Critical audit of WA's pastoral leases

A report by Auditor General Colin Murphy, tabled in State parliament on Wednesday last week, was scathing in assessing monitoring and administration of pastoral leases which were all renewed on July 1, 2015, for up to 50 years.

While Mr Murphy acknowledged the Pastoral Lands Board (PLB), Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage (DPLH) and Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development (DPIRD) were working to resolve issues, ongoing problems the audit revealed included:

p It will take more than 20 years to visit each lease at the current rate of annual inspections.

p Abundance and impact of foxes, wild dogs and dingos on stock and kangaroos, feral goats and donkeys on vegetation is not measured or considered by the PLB.

p A memorandum of understanding (MOU) authorising DPIRD to monitor leases for the PLB expired in 2015 and has not been renewed to reflect DPIRD’s downsizing and reduced staffing capacity.

p DPLH and DPIRD both tried developing monitoring systems using remote sensing but have generally not adopted new technology like satellite imagery to help understand land conditions.

p The PLB has a strategic plan and a Rangeland management compliance policy and procedures document, but no ‘action plan’ for implementing them.

p Pastoralists are required to manage leases in an ‘ecologically sustainable’ manner, but there is no official definition of ‘ecologically sustainable’.

p Lack of government departments co-ordination means pastoralists sometimes wait a year or more for approval of complementary activities, like irrigated fodder production, to reduce grazing pressure on leases.

p Pastoralists receive a reduced level of support in sustainable management for long-term productivity with ‘little evidence’ government agencies help develop or share knowledge.

p Since 2014 State research has focused on cattle production, marketing and developing supply chains, rather than ecologically sustainable grazing practices and land rehabilitation options.

Mr Murphy said the lack of support and guidance for pastoralists was “impeding opportunities to achieve social, environmental and financial outcomes for pastoral businesses and their surrounding communities”.

He said the DPLH received $2.6 million in pastoral lease rental in 2015-16, with lessees paying between $1700 and $61,600 per year.

Its Pastoral Lands Unit comprised nine metropolitan staff and one regional pastoral liaison officer, while DPIRD had three field-based staff conducting lease inspections in addition to their DPIRD duties.

A reduction in the scope of monitoring since 2009 and limited use of remote sensing tools “contributed to a lack of understanding of land condition at the lease level and restricted visibility of the extent of land condition issues across the pastoral estate”, Mr Murphy said.

He said monitoring was reduced in 2009 prior to introduction of a voluntary Rangeland Condition Monitoring program.

After an estimated $1.2 million was spent from 2010 to 2012 developing the program and training pastoralists, it was not fully implemented partly because the PLB’s data storage was inadequate.

But the previous more comprehensive Rangeland Condition Assessment inspection regime was not reinstated.

Instead, the DPLH relied on a “liaison approach” to compliance work that was not well documented by “inadequate” record keeping.

“A rigorous documented compliance program is essential to ensure appropriate stewardship of crown land,” Mr Murphy said.

“Monitoring is needed to inform decisions about land management, inform compliance and enforcement activities, and to ensure leases are managed on an ecologically sustainable basis.

“It is also an important component of the State assessing if diversification projects are capable of improving land condition.

“Future sustainability of the pastoral industry and the crown’s land estate relies on being able to make informed decisions on how to address existing issues and prevent new ones.

“Managing the sustainability of these areas is a complex task that requires consultation with a multitude of other land users.

“This is not easy, and to be successful requires government to play a key role in helping to ensure productive lands exist for future generations.

“This audit reiterates the findings of previous inquiries into the pastoral industry, highlighting a need for lease-level monitoring of land condition, and guidance on how best to manage pastoral lands.”

Mr Murphy said the audit revealed many lessees who had rehabilitated land and employed good management practices, often aided by not-for-profit and private organisations.

But there was little evidence government agencies helped to develop and share this knowledge, he said, so the result was slow uptake of regeneration techniques and insufficient landscape rehabilitation to reverse existing degradation.

“A potential stewardship scheme (which was) often mentioned by lessees during the audit, involves using rental payments to fund rehabilitation activities, or offering discounted rental payments for lessees already conducting rehabilitation works,” he said.

Lessees complained the process for applying for diversification permits for activities to reduce grazing pressure, particularly under different legislation and from multiple agencies, was not transparent and could be lengthy.

“Pastoralists we spoke with expressed frustration in the process, highlighting delays to acquire multiple agency approvals, and significant up-front investment with no guarantee of the outcome,” Mr Murphy said.

At June 1, the DPLH was managing 115 diversification permits and while 20 of the 28 diversification permits issued by the PLB between January 2015 and June this year fell within the DPLH’s suggested six-month time-frame, five were still waiting after more than 12 months.

One pastoralist, Mr Murphy said, was waiting almost two years after the initial application and said he had spent more than $2m in infrastructure, biological surveys and consultant fees for a proposed small-scale irrigated agriculture project on 600ha of a 200,000ha pastoral lease.

Mr Murphy pointed out the previous State government had invested more than $2m in the Rangeland Reform Program and Land Administration Amendment Bill 2016, to update land tenure arrangements, many of which have been in place since the Land Act 1933.

The DPLH had received more than 3000 public submissions on the draft bill but so far the reforms had not been introduced to parliament for consideration.

Mr Murphy said the audit did not look at the effect of the Native Title Act 1993, the Federal carbon farming initiative, the economic viability of pastoral leases, or actions by local government or regional development commissions.

His report is available on the Office of the Auditor General website - audit.wa.gov.au.

Lands Minister Rita Saffioti has asked the PLB to consult with the pastoral industry and provide advice to her on strategic priorities to “enhance economic, social and environmental outcomes” in the Rangelands.

PLB members met with Goldfields and Nullarbor pastoralists at Kalgoorlie on Wednesday last week.

They are scheduled to meet with Kimberley Indigenous pastoralists in Derby next Tuesday and with Rangelands pastoralists in Mount Magnet on Thursday, November 2, Newman on Thursday, November 23 and Carnarvon on Thursday, February 15, 2018.