Stock routes
Stock route reform
AgForce believes a reform of the stock route system presents real potential for responsible and sustainable management of Queensland’s 2.6 million hectare network.
AgForce Cattle directors Steve Taylor and Peter Hall represented members on the Stock Route Assessment Panel which made recommendations to government last year about how to improve long-term management of the 72,000 km route.
Negotiations are continuing, and AgForce have taken 4 key policy positions which will need to be adopted by the new SRAP and implemented by Government in order to have AgForce support.
1. Reform to apply only to ‘active’ and ‘inactive’ Stock Route Network areas and to initially exclude all other portions of the road network
AgForce has been working on the basis that the arrangements for Grazing Authorities / Annual Grazing Agreements (term to be decided) would be applied to the reserves and the active and inactive (formerly primary and secondary) areas of the SRN only and would not include road reserves.
2. Conditions for Grazing Authorities (GA) allocation and period
AgForce requires greater flexibility in terms of the use and approval of the new GAs. Producers on the active areas of the stock route should be allowed to automatically extend their Permits To Occupy (PTOs) into GAs and when required for these to be reviewed annually, based on the condition of the route and the grazing practices.
AgForce and LGAQ’s position is that GA terms must be as per the SRAP’s recommendations for the AGAs. There are concerns that the policies for the GAs have been changed significantly from the SRAP principles for AGAs.
3. Conditions for Grazing Authorities Fees and Rollover
The proposed fees for GAs under the RIS are unacceptable. Under the latest proposals, fees may be based on a return of 1.5 to 5 percent of the unimproved capital value (UCV) based on the areas next to the SRN.
AgForce opposes the policy that the rental component of GAs should go to three times the rent which is applicable to adjoining leasehold land. Instead valuations for the entire SRN which would be generated and a rate equivalent to the rates paid on leasehold land would be applied. This in most cases would be the rate for unimproved remnant value on the actual areas of the SRN.
4. Ongoing consultation and management systems and distribution of funding
In terms of the actual distributions of funds, AgForce representatives on SRAP need to have access to information relating to the total expenditure and income from GAs from each Local Government Authority. In order to ensure that there is equitable sharing of the totality of GAs income relative to the expenditure by each shire, there must be a transparent and open process.
All funds generated by the GAs and Travelling Stock fees must be quarantined to management of SRN. There must not be a flow of funds through to consolidated revenue. However, the definitions of what activities in DERM and Local Governments would be eligible for cost recovery must be further determined. There would need to be discussions of these activities by an implementation group.
AgForce believes producers should have the major role in consultation. This is essential because producers as the land managers pay the costs of pest and weed management as well as the costs of stock route management - either by direct rent payment for permits to occupy or through local government rates.
AgForce believes a reform of the stock route system presents real potential for responsible and sustainable management of Queensland’s 2.6 million hectare network.
AgForce Cattle directors Steve Taylor and Peter Hall represented members on the Stock Route Assessment Panel which made recommendations to government last year about how to improve long-term management of the 72,000 km route.
Negotiations are continuing, and AgForce have taken 4 key policy positions which will need to be adopted by the new SRAP and implemented by Government in order to have AgForce support.
1. Reform to apply only to ‘active’ and ‘inactive’ Stock Route Network areas and to initially exclude all other portions of the road network
AgForce has been working on the basis that the arrangements for Grazing Authorities / Annual Grazing Agreements (term to be decided) would be applied to the reserves and the active and inactive (formerly primary and secondary) areas of the SRN only and would not include road reserves.
2. Conditions for Grazing Authorities (GA) allocation and period
AgForce requires greater flexibility in terms of the use and approval of the new GAs. Producers on the active areas of the stock route should be allowed to automatically extend their Permits To Occupy (PTOs) into GAs and when required for these to be reviewed annually, based on the condition of the route and the grazing practices.
AgForce and LGAQ’s position is that GA terms must be as per the SRAP’s recommendations for the AGAs. There are concerns that the policies for the GAs have been changed significantly from the SRAP principles for AGAs.
3. Conditions for Grazing Authorities Fees and Rollover
The proposed fees for GAs under the RIS are unacceptable. Under the latest proposals, fees may be based on a return of 1.5 to 5 percent of the unimproved capital value (UCV) based on the areas next to the SRN.
AgForce opposes the policy that the rental component of GAs should go to three times the rent which is applicable to adjoining leasehold land. Instead valuations for the entire SRN which would be generated and a rate equivalent to the rates paid on leasehold land would be applied. This in most cases would be the rate for unimproved remnant value on the actual areas of the SRN.
4. Ongoing consultation and management systems and distribution of funding
In terms of the actual distributions of funds, AgForce representatives on SRAP need to have access to information relating to the total expenditure and income from GAs from each Local Government Authority. In order to ensure that there is equitable sharing of the totality of GAs income relative to the expenditure by each shire, there must be a transparent and open process.
All funds generated by the GAs and Travelling Stock fees must be quarantined to management of SRN. There must not be a flow of funds through to consolidated revenue. However, the definitions of what activities in DERM and Local Governments would be eligible for cost recovery must be further determined. There would need to be discussions of these activities by an implementation group.
AgForce believes producers should have the major role in consultation. This is essential because producers as the land managers pay the costs of pest and weed management as well as the costs of stock route management - either by direct rent payment for permits to occupy or through local government rates.