News 
 National Rural News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 General 
 Reward farmers who fight climate change: Wentworth Group 

Reward farmers who fight climate change: Wentworth Group

20 Oct, 2009 06:32 AM
PAYING farmers and investors to preserve native forests, plant vast areas of trees, stop land clearing and improve soil could help Australia make big cuts to its greenhouse gas emissions and boost the chances of threatened native animals and plants, a group of leading Australian scientists argues.

A report by the Wentworth Group is calling on the Rudd Government to expand its emissions trading scheme to include more so-called "green carbon", allowing forests and agriculture to play a greater role in cutting greenhouse emissions.

It also wants the Rudd Government to promote the ideas at the Copenhagen climate talks in December along with a voluntary green carbon trade in developing countries.

World efforts to combat dangerous climate change will not succeed, the report argues, by cutting emissions from industry and households alone.

Countries like Australia will need to use the landscape to absorb emissions already in the atmosphere by storing carbon in new forests, grasslands, farms and enriched soils.

The Opposition has called for agriculture to be excluded from the emissions trading scheme but the report argues that if there was a price for "green carbon", farmers and regional communities could reap financial benefits from the emissions trading scheme.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Agree that farmers who preserve native forests, improve soil, stop land clearing, revegetate cleared land should be rewarded, however to also say they should be exempt from an ETS or carbon tax (my preference) is blatantly inequitable. Additional costs/taxes in production, should always be passed onto the end consumer - that way the true "cost" of the resources is embedded in the wholesale and retail price.
Posted by Harmless, 20/10/2009 12:47:29 PM
Native vegetation has been ruled out of carbon trading. At least it has in Queensland anyway. Farmers who cleared their land might be able to claim credits for planting artificial forests. Farmers who have looked after their native vegetation and maintained the natural balance, and biodiversity of their land will get nothing. Except a massive tax. It would be nice if costs could be passed forward, to the end consumer. But it is a well-known fact that in food production, all costs are passed backwards to the producer.
Posted by Qlander, 20/10/2009 4:57:55 PM
If we as food producers could pass our costs of production on to the consumer, then I don't think the farmers would could get any better!
Posted by Pat, 20/10/2009 10:43:00 PM
You're exactly right Qlander! Beattie proudly claimed the carbon credits for forests locked up under vegetation management when he said so soon after 31st December 2006 when the last land clearing of any so called remnant vegetation was to cease. So that meant that he had not only stolen the landowners' land use rights, he also stole their carbon credits. Peter Spencer is currently fighting a case in the High Court against the NSW government over this very issue. We should all give him our support.
Posted by bushie, 21/10/2009 6:07:46 AM
Reward us!! These idiots need to go back to basics on geology. Carbon is stored in everything, soils trees, our oceans. Tell me this: if carbon dioxide is so bad why does it help farmers by being stored in the soils? Wake up you pillocks, carbon is not a pollutant, it is plant food. Pay us by all means but we're only helping nature and ourselves. We have been doing it albeit unknowingly for eons, were not doing anything special. Rewarding us makes out we have done something bad and for doing what nature does is good.
Posted by Alan Mears, 21/10/2009 9:06:17 AM
Taking something belonging to someone else for the benefit of others should have been compensated for in the first place. And, it’s not a bloody “Reward”, it’s called the ‘due process of natural justice’. What the Wentworth Group just woke up to this?? Theft is theft, end of story.
Posted by Rubbery Figures, 21/10/2009 9:10:57 AM
Once again the academics are not aware of reality. The Beattie/Blight govt has stolen our vegetation, and any chance of carbon credits. This remnant vegetation will be used by the Qld govt to offset future coal exports at the landowners' expense. The Wentworth Group must also be eating bse beef if they think that this govt intends to reward farmers instead of taxing them.
Posted by R, 21/10/2009 9:15:01 AM
Hear, hear bushie. Peter Spencer has already had a moral victory with a judgement ruling he was right but help is needed to secure an end to further farmer loss of rights and taxes. In the US farmers still get oil royalties for oil found on their land. Mineral rights were stolen from our farmers decades ago and now their right to make a living from freehold land and reduce bush fire risk is threatened in so many ways by conservation laws. Maybe the Wentworth Group reward suggestion is compensation but it is too little too late. Besides Penny Wong has said there is no money for this sort of thing. That is why they need to bring in the ETS. But Penny our farmers have no money either!
Posted by Common Cents, 21/10/2009 9:26:21 AM
As the population grows, more arable land will be covered by homes and towns. Where will the food come from then? At the end of the day more and more animal production is coming from marginal land forcing farmers to use as much land (previously timbered) as possible to make any money. Where do horticulture properties preserve native forests or plant trees? Vegetable production is under enough financial pressure without more costs.
Posted by Snigs, 21/10/2009 9:33:34 AM
Do not ever forget that it was this very same Wentworth Group who wrote to Beattie requesting that he impose a blanket ban on all native forest clearing in Queensland. And they didn't make a single squeak about the confiscation of property without "just cause" or "just compensation", or the lack of compensation for the foregone carbon credits. Their credibility is absolute zero and they have the gall to expect repeat custom. The only lesson for farmers from all this is, "never, ever, do business with spivs".
Posted by Ian Mott, 21/10/2009 11:41:41 AM
1 | 2  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
POLL
Q: Who do you think is the best person to lead the Federal Liberal Party?

Malcolm Turnbull
(46.4%)

Julie Bishop
(5.7%)

Tony Abbott
(10.3%)

Joe Hockey
(23.6%)

Other
(14.1%)

Total Votes: 760
Poll Date: 18 October, 2009
BLOGS
15 October, 2009

Most popular articles

SPRAY AWARDS NEWS MREC



The Land







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...