The NFF’s 3 April 2014 submission to the Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications Inquiry into Offsets outlined two major concerns; offsets are generally not feasible for agriculture applications under the EPBC Act, and secondly, that agricultural land is often the ‘target’ of large enterprises, such as coal mines, seeking to offset the impacts of their own developments. The NFF advocates for a more flexible approach based on the nature of the project, the availability of direct and indirect offsets, and whether the offset delivers improved environmental outcomes for the projected matter.
You may also like
Periodic Review of the Soil Organic Carbon Method 2021 April
The NFF understands that this Periodic Review will inform the development of the proposed Integrated Farm and Land Management (IFLM) Method. While this is supported, all methodology reviews, not just those focussed on...
Chrissy KerinReview of the Animal Effluent Management ACCU Method
The AEM methodology provides an important pathway for reducing CH4 emissions from animal effluent. For the method to remain effective, it must be financially viable, administratively practical, and aligned with evolving...
Carbon Farming Outreach Program: Knowledge Bank Discussion Paper
The intended purpose of the Knowledge Bank as stated by DCCEEW is problematic and misses the broader purpose of its creation. The purpose of the Knowledge Bank is to serve as an information resource for farmers and land...
Add comment