2011/03: Should cattle have been returned to the Alpine National Park?

What they said.
"The unique sphagnum moss peat beds and wetlands of the Alpine National Park. are threatened by cattle grazing"
Matt Ruchell, executive director of the Victorian National Parks Association

"The last thing you want to do is to damage that environment"
Mark Coleman, president of the Mountain Cattleman's Association of Victoria

The issue at a glance
On January 12, 2011, it was reported that cattle had been returned to the Alpine National Park. The cattle were the first of an anticipated total of 400 to be permitted to graze in the Park. Their return is part of a trial to determine whether by feeding on vegetation in the Park they serve to reduce the fire risk.
Victoria's Minister for Environment and Climate Change, Ryan Smith, stated that the trial would provide evidence as to whether cattle-grazing lessens bushfire risk through fuel reduction. The trial will run for six years, after which a decision will be regarding the appropriateness of returning cattle to the Park permanently and in larger numbers.
The move has been criticised as dishonest and unnecessary by a range of environmentalists. It has also been criticised by the federal government which is concerned that the Victorian Government did not consult the federal Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities before it re-introduced cattle to the Alpine National Park.

Background
(The following is an edited and supplemented version of the Wikipedia entry `Alpine National Park. The full text of the entry can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpine_National_Park)

The Alpine National Park is a national park in Victoria, northeast of Melbourne. It covers much of the higher areas of the Great Dividing Range in Victoria, including Victoria's highest point, Mount Bogong and the associated subalpine woodland and grassland of the Bogong High Plains. The park's north-eastern boundary is along the border with New South Wales, where it abuts Kosciuszko National Park.
The park has been increasingly affected by bushfires with lightning strikes starting large fires in January 2003 and again in December 2006, each fire burning over 10,000 square kilometres over a number of weeks. The largest fire previously was the Black Friday fires of 1939. While fire is a feature of most Australian ecosystems, some alpine ecosystems, such as Alpine Bogs and Fens, are susceptible due to the sensitivity of the component species. The 2003 fires created a mosaic of burnt and unburnt areas. In some areas where the 2006-07 fires burnt over the same ground, species and communities have struggled to recover. Alpine Sphagnum Bogs and Associated Fens have now been listed as a threatened ecological community by the Australian Federal government.
For much of its history agricultural activity was conducted in the park, with quotas of cattle allowed to graze on the High Plains during summer. Australia's alpine area was first used for grazing around the 1840s. Concerns about the environmental effects led various governments to remove grazing from parts of the alps over the next century. Grazing was temporarily halted in Mount Buffalo National Park in the 1920s and stopped altogether in 1952. Cattle were taken out of Kosciuszko National Park in NSW during the 1950s and 1960s due to concerns about the effect of grazing on water quality for the Snowy River Scheme. Grazing was also removed from Mounts Feathertop, Hotham and Bogong around this time, from around Mount Howitt in the 1980s, and from the northern Bogong High Plains, the Bluff and part of Davies Plains in the early 1990s, leaving about one third of the Alpine National Park - over 200,000 hectares - available for grazing
Cattle were removed from the Alpine National Park in 2005 by the Bracks Government after an investigation by the Alpine Grazing Parliamentary Taskforce. The taskforce concluded that cattle-grazing served no fire-retardant function, while it damaged the ecology of the Park Cattle continue to graze in state forest next to the park
Before the 2010 election the Victorian Coalition announced in a media release that it would return cattle grazing to Victoria's alpine national parks as a strategic tool to reduce fire risk on crown land.

Internet information
In June, 2004, Professor David Gillieson, the Chair of the National Committee for Geography, Australian Academy of Science, made a submission to the Alpine Grazing Taskforce, Victoria.
The submission outlines the damage that cattle-grazing has done to the ecology and environment of the Alpine National Park. It also disputes claims that cattle-grazing reduces the risk of fire. The full text of this submission can be found at http://www.science.org.au/natcoms/nc-geography/documents/nc-geography-submission-june04.rtf

On November 3, 2010, The Mountain Cattlemen's Association of Victoria published an editorial on its blog titled, "LIES, pseudo-science, green activism and politics". The comment attacks the claims made by opponents of grazing that all scientific findings support their view. The blog also argues that grazing is necessary to protect the Alpine National Park from bushfires. The full text of this comment can be found at http://www.cowpad.info/?p=97

On December 28, 2010, The Sydney Morning Herald published a report titled, `Alpine grazing a lucrative public subsidy for the privileged few'. The piece was written by Tony Lupton, the member for Prahran in the Victorian Parliament (2002-10) and cabinet secretary in the Brumby government. He was a member of the Alpine Grazing Taskforce.
Mr Lupton's analysis and comment gives a great deal of background information on the issue. It also explains why Mr Lupton believes that the decision to reintroduce cattle to the Alpine National Park is ill-advised.
The full text of this report can be found at http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/alpine-grazing-a-lucrative-public-subsidy-for-the-privileged-few-20101227-198g1.html

On January 9, 2011, Peter Walsh, the Deputy Leader of the Nationals in the recently-elected Liberal Coalition Victorian government issued a media release titled, "Vic Coalition to Reinstate High Country Cattle Grazing to Reduce Fire Risk'. The release includes a strong argument in support of the cultural significance of the high country cattlemen. The full text of this release can be found at http://vic.liberal.org.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=/bElf7kQ56M=&tabid=189

On January 12, 2011, the Victorian Liberal Government issues a media release titled, "Research begins on strategic cattle grazing to reduce bushfire risk". The release details the Governments institution of a trial of cattle-grazing in the Alpine State Park and gives an outline of the reasons for this. The full text of the media release can be found at http://vic.liberal.org.au/News/MediaReleases/tabid/159/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/2550/Research-begins-on-strategic-cattle-grazing-to-reduce-bushfire-risk.aspx

On January 14, 2011, The Gippsland Times published an article titled, `Cattle back grazing in the High Country'. Though a news report it focuses exclusively on the views of those who favour the trial - the Victorian Environment Minister and the Mountain Cattlemen's Association of Victoria. The full text of this report can be found at http://sale.yourguide.com.au/news/local/news/environment/cattle-back-grazing-in-the-high-country/2047444.aspx?storypage=0

The Internet site of the Mountain Cattlemen's Association of Victoria can be found at http://www.mcav.com.au/
The site includes subsections titled, `The Cattle are back in the Alpine National Park: Grazing fuel reduction trial is on" and "The proud history of the MCAV".

On January 27, 2011, a group of 125 concerned environmental scientists sent an open letter to the Victorian premier, Ted Baillieu, with a copy sent to relevant state and federal ministers and department heads. The letter outlines in detail the reasons for their opposition to the grazing trial in its current form and suggests that if appropriate processes had been adhered to before the trial was undertaken it would have been likely not to have secured approval to do so.
The full text of this letter can be found at http://vnpa.org.au/admin/library/attachments/PDFs/Reports/scientists%20letter-highcountrygrazing.pdf

On January 31, 2011, an opinion piece by Dr Greg Moore, a Senior Research Associate of Burnley College, University of Melbourne, was published on the environment section of the ABC's Internet site. Dr Moore is strongly opposed to the reintroduction of cattle to the National Park and claims that the trial was politically motivated. The full text of Dr Moore's opinion piece can be found at http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2011/01/31/3125906.htm

On February 7, 2011, the Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment issued a document on its Internet site titled, `Changes to cattle grazing in Victoria's Alpine National Park Research trial - strategic cattle grazing to reduce the risk of bushfire.' The document details the scope of and the rationale for the cattle-grazing trial. The full text of the release can be found at http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/DSE/nrenpr.nsf/LinkView/96607BDB8D7C34A9CA257817000F427425944F18CBF38C964A2567BD002971B9

On February 9, 2011, the ABC carried a news report titled, "Govt accused of alpine grazing consultation failure"
The report claims that the Victorian Government failed to consult with the Aboriginal custodians of the Alpine National Park before taking its decision to trial cattle-grazing. The full text of this report can be found at http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/09/3133965.htm

The Victorian National Parks Association has a section of its site given over to opposing the grazing of cattle in the Alpine National Park. Its arguments against the action can be found at http://vnpa.org.au/page/nature-conservation/parks-protection/alpine-cattle-grazing-%E2%80%93-it%E2%80%99s-a-park,-not-a-paddock
These arguments are current and are regularly updated.

A more detailed (though less current) statement of the Victorian National Parks Association's arguments against grazing cattle in the Alpine National Park can be found at http://www.cowpaddock.com/page1.html, http://www.cowpaddock.com/page1.html,http://www.cowpaddock.com/report2.html and http://www.cowpaddock.com/page1.html,http://www.cowpaddock.com/report2.htmlhttp://vnpa.org.au/page/publications/fact-sheets/faq-sheet-_-cattle-grazing-in-the-alps

Arguments in favour of cattle being returned to the Alpine National Park
1. Cattle have been returned to the Park in limited numbers, in restricted areas and for a limited time
The trial, commissioned by the Department of Sustainability and Environment, has returned only 400 cattle to the High Country. This affects only six sites covering some 25,600 hectares, or 3.9 per cent of the Alpine National Park. It has been decided that no grazing will occur on the environmentally-sensitive Bogong High Plains as part of the trial.
Mr Ryan Smith, the Victorian Environment Minister, has stated, "The research sites have been selected to avoid environmental impacts, and only areas that had been grazed in the past will be used."
Mr Smith has assured critics, "Any decision the government makes on strategic grazing in the future will take into account any potential impact on the environment and community."
The Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE)has stated, "Appropriate design principles, including site selection, will avoid and/or minimise significant impacts from the trial on important natural values and threatened species and communities."
The DSE has further explained, "The sites for the trial have been selected to add to the existing body of research by focusing on areas that don't have enough scientific evidence (both geographically and vegetation type)."
Avoid areas in the park where cattle-grazing is expressly prohibited under legislation.
The DSE has also indicated that care has been taken to minimise risks to listed national heritage values, to threatened species and to communities. Another determining factor was the need for ease of access to the site for cattle. Research sites will generally be close to private property or areas of State forest currently under grazing licence.
The DSE has noted that site selection criteria covered a range of site variables, such as altitude, slope, aspect and ecological vegetation class and were concerned to restrict cattle grazing under the research trial to areas that have been previously grazed.

2. The cattle have been returned as part of a carefully managed scientific trial to determine their impact on fuel load in the area
The Environment and Climate Change Minister, Mr Ryan Smith, has claimed that the trial, undertaken by Professor Mark Adams of the Bushfire Co-operative Research Centre, is intended to provide evidence on the efficiency of strategic cattle grazing for fuel and fire management purposes.
Mr Smith has stated, "The Coalition Government is committed to making transparent and informed decisions on bushfire management in Victoria's High Country based on credible scientific evidence. Current information on the effect of cattle grazing for bushfire mitigation is limited."
Mr Smith explained, "Bushfire management is a significant issue in Victoria and this trial will ultimately inform future fire management decisions and ensure an effective approach to environmental management."
Mr Smith has further stated, "The six-year research program is hoped to help DSE meet its responsibilities under Victoria's National Parks Act to ensure that appropriate and sufficient measures are taken to protect each national park and state park from injury by fire.
Any future decisions on the use of strategic cattle grazing to reduce bushfire risk in Victoria's High Country will be informed by the outcomes of the research."
Mr Smith also maintained that the trial and its findings would be conducted in an open, accountable and evidence-based manner. Mr Smith stated, "The Coalition Government is committed to making transparent and informed decisions on bushfire management in Victoria's High Country based on credible scientific evidence."
Mr Smith further stated of the head of the trial, "Professor Adams, from the University of Sydney, is currently leading the High Fire Project for the Bushfire Cooperative Research Centre and his depth of experience and knowledge will be a valuable asset during the research."
The Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment stated, "There is a need to collect more evidence and research that looks at the direct effects of grazing on fuel load and structure in all alpine and subalpine ecosystems.
Before cattle are introduced into the Park for fuel reduction purposes, DSE's Secretary must be satisfied with the effectiveness of cattle grazing as a fuel reduction measure, including non-fuel reduction impacts. So a trial is being conducted to gather that information and evidence."

3. Members of the Mountain Cattlemen's Association support the trial
The Mountain Cattlemen's Association has long maintained that its intimate knowledge of the Alpine National Park and its care to preserve the alpine environment were ignored by the previous Victorian government. The Association is strongly behind the decision taken by the newly-elected Liberal government.
Mark Coleman, the president of the Mountain Cattlemen's Association, has stated, "This is a government decision based on common sense and will seek solutions to long term good management of our public land.
In 2005, the Labor Government kicked us out of the Parks for short term political gain.
This new government is to be congratulated for having the courage to revisit that very bad decision and to accept in principle what the MCAV had been saying about grazing and fuel reduction for more than 50 years.
Members of the MCAV stand ready to assist this exciting project and to pass on their knowledge as to how the High Country should be managed and cared for."
The Mountain Cattlemen's Association maintains that grazing cattle in the Alpine National Park contributes to the good management of the Park.
On its Internet site the Mountain Cattlemen's Association of Victoria makes the following claims, "The Mountain Cattlemen's Association of Victoria (MCAV) represents a hardy group of people whose families and predecessors have grazed their cattle and maintained the Victorian High Country dating back to 1834. From Australian settlement to the present, caring for their cattle and custodianship of the land has been a cross generational family undertaking, so their training in the mountains is a lifetime experience. Consequently, the cattlemen are known for their love and knowledge of the bush."
The MCAV stresses the importance of the fuel reduction that is achieved by grazing cattle in the Alpine National Park. They argue that this practice must be reintroduced while there are still cattlemen alive and farming who are skilled in the management of their livestock for this purpose. The MCAV states, "The MCAV is working to preserve that knowledge and heritage and to have cattle grazing reinstated as a proven management tool to reduce fuel loads. This has to be done while there are still cattlemen around who can explain to the next generation how to do it."

4. The federal Government has been informed of the trial, however, the responsibility in this matter remains with the Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment
The Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) has claimed that contrary to the assertions of some members of the Australian Government, the federal Government has been informed of the cattle-grazing trial in the Alpine National Park.
In its media release the DSE stated, "DSE has written to the Australian Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities advising of the trial and offering a full briefing."
The DSE has claimed that in conducting the trial, it is doing no more than meeting its obligations under Victorian law. On its Internet site the DSE states, "The six-year scientific research trial will help DSE meet responsibilities under the State's National Parks Act to `ensure that appropriate and sufficient measures are taken to protect each national park and state park from injury by fire'."
The DSE has noted that the 2005 decision to ban cattle -grazing in the Alpine National park was taken by the former State government and thus the investigation of that decision is a state responsibility. On its Internet site the DSE states, "The decision to stop cattle grazing in the Alpine National Park was made by the previous State Government, based on its opinion that the continuation of grazing did not make environmental or economic sense. The decision was made after considering the issues and opinions identified by the Alpine Grazing Taskforce, based on the available scientific, social and economic evidence at the time.
The Taskforce raised a number of issues in its report and identified a range of options for the management of cattle grazing in the Park. These warrant further and more detailed investigation from a fire management perspective."

5. Opposition to the reintroduction of the cattle is politically motivated, while the trial itself is not
It has been claimed that opposition to the grazing of cattle in the Alpine National Park is politically motivated.
In 2005 the former head of the Victorian Farmers' Federation, Paul Weller, stated, "The Government has turned its back on Victoria's mountain cattlemen who have been an important part of the Alpine environment over many generations protecting this iconic environmental treasure from fire and pest weed infestation."
Mr Weller went on to say the then government had succumbed to a radical ideological philosophy to lock the community out of forests and allow them to deteriorate with weeds and pests.
Mr Weller stated, "Farmers have no confidence in the politically dominated Alpine Grazing Taskforce which is merely a front for government MPs to hide behind to avoid responsibility for their decision to sacrifice cattlemen to curry favour with radical environmentalists."
In contrast, the current Victorian Environment Minister, Ryan Smith, has claimed that his government's decision to implement a trial of cattle-grazing was not politically motivated.
Mr Smith has noted that the Mountain Cattlemen's' Association was not being given what they had asked, full access to the Alpine National Park under the terms that had existed before 2005. Mr Smith noted, "I am not opening the gates to let 8000 cattle back in."
Mr Smith also claimed that the process that was being followed was an open one and was not politically motivated.
Mr Smith stated, "The decision to allow cattle back into the Alpine National Park .was not politically motivated. The Premier has said we are going to implement our election commitments and my belief is I am doing that in a responsible way."

Arguments against cattle being returned to the Alpine National Park
1. Cattle-grazing will damage the Alpine National Park
Matt Ruchell, the executive director of the Victorian National Parks Association, has stated, "In the alpine environment, cattle pollute waterways, trample delicate wetlands, cause soil erosion and spread weeds."
Mr Ruchell went on to explain, "The unique sphagnum moss peat beds and wetlands of the Alpine National Park, and at least 12 alpine plants and wildflowers.listed under the federal law as matters of national environmental significance.are threatened by cattle grazing,"
It has been claimed that the cattle trial is already causing damage to the Alpine National Park, with an early investigation conducted by Dr Henrik Wahren of LaTrobe University's Research Centre for Applied Alpine Ecology showing Alpine Tree Frogs and their wetland habitat being trampled.
Dr Wahren stated, "The wetland habitat of the Alpine Tree Frog is heavily used by cattle, and given the level of damage already observed after just two weeks, it is likely to be severely degraded by the time the cattle are removed for the season in April."
The Alpine Tree Frog and alpine wetlands are listed as nationally threatened under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act.
A Victorian Government desktop study shows that nationally-listed threatened species have been found in the new grazing sites in the past. These species include the Alpine Tree Frog, the only frog known to occur above the winter snowline on mainland Australia, and the Spotted Tree Frog.
Dr Greg Moore, a Senior Research Associate of Burnley College, University of Melbourne, has stated, "Re-introduction of cattle takes us back to the future - a future of environmental degradation and a failure to appreciate the scale and impact of climate change. We should be securing the future of Victoria's alpine ecosystems rather than putting them at risk of further degradation. Doing so is imperative to securing the future of the State as climate changes. Victoria's ecosystems have been under enormous stress and some such as the State's grasslands are among the most threatened in Australia."

2. There is no need for a trial to determine whether cattle-grazing reduces fire risk
It has been claimed that the trail is unnecessary and lacks scientific rigor. One hundred and twenty-five of Australia's principal environmental scientists have written a letter to the Victorian government claiming that `the trials, designed to test whether grazing reduces bushfire, lack scientific integrity'.
Libby Rumpff, of the University of Melbourne's School of Botany, one of the scientists who signed the letter, said the trials set a dangerous precedent for national park management, in that they have failed to recognise previous research.
Critics of the trial claim that there have already been extensive scientific investigations into the supposed fire-preventing effect of cattle-grazing. Each of these studies has failed to find these effects.
The Bracks Labor government removed cattle from the national park in 2005 after an Alpine Grazing Taskforce found cattle damaged the environment and had no influence over fire behaviour.
A peer-reviewed CSIRO study in 2006 also found there were no scientific grounds for the claim that cattle grazing reduced fire risk. The Baillieu government, however, now argues that there is a "general lack of peer-reviewed science'" on the matter.
The most significant research on alpine grazing and fire was carried out shortly after the 2003 fires swept across Victoria's Alpine National Park, and was published in a pee-reviewed journal. The conclusion was that grazing is not scientifically justified as a tool for fire abatement.
The review found that the most flammable fuel types in the park, which contribute almost the entire available fuel load to bushfires, are branches, twigs, bark, eucalyptus leaves and shrubs. With the exception of some shrubs, cattle do not eat these fuels. Snow grass (which the cattle do graze) traps moisture and can be very difficult to burn.
Critics have also argued that this "unnecessary" trial will not produce valid results because it is not being conducted with sufficient rigor. Libby Rumpff, of the University of Melbourne's School of Botany, has noted that the trial design was not peer-reviewed, a normal scientific practice in controversial studies. Dr Rumpff stated, "The only fact that this trial can discover is that cows eat grass."

3. The decision to allow the cattle into the Park was politically motivated
Ted Baillieu's newly elected coalition government had committed to returning the grazing as part of its election campaign. Critics of the promise claim that it was not made with regard to protecting the environment but so as to win or retain the support of rural voters.
The Coalition, as part of its election bid to win back the seat of Gippsland East from independent Craig Ingram, promised the Mountain Cattlemen's Association of Victoria that its long-standing practice of national park cattle grazing would be reinstated. In return, the association campaigned strongly for the election of the Baillieu government.
Libby Rumpff, of the University of Melbourne's School of Botany, has claimed that the Victorian government has used science as a vehicle for political gain. Her argument appears to be that the supposed scientific trial is no more that an attempt to validate what is essentially a political decision.
On January 31, 2011, an opinion piece by Dr Greg Moore, a Senior Research Associate of Burnley College, University of Melbourne, was published on the environment section of the ABC's Internet site. Dr Moore argues, "The re-introduction of cattle must be more about politics than the sustainable management of the alpine environment as I know of no ecologist or environmental scientist who would advocate the re-introduction of cattle for the good of the alpine ecology.'

4. Neither the federal Government nor the Aboriginal custodians of the area were consulted about the trial
A spokeswoman for the federal Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities said the federal Government should have been consulted about the move and was not.
The spokeswoman stated, "Under national environment law, the onus to refer an activity falls on the person carrying out the activity. Any activity likely to have a significant impact on a place protected under national environment law, such as a National Heritage place, must be submitted to the federal environment department to see whether federal assessment is needed."
One hundred and twenty-five of Australia's principal environmental scientists have warned that the Victorian government has potentially broken federal environment law.
Questions have also been raised about the Department of Sustainability and Environment's mapping of federally listed species. The map of the trial sites, published on the department's website, shows only state-listed vulnerable species.
However, departmental information shows there are four federally protected species within the trial sites: the vulnerable alpine tree frog and the endangered spotted tree frog, and two plants, the leafy greenhood and dwarf sedge.
The trial sites are also believed to include alpine sphagnum bogs and fens - sponge-like wetland areas that are listed under the federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act as an endangered plant community.
Phil Ingamells, a spokesman for the Victorian National Parks Association, has stated, "We now know there are federally listed species in some of those areas. This is another indication of the haste in which this trial happened. It is an extraordinary oversight by the department."
Critics have claimed that it was not sufficient for the Victorian government to inform the federal government of the trials; it should have sought the permission of the federal government before it began them.
Advice provided by the Environment Defenders Office in January 2011 confirms that the Victorian Government must refer any plans to return cattle grazing to the Alpine National Park to the Federal Government for consideration and approval.
The advice outlines that under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act any action likely to have a significant impact on a "matter of national environmental significance" must be referred to Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke.
Native Title Services has also noted that the Gippsland Gunai Kurnai people may have a case to stop alpine grazing in national parks.
The Gunai Kurnai people were recognised as custodians of the Gippsland national parks at a ceremony in Stratford in 2010. Mr Chris Marshall from the Native Title Services has stated that the State Government failed to notify to Gunai Kurnai people of the changes to grazing.
Mr Marshall said, "There may have been a breach of the Native Title Act by a failure to notify the traditional owners.'

5. The trial has been condemned by Australia's principal environmental scientists
Australia's scientific community has condemned the Baillieu government's decision to return cattle grazing to the Alpine National Park.
In a letter to Environment Minister Ryan Smith, 125 scientists (including some of Australia's top experts in ecology, zoology, fire regimes, wetlands and threatened species) have called for the trials to be postponed.
Concern over the trials has spread to the highest reaches of the scientific community.
In an unusual move, the conservative Australian Academy of Science, a fellowship of the nation's most eminent scientists, has confirmed it is ''taking an interest'' in the issue.
The letter to Mr Smith was signed by 11 professors and nine associate professors.
The experts argue that a panel of independent needed to be involved with the trial from its beginning if its results were to be credible. Their letter states, `The issue of grazing in the Alpine National Park is a highly charged one, and is characterized by entrenched positions amongst stakeholders. Given the divisive nature of this issue, an appropriate governance and administrative structure that ensures transparency and scientific integrity is essential. The provision of high quality science demands independent peer review at the stages of proposal, conduct and communication. This trial has commenced without independent peer review to assess the viability of the research proposal. The establishment of an independent panel of scientific experts to oversee all aspects of the research into cattle grazing in the high country, including its initial design, is necessary to ensure scientific credibility of the current research trial.'
The scientists request that the trial be postponed, at least until it can be set up in what they believe is a proper manner. Their letter suggests that if the proposal had been given full preliminary consideration it may not have gone ahead.

Further implications
It will be interesting to see the outcome of the current trial. Without wishing to preempt the results of the trial, it seems unlikely that it will find that the grazing of cattle in the Park reduces the fire risk. A series of previous studies have failed to do so. Should the current trial arrive at a different conclusion, this conclusion is likely to be vigorously opposed by a majority of the Australian environmental community. Doubts have already been expressed about the validity of the current trial both in terms of its design and the fact that it is not to be peer-reviewed.
If the trial does suggest that cattle be reintroduced to the Park then the next question will be in what numbers. Anything beyond the trial 400 will prompt even more extensive opposition. It is also probable that the federal Government would intervene were the Victoria government to attempt to increase the number of cattle able to graze within the Park. The federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act would seem to give the federal Government both the authority and the obligation to do so. It appears to be a mark of the vulnerability and political uncertainty of the present federal Government that it has made no statement in relation to the current trial which was undertaken without federal consultation.
Were substantial numbers of cattle not to be returned to the Alpine National Park, there would be substantial and vocal opposition from the Victorian Mountain Cattlemen's Association which appears to see the current trials as merely the precursor to a more substantial reintroduction of cattle to the Park in six years' time. However, the Coalition government may believe it can afford to ignore such protests as the Cattlemen are unlikely to support a future Victorian Labor Government as such a government would offer even less chance of a return to cattle-grazing within the National Park.

Newspaper items used in the compilation of this issue outline
AGE, October 31, page 17, comment by Phil Ingamells, `Why cattle will never again roam free in the high country'.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/why-cattle-will-never-again-roam-free-in-the-high-country-20101030-1784b.html

AGE, December 14, page 5, news item by Peter Ker, `Gate stays shut on Nationals MP's plan to return cattle to forests'.
http://www.theage.com.au/environment/conservation/gate-stays-shut-on-nationals-mps-plan-to-return-cattle-to-forests-20101213-18vjh.html

AGE, December 13, page 2, news item (photo) by Peter Ker, `Coalition divided on grazing policy'.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/coalition-divided-on-grazing-policy-20101212-18u0t.html

AGE, December 20, page 12, letters, incl, `Alpine creeks no longer fetid bogs / Tourism is the future / Locals have spoken'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/letters/alpine-creeks-no-longer-fetid-bogs-20101219-191uu.html

AGE, January 13, 2011, page 8, news item by Richard Willingham, `Grazing returns to high country'.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/grazing-returns-to-high-country-20110112-19o95.html

AGE, January 17, 2011, page 12, letters, incl, `Return of cattle is devastating news / Face up to reality'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/letters/return-of-cattle-is-devastating-news-20110116-19sg9.html

AGE, January 30, 2011, page 3, news item by Melissa Fyfe, `Top scientists urge halt to Alpine grazing trial'.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/top-scientists-urge-halt-to-alpine-grazing-trial-20110129-1a938.html

AGE, January 29, 2011, page 9, news item by Adam Morton, `Grazing study can't start for months'.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/grazing-study-cant-start-for-months-20110128-1a8fx.html