Members’ Newsletter 27th April 2017

27th April 2017

2017 PRA Conference June 3

Please keep free June 3 for the PRA conference which will be in Chinchilla this year. The conference package including registration forms will be sent out shortly.

Conference Bus trip June 2
On the afternoon before the conference there will be a bus trip that will do a circuit to the west
and south of Chinchilla to see firsthand many of the issues that will covered by the presenters on the following day. Linc Energy site and the Hopeland district; areas marked blue on the trigger maps under the Nature Conservation Act; the coal seam gas fields; the site where the salt derived from the CSG industry is proposed to be buried as landfill and whatever else we can find of interest. The bus will leave on the dot at 1pm and will be back in time to get ready for the Meet & Greet.
You need to phone or email the PRA office ASAP to secure a seat because when it is announced in publicity to go out next week to the general public this bus trip will fill up.

New board members needed

With the AGM coming up along with the conference on June 3, it’s time for you to consider putting up your hand to become a board member. We have gone this last 12 months without our full quota of board members and along with a couple of current board members needing to move along, there is room for 4 new people to come onto the board. For good succession it is more ideal if there is new blood learning the ropes before those of us who have been on the board for a while have no choice but to leave.

Reef Regulation by Joanne Rea

The Qld Department of Environment and Heritage has had a discussion paper out about “enhancing” regulations covering the Great Barrier Reef.

The paper is big on spin and short on detail but what can be gleaned from it does not appear to be good for agriculture. Terms such as “expansion” or “intensification” are not defined and it cannot be taken for granted that they have any normal understanding of the words.

What is clear is that any allowance of expansion or intensification of agriculture will be dependent on some sort of pre-determined performance by all industries against whole of catchment criteria which, quite frankly, are likely to be unattainable.
Deliberate vagueness is the order of the day with “appropriate stocking rates” being mentioned but not expanded upon. This is something we need to be ever vigilant about with land managers needing to keep this within their control.

Non-agricultural industries are included but with allowance for offsets, which are usually outside the pockets of agricultural producers, or payment into a mitigation fund it becomes a game of wealthy polluters paying to pollute. The mitigation fund is supposed to be used for mitigation projects suggested by government or “trusted third parties”. This raises alarm bells.

With agricultural expansion or intensification dependent on whole of catchment performance, it would appear that wealthy non-agricultural activities will have the power to sink agricultural ambitions. “Land use change” is used in the paper in such a way that it implies contraction of agriculture in spite of the spin.

The whole body of science on which the Great Barrier Reef Report Card is based is centred on modelling. Most of the underlying assumptions on which it is based are unavailable or of dubious scientific accuracy, such as using the number of people who have completed Best Management Practice courses used as a proxy for the number of good land managers. Completion of a BMP also confers a certain immune status against the proposed regulations.

This initiative is well within the sphere of influence of the green groups and it is clear that it will not be good for agriculture. What they have not been able to achieve by legislation will be brought in as Reef regulation. This requires major vigilance.

Personal Property Securities Register (PPSR)

There was an important reminder published recently at Beef Central by Peter Kennedy, McCullough Robertson, in an article called ‘Legally speaking: Don’t lose your interests in livestock, crops and plant.’

“It is vital to understand and remember that your ownership of property, such as livestock, will not prevent you from losing that property if you fail to register your security interest and the party that holds your property becomes bankrupt or insolvent.”

“Failing to register a security interest can mean that you lose your rights to your property. The fact that you own the property will not be enough.”

“You should register your interests to protect yourself. It’s worth noting that there are strict time limits for a valid registration.”

 Here is the web page for the PPSR –

Lease & Agistment Agreements

Not only is it a good idea to have a signed agreement but also to carefully read and understand it. A standard agreement may not protect you from a circumstance, that although legal, may not quite be ethical. For example if the owner lights a fire, leaves it unattended and the fire then proceeds to burn out all the feed for the livestock you have in the leased or agisted area. It could be that without specific clauses in an agreement that you can do little more than to put it down to one of life’s experiences.

This item is offered with the aim of awareness. PRA can’t offer legal advice, for that seek the opinion of a legal professional.


Dale Stiller

Dale Stiller


Property Rights Australia

Phone:  07 49 214 000
Fax:       07 49271 888

Members' Newsletter 27th April 2017