The EARTH is an evolving instrument, six billion years ago it was a violent mass belonging to a galaxy. Today it is serene, in four billion years it will be totally different again. All species, plant and animal. including the human race, will change. Present ones will become extinct, others will change enormously, while new species will. be created. The atmospheric gas combinations will also change, possible much quicker than life species. In the past carbon gases were more prolific than today, illustrated in the huge fossil deposite now being exploited for energy. and thus tending to re-create the atmosphere of yesterday.

The EARTH will always be changing, there is presently no technology that can arrest this evolution, nor should there be. Man is a product of the earth. We will have little effect on the planet, earth will evolve an regardless of the presents of the human race. We cannot hold the world in a “Time Warp” for our own gratification. if we, as humans, seek to create an environment an this changing world to suit cur life style, then we must pay the piper for that privilege personally, and not seek to encumber others with our responsibilities and costs.

It is with this understanding, I submit the following (attached).

NATIVE VEGETATION ON RURAL LAND and IT'S IMPACT

A		THE URBAN CITIZEN
ADVANTAGES TO HIM

(i) Feel good syndrome:	while I pollute the environment in my cities (Coal burning for electricity, gas & petroleum consumption) my conscience is cleared by forcing other rural citizens to create native vegetation to compensate my extravagant life style, at a personal cost to the rural citizen.

(ii) Saving the Planet:	native vegetation and wild life is taught in the school, depicted in the media, and politically endorsed as essential for the survival of the planet.

(iii) Pleasure and Recreation: 	a relaxing day among nature's trees and wild life gives a feeling of well being, for the couple times a year we might experience it.

(iv) Tourism:	in a busy life tourist love the quite, get-a-way freedom experienced by getting close to nature.

(v) Economic Value:	the beauty of the above benefits are they cost the urban citizen nothing economically. The cost is carried by the rural citizen. 

(vi) Power (Statutory/

Political):	one vote, one value allows the urban citizen to impose his will on the rural citizen. We control 90% of the vote but only 10% of the land mass. The rural citizen looses control of 90% of Australia to those unsympathetic to a rural way of life.

DISADVANTAGES TO HIM

(i) Ignorance:	A belief that trees alone create oxygen. Trees use carbon dioxide from the air during sunlight and give off oxygen. When the sun-sets trees use oxygen and give off carbon dioxide. Any carbon uptake by trees is returned to the environment when the tree dies or is destroyed. A neutral impact.

(ii) Misconception: 	We can change the world to our liking. The world is evolving. Nothing we can do will stop this happening. The world cannot be put into a TIME WARP irrespective of how we feel. We can enjoy our stay on earth and create a way of life for our children. We cannot expect rural citizens to pay for this luxury we deem as a personal right. We must pay hard money for this right.

(iii) Political Deceit: 	Political parties misrepresentations. Political gains are to be made by taking up a "Green" tree attitude with the urban citizen. These gains can be enhanced by convincing the urban citizen by +ear or otherwise‑ that the world is doomed unless the rural citizen is forced to conform to their political idealism. A true disadvantage to all.

(iv) Denial of

Responsibility:	The urban citizen is denied the benefit of preserving his believed environment, because there is no structure for him to fund his obligations, such as a levy on his income. A federal political party has disgraced the opportunity +or the introduction of an environmental levy that could pay farmers $X for growing trees, Agisting native fauna, and water collection on his property for urban benefit and use.

B THE RURAL CITIZEN
		RURAL CITIZENS ADVANTAGES

(i) Farm Protection:	Growing native vegetation helps the farmer control wind and water erosion, and salinity. But of course this is done for economic reasons.

(ii) Stock Protection:	Native vegetation assist in providing wind break and shade for farm animals.

iii) Natural Beauty:	Native vegetation provides some beautifying of the farm and enhancement of the work place

iv) Economic Benefit: 	In rare areas where firewood, and timber for fence posts are allowed to be taken some economic benefit can be gained. Bit these are rare opportunities.

		RURAL CITIZEN'S DISADVANTAGES
(i)	Three Tiers of Government:
	Local Government, requires you to obtain a planning permit before removing any trees. I needed to remove five trees to renew a fence. The permit was given an condition that I plant, and guarantee the survival for life of our trees for every tree I was permitted to remove. These trees were obstructing the renewal of a security fence.
	The State Government, Requires you to obtain a 	permit for the removal of any vegetation in State restricted zones. Water Catchment Authorities also have restrictions on any removal as well. Commonwealth Government at present do not 	represent a problem. But assist with land care and other support groups.

(ii) Loss of Motivation:	I had spent time and money in conjunction with Landcare to plant up to 16,000 trees in lots of 4,000 each along a creek area. When I queried the local government an possible removal of any of those tree should they present any problems, I was told that presently any or all removals would have to be matched with a replanting of four trees for every one removed provided a permit was issued. This meant if at some future time I required to remove these trees, I would have to replant and guarantee for life 64,000 trees, this was a stupid possibility, so I decided not to shoot myself in the foot, and refrained from planting any trees at all.

(iii) Commercial Disadvantage: 	Native vegetation provides habitat for wild dogs, dingoes, foxes, feral cats that kill farm animals and poultry. It protects rabbits, rodents, kangaroos, and snakes that attack pastures, and animals they damage farm infrastructure (fencing etc.). Not only do they damage farm infrastructure

but kangaroos in particular foul pasture. Four kangaroos eat as much pasture as one steer, but they urinate, and defecate an an equivalent amount of pasture, which spoils that pasture for cattle. Cattle will starve to death before eating that spoiled grass. In winter when grass is at a premium or in drought it is untenable. It supplies protection for birds, particularly parrots, that spread weed infestation.

iv) Fauna Protection: 	Urban citizens and "Greens" desire all native fauna to be protected. History shows the Australian environment had checks and natural balances viz: over a million aboriginals killed or ate Kangaroos, reptiles, and birds. Native carnivores also helped keep the balance. predators such as dingoes, Tasmanian tigers, hawks, and eagles etc. have virtually disappeared, and the aboriginals have became westernised. With the introduction of farming, new lush pastures, water conservation, has provided native fauna with a bountiful supply of food never experienced before. The result is a boom in kangaroo, bird, and fauna populations.

Fauna fertility was linked with food availability. Dry seasons in Australia meant a decrease in populations. With farming native fauna do not suffer these traumas any more. Protected species must be kept in balance

(v) Legal Liability: 	Farmers are held legally responsible for their cattle and their vegetation. Should a tree or any part of it fall and bring down a fence allowing cattle onto a road way causing an accident where someone is injured or killed, or should it fall onto a person/property who is going to be legally responsible? Yet the farmer has no control over the persistence of that vegetation.

(vi) Future Viability:	with all the restraints placed an the rural citizen by the urban citizen, young rural citizens are flocking to the cities where life and income are easily obtained. In the cities there are no unyielding demands that crucify the rural citizen who works seven days a week for ten hour days on a very low income. The result is that the mean age of farmers is now in the high fifties, and farm skills that take decades to learn will pass with them. 

	The knowledge of caring for the land, and farming it, which has been learned through trial and error over two hundred years will be lost. It will take decades to re-learn it. You cannot learn farming from a text book or in a class room. Every piece of land is different. It must be farmed over time to learn it's soul. On the one farm each paddock is unique, it's aspect, soil type, topography, prevailing winds, rainfall, etc., and how that actual piece of land reacts to those elements are unique to that piece of land. Farming is a profession equal to medicine and architecture, it takes a long time to learn, and it can be lost to the nation very easily. With unskilled and ignorant people taking over the rail of the rural professional farmer I see a grave danger to the protection of our land and the environment.