THE Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM) is investigating 35 cases of alleged unauthorised clearing of vegetation as fears continue to mount over potential changes to the Vegetation Management Act (VMA) 1999.
In response to questions from Queensland Country Life this week, the department also confirmed that 176 claims of unauthorised clearing had been investigated since 2013, and eight cases had already been examined this year.
A spokesperson for Minister for State Development, Natural Resources and Mines, Anthony Lynham, said the government would not allow illegal tree clearing.
They said the government shared the position of responsible landholders and peak bodies like AgForce and that illegal tree clearing only served to tarnish the reputation of good, honest landholders.
"In Opposition, we committed to changes to the Vegetation Management Act 1999, but they will not be rushed. We pledged to be a government that listened and sought consensus and we will consult with all stakeholders," they said.
"We are absolutely committed to taking a considered approach to implementing protections that will promote sustainable agriculture as well as addressing increases in carbon emissions and the long-term health of the Great Barrier Reef."
AgForce general president Grant Maudsley said he had stressed in numerous discussions with Dr Lynham and other cabinet members that changes should be based on a transparent process, looking at actual issues rather than perceptions of what might be wrong.
"We won’t know whether Labor is really supporting regional Queensland and the agricultural sector until it comes time to choose between sensible and sustainable agricultural development, and the shut-it-all-down mentality held by environmental conflict groups," he said.
"Of concern are the statements made by the ALP about removing the ability to clear for high value agriculture. This move would place agriculture at odds with other sectors such as tourism, urban and resource development which all have the ability to expand through land-clearing in a sustainable manner."
Mr Maudsley said consultation with the rural sector should be included, given they would be the ones most affected by any potential changes.
He said for the majority of landholders, the biggest concern would lie in how the Department of Natural Resources handled the self-assessable codes.
"These codes have given landholders the ability to do low-risk, essential management activities without waiting for lengthy and costly departmental approvals, which had been causing administrative nightmares for the department itself and in some cases taking up to nine years," he said.
"We know the department is doing on-ground audits on the codes, however initial advice indicates that landholders are passing audits with flying colours. While we may in fact find that there is a need to review the codes to improve their operation, it would be an incredibly retrograde step to make significant changes to what the codes are seeking to do."
The Palaszczuk Government's strong stance on the matter came to light last week with the release of the Portfolio Priorities Statements.
In the letter addressed to Dr Lynham he was instructed to: "Re-instate the vegetation protection laws repealed by the previous government to reduce the clearing of native vegetation."
Property Rights Australia chairman Dale Stiller labelled this directive as "highly alarming".
Mr Stiller said PRA was concerned the Premier and senior members had failed to grasp that the VMA was not repealed but modestly amended.
