Landclearing
|
|
|
Broad scale clearing for agriculture remains
Australia's greatest threat to biodiversity. It also contributes
greatly to salinity, other soil and water degradation problems
and greenhouse gas emissions.
|

Cockburn Range near Kununurra, targetted for clearing
|
|
Until recently temperate
and sub-tropical woodlands have been the main ecosystems targeted,
particularly in the southern states and Queensland. However, northern
Australian woodlands are now facing rapidly increasing clearing and
associated problems with parts of the agricultural sector targeting
Northern Australia for 'greenfields development opportunities'.
|
Several massive schemes are in the early stages of
development, while existing schemes are being expanded. The long
term risk is that the Top End and the Kimberley will repeat the overclearing
and irrigation problems of southern Australia, with consequent massive
loss of biodiversity and soil and water degradation.
|
One area being targeted
for such development is the Ord River region. Situated near Kununurra,
the Ord River has a catchment which spans the NT and WA borders.
The
catchment falls predominantly within the Victoria-Bonaparte bioregion
and is the traditional land of the Miriuwung and Gajerrong people.
|
The Ord has a history of
exploitation, since the 1870s there has been pastoral interest in
the region with the first herds of cattle arriving in the early 1880s.
Significant land degradation occurred in the Ord Catchment as a result
of overstocking. Ord Stage 1 began in the early 1960s, and was the
first step of a long-term 'vision' for the agricultural development
of the area. The Diversion Dam was completed in 1963, however the
subsequent construction of the Ord River Dam further up the Ord River
created Lake Argyle. Lake Argyle is now the biggest permanent freshwater
lake in Australia.
|
Back
to top
|
Fourteen thousand hectares
were cleared and levelled for agriculture, mainly for cotton although
research failed to find suitably viable crops for the area. The cotton
industry had big hopes for the region in the late 1960s and early
1970s but the industry collapsed in the mid 70s. The collapse was
due to several bad seasons of intensive insect attack from the Heliothis
moth and other species, the subsequent high level use of pesticides
which were very costly, the end of the Commonwealth cotton bounty
program which provided subsidies to growers, and extremely high freight
costs.
|
It is likely that traces
of DDT, dieldren and other toxic chemicals remain in the region.
Recently the cotton industry has made a return to the region establishing
trial crops of genetically modified cotton, over the last few years
with variable success.
|
One of the major criticisms
of Ord Stage 1 has been the complete lack of analysis of the environmental,
social and economic impacts of the project. The irrigation channels
in some parts of the area are filled with contaminated runoff. Signs
warn residents and tourists not to fish or swim in the channels as
they pose a health risk, yet the runoff from the paddocks seeps into
the groundwater and has breached irrigation channels and flowed into
the Ord river.
|
The area also has a significant
weed problem, both Gamba and Mission grass, escapees from cattle
pasture 'improvement' are rife. It is impossible to estimate the
full scale of the impacts of the developments in the area. No baseline
data from before the damming of the Ord exists. It appears the same
mistake is about to made again, as plans to develop Ord Stage 2 start
to gain momentum.
|
Ord Stage 2 will comprise
an area of approximately 64,000 hectares of irrigated agricultural
land, about one third of which is within the NT. The area has been
under pastoral lease until now and is subject to various Native Title
claims by the Miriuwung and Gajerrong people. This area is divided
into three sections known as: M2, Green Swamp and Mantinea Flats.
There are three companies which hold the leases to these sections.
|
The co-proponents for M2
are Wesfarmers Ltf and Marubeni Corporation. They want to clear 33,500
hectares of land for agricultural production and irrigation channels,
irrigating the area with water from Lake Argyle. The proposed project
area spans the NT and WA borders north-east of Kununurra. About 27,000
hectares of the development would be for sugarcane production (initially)
and 3,500 hectares would be sold to independent farmers to grow other
crops.
|
On the face of it, the
M2 development involves nearly a tripling of the amount of land available
for agriculture in the region, by clearing and flattening and irrigating
farms via a system of channels. However on another level the project
represents a very deliberate effort to 'open up new country' for
more intensive use, ie. the project is a very large real estate development.
This has major implications for Native Title- the Mirauwung/Gajerrong
Traditonal Owners have been involved in court cases over the past
couple of years to determine their Native Title rights to areas in
Keep River National Park and around Kununurra.
|
Back
to top
|
In 2000 the M2 development
was assessed by an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). ECNT made
a submission to this process and raised a number of concerns relating
to the project. Some of these follow and would apply to any development
proposals in the Ord region:
|
»
|
Native vegetation clearance - experience
in the Murray-Darling Basin (and elsewhere) has shown the true
costs of clearing native vegetation. We know that habitat loss
is the single greatest cause of biodiversity loss and extinction.
Broadscale clearing of 33,500 hectares would have massive, irreversible
environmental impacts;
|
»
|
Impacts on Groundwater - Irrigation water would
seep through to the groundwater, polluting groundwater with agricultural
chemicals and raising the water table. Ord Stage 1 has seen the
groundwater table rise to two metres below ground level requiring
dewatering bores to 'manage' the problem;
|
»
|
Water allocation - While water allocation is
not addressed in the EIS (water allocation in Western Australia
is conducted by a separate process through the Water and Rivers
Commission), the increased demand for irrigation water that would
accompany Ord Stage Two is of great concern. The Waters and Rivers
Commission submitted to the WA Government a 'Draft Interim Water
Allocation Plan'.
|
»
|
This plan essentially permits the use of a certain
amount of water for irrigation purposes. The WA Environment Protection
Authority has condemned the water allocation plan as it fails
to assess environmental values of the river and to consider the
flows required for river 'users' ie aquatic and terrestrial plants,
animals and organisms. Currently growers in the Ord Stage 1 area
pay only $75 per hectare for water annually (plus a small service
fee) - there is no limit to the amount of water that can be applied
over that area. A revised interim water allocation plan providing
for environmental flows is currently being developed and is likely
to be released for public comment before the end of this year.
|
»
|
Greenhouse gas emissions - The EIS claims that
the project would actually reduce the level of carbon dioxide
in the atmosphere. A large portion of the 33,500 hectares that
would be cleared if this project proceeds is wetlands on the
floodplain of the Keep River. Wetlands are carbon sinks, that
is they are a net store of carbon so any clearing of wetlands
results in the release of that stored carbon into the atmosphere.
There is no consideration to this given in the EIS when greenhouse
emissions are estimated. Further, the greenhouse gas implications
of burning 27,000 hectares of sugar cane every year has not been
assessed or even identified as a significant source of emissions.
|
|
In August 2000 the West
Australian Environment Protection Authority advised the Minister
for Environment and Heritage to approve the clearing of 33,500 hectares
of woodlands for the M2 project to proceed. The EPA made this recommendation
in the same week that the Commonwealth announced a $500 million assistance
package for Queensland cane farmers. The global sugar market is saturated-
it does not make sense to approve the destruction of native vegetation
to plant a barely marginal crop. ECNT appealed the EPA's advice -
our appeal is yet to be heard.
|
In 2001 the future of the
Ord Stage 2 (M2) project is unclear.
|
Back
to top
|
A further recommendation
from the EPA to the Minister was made in June 2001. The Minister
was advised to approve the project on the basis that the impacts
were acceptable and could be satisfactorily managed by the proponents.
ECNT lodged another appeal about this recommendation - our key concerns
include:
|
»
|
Missing work and insufficient
information - Major pieces of work and information are missing
from the assessment process to date. The Aboriginal Socio-Economic
Impact Assessment and detailed ethnographical and archaeological
studies have not been undertaken. There is insufficient information
on which to make a decision that the impacts of the proposal
can be satisfactorily managed by prescribing various conditions.
|
»
|
Management of 'conservation area' - The tenure
of the buffer area has not been determined nor has an 'accepted'
management structure been decided upon (ie.who pays for what,
who can sit on the board and make management decisions etc).
It is also unclear how funding for ongoing management of the
buffer areas will be found and from whom. The final project design
has also not yet been completed.
|
»
|
Scope of the assessment - The assessment fails
to consider the impacts of cultivating different crops (ie.cotton
instead of sugarcane) and the changes that would be required
to the management program, plans and actions.
|
»
|
Declaration of reserves - New reserves are identified
if the proposal goes ahead. The declaration of new reserves cannot
be contingent on the development proceeding - areas worthy of
protection should be protected.
|
»
|
Lessons from Ord Stage 1 - The WA Government has not undertaken
a comprehensive and thorough analysis of ORIA Stage 1 to identify
and quantify existing problems. In failing to undertake such
an assessment there is a high likelihood of repetition of mistakes
from the past.
|
|
Our second appeal is also
yet to be determined. The project still lacks some key approvals
while economically the project looks increasingly unviable.
|

Existing agricultural development- Ord Stage 1
|
Clearly, the problems associated with expanding
irrigated agriculture in northern Australia are many and varied
and this development is just one example of the projects being
considered. ECNT continues to work with other local groups, including
the Kununurra group; Care of the Ord Valley Environment (COVE),
Environs Kimberley in Broome and the Kimberley Land Council in
response to the Ord Stage 2 proposal. Work is also ongoing, with
these and other groups, on similar issues in different parts
of Northern Australia.
|
|

|
MORE
INFORMATION |
»
|
If you would like more information or wish to get involved in
a campaign to protect the Northern Woodlands please contact us.
The Environment Centre NT
08 8981 1984
ecnt@octa4.net.au
|
»
|
See also: Landclearing
Media Releases
|
|
Back to top
|