The scientific community

“These things really are off the scale of what was thought possible. What we have been saying has been very contentious in the scientific community. But I do believe that, probably only in the last 12 months, there has a considerable change in attitude and there is now real interest. Some are completely sceptical about what we doing; others are really interested. I think that the scientists and the scientific bodies are in the process of going through a very bg change in thinking?”

Senator MILNE—. I am particularly interested in the research you have been doing and any connection with CSIRO, the Bureau of Rural Sciences, Land and Water Australia or anyone anywhere in the research body across Australia in looking at the potential of building resilience in soils as an adaptation strategy to climate change and maintaining food ecurity. Is CSIRO actually looking at this in any way? Is anyone supporting you in developing field trials across the country and in helping to get the data together—doing all that—or are you battling on your own?

Mr Wiley—What we are talking about is radical.

Senator MILNE—Yes, it is a radical shift.

Mr Wiley—For me, it has been driven from the farmers’ paddocks. From my perspective, there has been limited support—I have a job, which is great, and the Western Australian state government pays my wage—but these things really are off the scale of what was thought possible. What we have been saying has been very contentious in the scientific community. But I do believe that, probably only in the last 12 months, there has a considerable change in attitude and there is now real interest. We are certainly starting to talk to people in CSIRO. Some are completely sceptical about what we doing; others are really interested. The future farm CRC is showing interest and their budgets have just been signed off in the last few weeks. ... The staff in the future farm CRC will actually do most of their work in Western Australia up to the north in our region, looking at these pasture cropping systems. I am optimistic that there has actually been a change. We are in the middle of a significant change in thinking. It has already happened for our farmers in the north but I am not sure if the rest of Western Australia believes that this is real and that we are going to get dinkum.

I think that the scientists and the scientific bodies are in the process of going through a very big change in thinking, from: ‘It is only minor; we’ll deal with it’ to ‘Maybe this is the disaster that a few people are saying it is.’ It is a difficult process to rethink; we are talking about a very big shift in thinking. I am really pleased with what has happened recently. There is a lot further to go and we do have the problem that we have very limited data that does not stand up to detailed scientific rigour, and I have never claimed anything else. We actually need to get that data and we need those scientists involved. They need the funds to be able to do it properly.

Senator MILNE—Do you want to comment on this, Dr Jones?

Dr Jones—My comment would be that I have been applying for funding for this for 10 years at least. I have folders full of reject letters saying that it was an extremely well worded application, that it has possibility but the current science does not support it and it is not possible to actually increase carbon to the levels that we were documenting on farm. I would have to say that that has changed very quickly recently. In fact in the last week even, there have been huge changes. I think we have just finally got to the tipping point. We have 2,000 farmers involved in this. It is a huge grassroots revolution that the scientific establishment for some reason seems to be completely unaware of or, if they are aware of it, have totally discounted as irrelevant.

"It is a huge grassroots revolution that the scientific establishment for some reason seems to be completely unaware of or, if they are aware of it, have totally discounted as irrelevant."

I travelled to Central Queensland last week with a professor from the University of New England, where I formerly worked. He is the head of the beef CRC and a professor of meat science. He was going there to talk about tenderness in beef. He does not get to interact with farmers because he goes to conferences and talks to people at that level. Over 200 farmers came to this workshop and they got up and talked about and gave presentations on pasture cropping and presented their data with very professional PowerPoint presentations. They have data, but it is considered anecdotal because it does not fit into the scientific model. The professor was blown away. All he could talk about was what he had seen that day and this farmer revolution. He said, ‘How come I have never heard about this?’ The scientific establishment have been talking among themselves and, out there, farmers all over Australia are doing this other amazingly innovative stuff. Now, all of a sudden, this bubble here seems to have burst and we are getting through. DAFF are now very interested in what we are dong and suggesting that if we talk to them and give them some case studies then they might be able to provide some funding. I think we are going to see an explosion in this area. I am feeling very positive as of last week, I would have to say.

Senator MILNE—What sort of formal interaction are you having with Dr Jeff Baldock and the CSIRO in Adelaide on soil carbon? It seems to me that if he is doing a whole project on soil carbon and is dismissing this as irrelevant or whatever, then we are not making any further gains. Is this embedded in the CSIRO yet, in terms of data collection and proper studies, or not?

Mr Wiley—Bob, Christine and I met with Jeff at Mudgee last November. Jeff has heard of some of these figures and what he has done is run it backwards through the Roth C model. He has run it back and said, ‘You would need to be growing 30 tonnes of dry matter per hectare per year to get that level of sequestration; you cannot do it,’ and we would agree entirely—we cannot. So our data is not fitting with his model. Either our data is wrong or his model needs readjusting. Basically, what is good about this is that if this is real I will go and change the model to fit what is actually happening in the paddock. That is what we have lacked, good hard data, and that is what we are trying to get right at the moment—but it will still be limited—so that they can make the model fit what is actually happening in the paddock.

Getting the model right is absolutely critical for Australia. A lot of people are saying that soil carbon is not part of Kyoto. That is just total rubbish. It is in there; it is in all the rules. It is probably the biggest uncertainty in our current national accounts and the biggest risk for this government in that, if we are actually running down our soil carbons and we have to count it properly, for every tonne we go over budget the federal government will have to pay, and we will be able to sell every tonne that we go under budget. But we will need a very large investment to get those models right so they are reliable.