Environmental regulation in the pork producing industry - bring on the research!

Over the last 20 years, environmental management in Queensland has moved from the policy backwaters of government to the front line of operations by way of regulatory enforcement, industry programs and incentives. When the new Queensland Environmental Protection Act 1994 (EPA) came into effect, the business of environmental management has become a central feature of urban and rural development activity. The concept of environmentally sustainable development (ESD), has given life to the precautionary principle as a way for planners and regulators to place relevant controls on development. The planning, development and operation of pig farming systems has been effected by the new regulatory framework. Ever more definitive standards and approval permits have emerged which endeavour to achieve ESD. With these modern planning instruments in place, rural industry sectors have become, quite legitimately, concerned about future opportunities for research and innovation. This paper asserts that the capacity to engage in research and to achieve innovation in the pork producing industry is not hindered by Queensland environmental regulation frameworks. However, in order for research and innovation to prosper within these frameworks, some protocols need to be followed by the industry. What is at stake is community confidence.

Sugarcane smut after three years: a policy retrospective.

The detection of sugarcane smut disease (Ustilago scitaminea) in the Bundaberg-Childers region of eastern Australia in 2006 triggered a comprehensive and united response from BSES Limited, Queensland Government and CANEGROWERS. The response to sugarcane smut in the Bundaberg-Childers area was the first test for the Emergency Plant Pest Response Deed, an agreement between Australian governments and plant industries to facilitate a response to a plant pest incursion. As part of this response and the subsequent inquiry, economic models of the likely pattern of spread and cost of the smut epidemic were prepared. This paper reviews the predictions of those models in the light of the subsequent three years' experience. It examines reasons for divergence from the modelled outcomes, some of which were good approximations of actual experience.

Nitrogen requirements of Burdekin soils to inform Reef Policy legislation

Reef Project 20: Nitrogen fertiliser requirements of representative soils of the Burdekin (BRIA and Delta), and peaty soils of the Wet Tropics to inform the ReefWise farming Nutrient Calculator.

Good science for improving policy: greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural manures

Australia’s and New Zealand’s major agricultural manure management emission sources are reported to be, in descending order of magnitude: (1) methane (CH4) from dairy farms in both countries; (2) CH4 from pig farms in Australia; and nitrous oxide (N2O) from (3) beef feedlots and (4) poultry sheds in Australia. We used literature to critically review these inventory estimates. Alarmingly for dairy farm CH4 (1), our review revealed assumptions and omissions that when addressed could dramatically increase this emission estimate. The estimate of CH4 from Australian pig farms (2) appears to be accurate, according to industry data and field measurements. The N2O emission estimates for beef feedlots (3) and poultry sheds (4) are based on northern hemisphere default factors whose appropriateness for Australia is questionable and unverified. Therefore, most of Australasia’s key livestock manure management greenhouse gas (GHG) emission profiles are either questionable or are unsubstantiated by region-specific research. Encouragingly, GHG from dairy shed manure are relatively easy to mitigate because they are a point source which can be managed by several ‘close-to-market’ abatement solutions. Reducing these manure emissions therefore constitutes an opportunity for meaningful action sooner compared with the more difficult-to-implement and long-term strategies that currently dominate agricultural GHG mitigation research. At an international level, our review highlights the critical need to carefully reassess GHG emission profiles, particularly if such assessments have not been made since the compilation of original inventories. Failure to act in this regard presents the very real risk of missing the ‘low hanging fruit’ in the rush towards a meaningful response to climate change