02/09/2019

AgForce Backs Calls For Review Of Consensus Science On Great Barrier Reef

The Guardian - 

Exclusive: Top Queensland farmers’ group supports controversial scientist Peter Ridd’s questioning of climate science
AgForce says it agrees with Peter Ridd’s calls for Great Barrier Reef climate science ‘to be more thoroughly examined and tested’. Photograph: Photography by Mangiwau/Getty Images 
Queensland’s most influential farm lobby group, AgForce, has backed calls for a review of consensus science on the Great Barrier Reef, as the state’s agricultural sector intensifies its campaign against proposed water quality regulations.
On Friday the release of two key reports painted an alarming picture of the state of the reef. The Queensland-led water quality report – which rated the water quality at inner reefs as “poor” – highlighted the impact of land management practices that contribute to the degradation of the reef due to sediment and nutrient run-off.
The findings were released at a critical point in debate about the Queensland government’s proposed regulations, which would set variable pollution limits in separate reef catchments.
Agricultural groups say those regulations will have a significant impact on farmers; particularly graziers, sugarcane growers and tropical horticulture.
Some farmers accept the consensus science, but claim the regulations are ill thought out and will have unintended consequences for primary producers. This is also the formal position of the LNP opposition.
But increasingly, sober debate about the impact of the regulations has veered into science scepticism; pushed by the controversial scientist Peter Ridd, some of the larger peak industry bodies, backbench LNP MPs and opaque front groups.
The AgForce chief executive, Michael Guerin, in a statement to Guardian Australia sent before the release of the latest reef reports, said the organisation agreed with Ridd’s calls for the science “to be more thoroughly examined and tested”.
Last week Guardian Australia revealed that an expert panel led by the former chief scientist Ian Chubb had warned ministers that Ridd is misrepresenting robust science about the plight of the reef, and compared his claims to the strategy used by the tobacco industry to raise doubt about the impact of smoking.
Guerin said there “was no absolute consensus” on the reef.
“We are not scientists and have no position on the science. However, when eminent reef scientists call into question the research conducted by their peers, we as a community would be foolish not to listen.
“We are simply asking the government to make sure of the science before it implements such momentous changes with potentially devastating consequences for so many.”
The AgForce general president and ABC board member Georgie Somerset will speak at a protest rally of famers in Townsville on Tuesday to coincide with a sitting of the state parliament. The event is being promoted by the opaque front organisation Farmers United, with flyers quoting Ridd and featuring the AgForce logo.
The industry argues regulation is not necessary, and that “best management practice” measures, led by agricultural groups and funded by government, were the best method to address water quality issues. Earlier this year, in protest against the proposed regulations and citing privacy concerns, AgForce deleted a decade of data from its BMP database.
The Queensland environment minister, Leeanne Enoch, said on Friday that the reef water quality report showed that voluntary BMP programs were not working quickly enough, and that urgent action was needed to address the health of the reef.
“The report … shows land-based run-off still remains a problem and that urgent changes are needed if we are going to meet our targets,” Enoch said.
“The report also shows that many farmers have been doing good work to help improve the quality of run-off, but unfortunately the science is showing that uptake has not been fast enough.
“For example, we want 90% of sugarcane land across the reef catchments managed using best management practice systems by 2025. But, the results show this was happening on only 9.8% of land so far.
“Overall water quality modelling showed only a 0.3% reduction in dissolved inorganic nitrogen and a 0.5% reduction in sediment in 2017-2018 across all regions.
“This simply isn’t enough. There are also a lot of scores that are poor, or very poor.”
As large agricultural groups seek to question the science, largely on the basis of a single opinion rejected by scores of other reef scientists, questions have grown about whether they can continue to manage millions in grants allocated for reef water quality measures.
AgForce jointly manages Queensland-funded BMP programs.
AgForce last year lobbied in support of the controversial $433m federal grant to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation, and at the time noted that “agricultural land is one of many factors which can affect water quality and the long term health” of the reef.
The Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson has written to the federal environment minister, Sussan Ley, suggesting groups that receive reef foundation grants to improve water quality, but who otherwise seek to question the underlying science, have a conflict of interest.
He cited support for Ridd’s recent lecture tour from regional branches of the peak organisation Canegrowers.
“On the face of it, this is a conflict of interest. The activity of Queensland Canegrowers (as a subcontractor) is impairing the ability of the foundation to improve water quality in the reef.”

Links
at

No comments:

Post a Comment