE OF AGMATES NEWS:

1. Australian beef Association Backs “Tree Chop Campaign” –

2. Nationals MP Kevin Humphries – throws his support behind dissident farmers

3. NSW Gov't & Radical Greens declare WAR on dissident Farmers

4. Comment on StateLine Show - Peter Spencer CPPA

5. Comment on StateLine Show - Australian Beef Association.

6. How Farmers can survive a raid by the Green Gestapo.

7. SA Joins the Tree Chop Campaign – Whats wrong with SA Veg Laws and Regs

8. The Great Soil Data Swindle – Michael Keily

9. Readers Comments.

10. Part Four of Professor Suri Ratnapala’s paper -

_______________________________________________________________

1. AUSTRALIAN BEEF ASSOCIATION BACKS "TREE CHOP CAMPAIGN"

AUSTRALIAN BEEF ASSOCIATION SETS THE RECORD STRAIGHT ON TREE CHOP CAMPAIGN



Australian Beef Association Chairman Brad Bellinger (pictured) said his personal participation and that of other senior ABA Directors in the tree chopping action, has attracted some ridiculous comments from members of the public, who clearly do not understand the issues involved..........

The action of some members of the ABA executive by backing and participating in the tree-chopping campaign may seem radical. However we see ourselves as custodians of the land upon which we run our livestock in order to make a living. We support the Commonwealth Property Protection Association. We recognize that civil disobedience is a legitimate course of action in a civil society. The courts, public opinion, and the ballot box will ultimately judge the actions and arguments of all involved.

To the anonymous radical greens whom resort to abuse and threats many who have heard your method of expression, consider you to be in a class of your own. To Ben Fargher CEO of the National Farmers Federation that condemned the tree falling, you probably did so because the Federal Government told you to do so.

The ABA deplores the Federal Government’s duplicitous policy of profiting (tax and royalties and political donations) from the production, domestic consumption and export of fossil fuel, while taxing farmers by arbitrarily restricting their land use (including land clearing), to grandstand and claim carbon credits in domestic and international forums.
Click here to read this full media release on Agmates.

Back to top

_______________________________________________________________

2. NATIONAL MP KEVIN HUMPHRIES - THROWS HIS SUPPORT BEHIND DISSIDENT FARMERS

Clearing compensation
By Meg Strang ABC Reporter


Tuesday, 10/07/2007
A fierce land clearing row continues to flare in the Eastern States

Kevin Humphries, the National Party's MP for Barwon in the North Western NSW, has accused BOTH State and Federal Governments of mishandling native vegetation laws, and has thrown his support behind radical farmer group, the Commonwealth Property Protection Association.

The Association is fighting for compensation for lost property rights in the courts and claims governments have illegally appropriated farmers' carbon credits to meet international green house gas abatement commitments.

While Mr Humphries isn't advocating chopping down trees, he said farmers have been forced into radical action by bad government.

Mr Humphries says the Federal Government should not have utilized State restrictions on land clearing to meet Kyoto targets: "Not without paying compensation, and if you look at our constitution when the Federal Government resume an asset or a resource, they need to stump up compensation.

Whilst we haven't signed off on the Kyoto protocol, they certainly ratified elements of it and part of meeting our carbon credit commitment was you know the end to broadscale clearing in certain parts of the country is helping us meet those targets."
Read full interview on ABC web site here.

Back to Top
_______________________________________________________

3. NSW GOV'T AND RADICAL GREEN GROUPS DECLARE WAR ON DISSIDENT FARMERS

Last Friday nights NSW State Line with Quentin Dempster showed one of the most chilling displays of utter the arrogance and contempt that the NSW Government and the radical green groups hold for farmers.

Here's a few extracts:

QUENTIN DEMPSTER (Pictured): There's been an outbreak of political hostility around private and leasehold rural land.


A group of militant farmers has been urging landowners throughout Australia to illegally chop down trees each day before State and Federal Governments compensate them for removing their rights to clear native vegetation as they see fit.

They are mimicking tactics by green groups threatening to blockade exports over protest over climate change.

The NSW Government is under pressure to more tightly regulate logging of private native forests.

There's a dispute between conservationists and the Lands Department over the sale of thousands of hectares of crown lease-hold land at below market rates.

First, let's deal with the tree choppers.

Steve Truman, a farmer from Gympie in Queensland runs a rural marketing website called "Agmates".

From 1st July, Mr Truman claims thousands of farmers who subscribe to the website have been chopping down trees on their properties each day in a campaign of civil disobedience against both Federal and State Governments and their vegetation management acts.

EXCERPT OF EMAIL FROM STEVE TRUMAN: The peak farming bodies, including the NFF and the NSW Farmers Association have become totally ineffective on this issue. The recent admission by Federal Treasurer Peter Costello on ABC's 7:30 Report that it was Federal coalition policy that stopped landclearing so Australia could meet its Kyoto target has sparked the uprising.

QUENTIN DEMPSTER: Needless to say environment and conservation groups are outraged at the "Chop Down a Tree" tactic.

JEFF ANGEL, TOTAL ENVIRONMENT CENTRE (Pictured): The minority of farmers clearing trees as a stunt against tree clearing vegetation should be prosecuted to the full scope of the law.


QUENTIN DEMPSTER: NSW climate change and Environment Minister Phil Koperberg has appealed to the public for any information on illegal tree chopping in this State, so with the aid of satellite tracking his department can prosecute.

PHIL KOPERBERG, MINISTER FOR CLIMATE CHANGE (Pictured): There are a number of potential breaches if for argument's sake the trees are being cleared or felled for landclearing purposes.


Well that clearly breaches the native vegetation legislation and penalties of up to $1.1 million if a conviction is obtained can be applied.

PHIL KOPERBERG: This is a new regime, we're in hot pursuit of people who would engage in what some might describe as "environmental vandalism".

QUENTIN DEMPSTER: In an e mail exchange Stateline asked Steve Truman:

You are inciting farmers to illegal acts. I put it to you that rather than building support across the community, this lawlessness will destroy support, confirming in the public mind that you and your supporters are irresponsible red necks?

EXCERPT OF EMAIL FROM STEVE TRUMAN: There is no bigger issue in rural Australia than farmers who have their property rights stolen by legislation. If the Federal Government wants to claim they are meeting their Kyoto targets, let them pay for the 74 million tonnes of carbon they have already accounted for in meeting their emission targets.

The value of the sequestered carbon is on the low side $1.85 billion and on the high 5.18 billion. You'd have to shut down the entire economy of New Zealand or Ireland to achieve the same reductions. The vegetation management acts are the most draconian legislation ever seen in this country. They take property from their lawful owners and invest it in the state.

QUENTIN DEMPSTER: If you really want to win this debate, shouldn't you be supporting the farmers to get compensation for the carbon sequestration services to eco management that they are indeed providing?

JEFF ANGEL: Well, the fact is everyone has an environmental responsibility. In the city we're required to look after bushland and we have tree preservation orders. There's a certain minimal level of individual responsibility which the farming responsibility did not have until we had tree clearing laws.

REECE TURNER, WILDERNESS SOCIETY: I think people would be surprised to know that on the lease-holds, these perpetual lease-holds, the lessees are only playing a flat rate of $190 a year whether they're leasing two hectares or 2,000 hectares.

GEORGINA WOODS, NATIONAL PARKS ASSOCIATION: At the moment, what we need a moratorium on the sale of any of the high conservation value Crown leases in particular. That's a little bit over half of the Crown leases in this State.

We need an inquiry into land management generally in NSW because of the incompetence of the Department of Lands and their inability to recognize and protect conservation values.

JEFF ANGEL: I think what we're seeing with both this Crown lands issue and the tree chop minority who are going out clearing vegetation is a kickback from a minority of people both in the Crown lands Department which aren't particularly capable conservation managers and a minority of farmers who would like to keep clearing vegetation.

Those two institutions, or those two bodies of people need to be radically reformed.

The Government should not give in to them. The Crown lands Department frankly should be abolished so we can have modern conservation principles put in place.
Click here to read entire transcript of the Stateline interview

Back to Top

___________________________________________________________

4. COMMENTS ON STATELINE SHOW - PETER SPENCER CPPA

Publicly admitting their (Fundamentalist Gren Groups Total Environment Centre & World Wildlife Foundation) agenda was to stop the further granting of Freehold land, says Peter Spencer head of CPPA (Pictured)........Their claim they had spoken the minister to stop all conversions from Crown lease to Freehold is no more then a declaration of war on all property owners.

Then they showed the maps and spoke of an amount of $190 being all it cost and a demand that the Minister for lands immediately stop this process claiming all land should be controlled my stockholders and environmental limitations.

If property owners do not appreciate the real impact of this agenda and that we have been warning land owners for over ten years of the next stage in this move to abolish property rights - now here it is.

Every one in Australia who owns property of any kind should read this transcript again and be briefed on this objective as it will impact on every person across the Nation.

This outburst this threat worse then what took place behind the iron curtain is now here in Australia......it is part of a plan......Wake Australia.

This is a real eye opener.

Peter Spencer CPPA

Back to Top

___________________________________________________________

5. COMMENT ON STATE LINE SHOW FROM ABA
On the ABC’s NSW Stateline on Friday night (7/7/07) the environmental group the “Total Environment Centre” (TEC) spokespeople Mr Ian Cohen Greens (MLC in NSW), Mr Reese Turner (Wilderness Society), and Mr Jeff Angle (TEC) openly declared their collective disgust and hostility towards not only farmers but also all privately owned land owners.

The trio also called for the complete dismantling of the NSW Lands Department, which holds all the ‘Land Title Deeds’ for NSW under the ‘Real Property Act’. This outburst by the TEC, gave the public a rare insight into the environmental movement’s real political agenda, which is based more on the ideals of Communism rather than environmentalism with their statements with the removal of private ownership of all land. This cannot be accepted by the ABA.

Back to Top

_____________________________________________________________

6. SURVIVING A FARM INVASION BY THE NATIVE VEG GUESTAPO

With NSW Environment Minister Phil Koperberg promising to crush dissident farmers it is timely that we advise what you can when you suffer a farm invasion by his departments goons. Click here to read what they did to the Hudson family when they raided their property "Yarrol" at Moree.

ABC radio reported this week they they were able to confirm the following facts about the property "Yarrol".

1. It is unrestricted Freehold land.
2. It is NOT in the Heritage Ramsar Listed Gwydir Wetlands.
3. There was a Gwydir Catchment Management Authority plan in place for cleaning up
the invasive weed Lipia.

This is what they reported when they (ABC) tried to question MR Koperberg about these facts:

The Minister Phil Koperberg has declined to comment saying it is not appropriate given that the issue is still under investigation. A spokesperson for the department also declined to comment.

This is the same minister who has had plenty to say earlier when vilifying the Hudson's for their incredible act of environmental vandalism. Honestly Minister why don't you run back to your mate Reece Turner (WWF) and ask him why he perpetrated this BS in the first place.

In case you have forgotten it was Mr Turner who flew over the property and took the photo's of the weed clearing at "Yarrol" and then over the Gwydir wetlands telling the ABC (who broke the story) and the media that they were before and after shots of clearing in the Heritage listed Ramsar Wetlands.

Or perhaps Mr Koperberg might take some council from his departments former employee Mr Jeff Angel who in 2005 while still head of The Total Environment Centre worked as a paid consultant for the department of the Environment, advising the Government on Environmental Policy.

Click Here for the "WHAT TO DO WHEN THE GREEN GESTAPO RAID YOUR PROPERTY".

Back to Top

______________________________________________________________

7. SOUTH AUSTRALIA'S TREE CHOP UPDATE– WHATS WRONG WITH THE SA NATIVE VEG LAWS AND REGULATIONS

Comments on the South Australian Natural Resource Management Act

It is with absolute dismay that I read such complex draconian legislation in a South Australian Act.(Photo of trees that have been secretly chopped in South Australia as part of the campaign of Civil Disobedience)

The legislators are the servants of the voters, but anyone reading this document would conclude otherwise. Our common law rights that previously allowed us to make decisions on they way we viably manage our fee simple properties and protect the environment have gone, illegally legislated away.

Under common law, fee simple titles, we as landowners own the vegetation, a fair share of the water falling on the land and under the land, the soil, the air and any other property associated with the land. This applies to city dwellers as well. Yes, you own that tree on your property that threatens your house structure and you can cut it down without approval.

If the government believe that for the community good a landowner must give up his ownership of one of these things associated with his title the landowner is entitled to compensation, on just terms (i.e. they buy it for the community). Unfortunately the government believes that they can just abolish common law rights without compensation. To this end it has started with farmers.

Here is a direct quote from a letter from Mr John Johnson, General Manger of the South Australian Murray-Darling Basin Natural Resources Management Board 11th September 2006; “Please note there are no provisions for compensation for the NRM Act abolishing common law rights.” The question is where does the removal of common law rights without compensation end?............

Click Here to read the full article on Agmates web site.

Back to Top
_________________________________________________________

8. THE GREAT SOIL DATA SWINDLE - Michael Keily

The federal government has swindled Australian farmers out of Billions of Dollars in Carbon Credits from trees that it's used to claim its met its Kyoto targets. Agmates has always held that they plan to do exactly the same thing with Soil Carbon Credits. Now here proof -

An email from Michael Keily - Convener of the Carbon Coalition Against

Please find attached a point by point refutation of the Grains Council's hatchet job on soil carbon credits. We've done the research, talked to the scientists who know where the bodies are buried.

Michael

PRESS RELEASE
8/7/2007
THE GREAT SOIL DATA SWINDLE
The Grains Council is using flawed scientific evidence from the Australian Greenhouse Office to attack the emerging soil carbon credit market.


“The AGO does not have the data to back up its claims about Australian soils, and industry bodies like the Grains Council are stumbling while trying to play catch up on the carbon issue,” says Convenor of the Carbon Coalition Against Global Warming, Wellington woolgrower Michael Keily (Pictured). The Carbon Coalition has campaigned for soil carbon credits since 2005 to give farmers an additional revenue stream to encourage landscape restoration.

“We informed the AGO more than a month ago that the data sets used to compile the reports on soils for National Carbon Accounting System (NCAS) were incomplete and that they were incapable of sustaining the advice they were giving to Government and industry,” he says. “We warned the AGO that conclusions based on these data sets are misleading and wrong. Alan Umber’s report is flawed due to his reliance on this inadequate data.”

The evidence is available in the NCAS Technical Reports published by the AGO. The gaps in the data sets have been verified by several soil scientists.
The Grains Council Report is wrong on 9 counts:.......

Click Here to read the full article on Michael Keily's Web Site.

Back to Top
___________________________________________________

9. READERS COMMENTS.

Agmates has had a huge amount of comments on recent articles. Click here to go to the Agmates site to read these.

Comments by Sue Maynes, Rob Wass , Doug and various

______________________________________________________

10. PART 4 OF PROFESSOR SURI RATNAPALA'S PAPER
"CONSTITUTIONAL VANDALISM UNDER GREEN COVER"
The main concerns
Environmental law is one of the fastest growing areas of the legal system. It
comprises a vast body of statute law that includes Acts of Commonwealth and State Parliaments, subordinate legislation in the form of regulations, orders and decrees, and case law interpreting these provisions.

There are rising concerns within primary and manufacturing industries, as well as scientific and legal communities, that the processes of environmental policy
formulation and implementation are leading to outcomes having seriously negative impacts on individual producers, industries, local and national economies, civil liberties, the rule of law and on sustainable environmental protection.

In its August, 2004 Report on The Impacts of Vegetation Management and Biodiversity Regulations, the Productivity Commission acknowledged the validity of many of these concerns, and made recommendations that in effect require the radical re-evaluation of the philosophy and processes of environmental regulation in Australia. The Commission's report highlighted the following serious defects in the current regulatory system:

* Lack of cost-benefit assessments before regulations are made, and the absence of on-going monitoring and independent reviews of costs and benefits once the regulations are in operation.
* The poor quality of data and science on which native vegetation and biodiversity policy decisions are based.
* Inadequate use of the extensive knowledge of landholders and local communities in the formulation of policy and regulations.
* The failure to take account of regional environmental characteristics and agricultural practices in imposing across-the-board rules, particularly in
relation to native vegetation regrowth.
* Serious impediments to private conservation measures, including tax distortions and regulatory barriers to efficient farm management.
* The imposition on landowners of the cost of wider conservation goals demanded by society.

The Productivity Commission's report deals only with native vegetation and
biodiversity issues. However, many of its findings are relevant to environmental law and policy generally. There are also other fundamental issues that call for investigation.

To read the full paper Click Here

Back to Agmates News Page

Back to Top

Back to Latest Article

Cheers,

Your Agmate - Steve
Agmates - 100% Pro Australian Farmers