CHAPTER 16 - PLANTS

Commercial Utilisation of Australian Native Wildlife

CHAPTER 16 - PLANTS

16.1 As with animals, plants (and plant parts) can either be gathered directly from their natural environment or cultivated artificially under controlled conditions. Both aspects of commercial utilisation of native plants are currently expanding in Australia. Plants are used in floriculture for cut flowers, as garden plants, in fence construction (broombrush), or extracted to produce gums and essential oils. There is also a rapidly expanding industry based on the use of native plants for food (bush 'tucker' or bushfood). Some native plants are also being researched for medicinal and pharmaceutical applications. [1]

Wildflowers

Industry Development

16.2 The use of native plants in the cut flower industry in Australia has expanded considerably over the last decade in Western Australia and to a lesser extent in Victoria and New South Wales. Flowers and plant parts (such as leaves, stems and seed-pods) are harvested under licence from the bush or, increasingly, are being cultivated by horticulturalists. Some states have legislation which facilitates the picking of native flowers from the bush (including foliage and seeds). [2]

16.3 A major base-line study of the floriculture industry commissioned by RIRDC and carried out by Karingal Consultants of Melbourne, was published in 1994. This report identified floriculture as an important domestic and export industry in Australia and concluded that the key limitations to growth did not relate to demand, but related more to the ability to get sufficient products to market at times of peak air freight demand with minimum loss of quality. [3] In 1994-95, exports of wildflowers and native plants were worth in total about $26 million. They are now worth about $30 million [4]. The major importing countries are Japan, USA, Germany and the Netherlands; and the major types of flowers exported are Geraldton wax, kangaroo paw, Thryptomene and species of Banksia, Leucadendron and Protea. [5]

16.4 Although the wildflower industry has been in existence for many years in Western Australia and accounts for more that half of Australia's wildflower production, it is still primarily a 'cottage industry' and there is a high turnover of growers and wholesale exporters. In 1995-96, almost 592 flora licences were issued for commercial purposes and 511 flora licences were issued for commercial production. [6] There have been a few high profile success stories but they have been short lived. [7]

16.5 According to Ms Carol Davies, Managing Director of Heritage Wildflowers, Australia has failed to take full commercial advantage of its wildflower resources. Gains made by Western Australia were first lost to the eastern states; then Australia faced strong competition from Israel, California and, most recently, South Africa. In addition to loss of markets to overseas countries which are producing Western Australia wildflowers, Australia is now experiencing a loss of skilled scientists:

The history of this industry is that in the 1960s we sent all of our seeds overseas, in the 1970s we potted them up in plants, in the 1980s we tissue cultured them; now in the 1990s our top scientists are taking overseas jobs to show them how to get it right. People who have come to prominence in Australia on R&D funds are now being employed overseas; for instance in Japan to develop pink Sturt peas for the Japanese market. All of that research was done on Commonwealth funds here in Australia. [8]

16.6 Unlike many other industries in Australia based on commercial use of wildlife, the floriculture industry does not face legislative export constraints, regardless of whether the flowers have been cultivated or picked from the wild. However, there are logistic problems with the issuing of export licences and, according to Ms Davies, it can take up to four months for Environment Australia to process an application. Part of the problem appears to be that once an application from Western Australia has been sent to Environment Australia, the Federal body then refers it back to the state body (CALM) for confirmation. Ms Davies recommended that time would be saved if applications were cleared in Western Australia before being sent to Canberra. [9]

16.7 The major problem faced by the floriculture industry is that there is no legislation, state or federal, to prevent genetic resources from being removed from Australia and used by other countries to develop and propagate cultivars from that material. With the advent of micropropagation techniques (tissue culture), legislation to prevent seed export would be ineffective in preventing Australian plants from being cultivated elsewhere. The only way in which Australian plants could be protected from exploitation overseas would be through an international protocol which prevented the tissue culture of native plants. Ms Davies pointed out that there was a significant anomaly in the fact that an Australian could be heavily fined for picking a wildflower from the bush, but that overseas agronomists and plant breeders could, with a licence, remove genetic resources in the form of plant material to cultivate elsewhere. [10]

16.8 When asked about this problem the Director of CALM, Mr Keiran McNamara, commented that other than a total ban on the removal of all plant material from the bush and from Australia (which would see the end of the floraculture industry), preventing other countries from obtaining plant genetic material from Australia would be very hard to achieve in practice. Only a very small amount of plant material was needed for tissue culture and seeds could be very easily smuggled out as well. [11]

16.9 At the moment, 60 per cent of flora exported from Western Australia is collected from the wild, although the proportion of bush-picked flowers is declining in WA and now represents only 16 per cent of production. [12] It is preferable for industry to source flowers from cultivated stands, but moves to increase cultivation are limited by lack of funds. Ms Davies suggested that the allocation of R&D funding should be more industry driven. Funding would be more cost-effective if they were directed towards the private sector, proving incentives for propagation and growing, rather than laboratory work. [13]

16.10 According to RIRDC, the current farm-gate value for wildflowers is $30 million. [14] In consultation with the industry, RIRDC has developed a five-year R&D plan [15] and in the past some $550,000 per annum has been invested by that organisation in R&D. [16] However, in response to the failure of the industry to support a floriculture levy, RIRDC withheld funding for new projects in 1996-97. According to RIRDC, in addition to defining and developing new markets, key issues for the industry are:

Concern About Over-Harvesting

16.11 In its evidence to the Committee, CALM expressed concern that wildflower harvesting had the potential to deplete the bush and threaten some species, although the Department noted that this would only occur if the industry was unregulated and unmanaged. Mr McNamara outlined the efforts made over the last decade to improve management of the industry, including aspects of administration, inspection and enforcement and scientific knowledge, as well as improving communication with the industry through the establishment of a Flora Industry Advisory Committee. There was a comprehensive management plan for the industry [19] and where there was information that certain plant species were of conservation concern, they had been removed from the list of species available for harvesting. [20]

16.12 The Western Australian Government believes that the bush harvesting of wildflowers is a good example of sustainable use of wildlife aiding conservation because the placement of an economic value on natural habitats provides an incentive for landholders to retain remnant bushland. [21] However, this view was not shared by some environmental groups which are opposed to bush picking of flowers on the basis of detrimental impact to the environment. The Conservation Council of Western Australia expressed concern about the impact that picking of wild flowers had on the environment, in particular the potential for spread of disease (die back and aerial canker) and the lack of regulation by government over the industry. [22] This view was supported by the Nature Conservation Council of NSW. [23]

16.13 In addition, the North Coast Environment Council cited a case where a licence was granted to a single operator to remove 500,000 banksia blossoms in one year. About this the Council stated:

The countless number of insects, bats, birds, small mammals and reptiles that must have suffered at the hands of one proponent is hard to imagine. One only has to observe a banksia in flower to realise just how many diurnal as well as nocturnal species depend on them for food. It seems obvious, even without studies being undertaken, that this loss must have a disastrous effect on the fauna population and local environment. How could this possibly be called environmental sustainability? [24]

16.14 However, while some conservation groups would prefer to see a total ban on bush harvesting, CALM believes that it is an important element in conservation of remnant areas of native flora because, with commercial use of flowers comes an incentive to retain those areas in their natural state. [25] Further, native wildflowers have several environmental advantages over exotic flowers - their production systems do not consume large quantities of water and they do not require large applications of fertilisers and pesticides. [26]

Native Trees and Shrubs

Garden Plants

16.15 There are hundreds of native plants that have been cultivated by the horticulture industry for garden plants but there are only a few plant species harvested. The most important of these is the tree fern, Dicksonia antarctica. [27] Tree ferns are removed under licence from forests which are being harvested in Tasmania, Victoria and New South Wales. In Tasmania, about 80,000 plants are sold to Victoria at an approximate value of $800,000. A Commonwealth management plan for the species has not been accepted and so export of tree ferns is prohibited. Should approval be given, it is estimated that the volume exported from Tasmania would instead be worth $30 million. In the long-term it is hoped that export approval may be granted for nursery-grown sporlings. [28]

16.16 TRAFFIC Oceania expressed considerable concern that there was a complete lack of information about the size and nature of the domestic market for Dicksonia antarctica and the impact that harvesting was having on the survival of the species in the wild. Figures given by TRAFFIC Oceania indicate a sizeable illegal harvest is occurring in addition to the legal take. In 1991, it was estimated that 20,000 to 40,000 were taken from private land in Victoria, while a further 200,000 were imported from Tasmania. The industry is largely unregulated, fragmented and uncoordinated, and pilfering, price-cutting, poaching and unpaid royalties are apparently common. [29]

16.17 The Wollemi Pine was discovered in 1994 in New South Wales. It belongs to a new genus and is known from only two populations of about 50 individual plants in Wollemi National Park. It is thus considered to be threatened and, as part of a recovery plan, the NSW Government is exploring ways in which the species can be commercialised. Among these are a tender for world rights to propagate and distribute pine seedlings, the income from which will contribute to the conservation of the Wollemi Pine and other rare or endangered plants. [30]

Broombrush (Melaleuca uncinata)

16.18 Melaleuca uncinata, commonly known as broombrush, is used as a fencing material and has been popular in South Australia since the 1930s. It is a tall shrub with finely leaved branches which occurs widely across the agricultural regions of the state. Some 30-50 kilometres of fencing are constructed from this material each year. The South Australian Government believes that there is sufficient brush available for a sustainable harvest but the industry disagrees, claiming that they have had difficulties obtaining enough good quality brush, and a brush Management Working Group has been set up to examine this issue. [31]

Xanthorrhoea semiplana tateana

16.19 Xanthorrhoea species are variously known as grass trees, blackboys, yacca gum or Tate's grass tree. It is a genus of native plants that have a tree-like trunk (which stays black after fires), a large head of grass-like leaves and a single tall flower spike. It is slow-growing and widespread in south-eastern coastal areas and central Australia. Yacca gum is derived from resin which flows from the point where the leaf base joins the trunk.

16.20 Traditional, indigenous uses included the use of resin as an adhesive, the flower spikes as spear shafts and firesticks, and the trunk, seeds and nectar as sustenance. Recent modern uses of the gum include munitions (historic), fireworks, polishes, stains and varnishes. Products taken from the plant include cut flower spikes and leaves for floral displays, and small whole plants for gardens.

16.21 The main environmental benefit of industries based on Xanthorrhoea species is the possibility that applying a commercial value to it may encourage farmers to retain stands on land which would otherwise be cleared for pasture improvement. The main detrimental environmental impacts are:

16.22 Yacca gum is mostly derived from the species Xanthorrhoea semiplana tateana which is common on Kangaroo Island. Harvesting is now restricted to dead plants removed from existing pasture land and areas that are being cleared. The declaration of the species as a controlled plant expired on 30 June 1997 and having concluded that it was not an ecologically sustainable industry, the South Australian Government did not renew the declaration and consequently the industry has now ceased. [34]

16.23 There are still small industries in Queensland, NSW, Victoria and Western Australia based on the collection of Xanthorrhoea flower spikes and leaves for wholesale to florists. Approval for export of these products has been granted under the Wildlife Protection (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Act 1982. [35]

16.24 However, both the North Coast Environment Council and the Stradbroke Island Management Organisation Inc are opposed to the harvesting of Xanthorrhoea leaves because of the impact on other species which are dependent on the plant for food and shelter. According to the North Coast Environment Council, although it may be difficult to assess the impact of harvesting of one native species on the whole habitat, some impact must occur simply because the species is part of an ecosystem:

Millions of Xanthorrhoeas are being destroyed for the domestic and export market. A licence was granted to a proponent for the removal of 50,000,000 of these leaves (ANCA Ref, 330/4/359) with the statement that there was no effect on the species. It has to affect the survival of fauna. These plants are essential to the ecosystem to fill the role previously played by the fast disappearing forests; that is, an abundant source of nectar, shelter and protection for numerous birds, bats, reptiles, insects and small mammals. The skirts of these plants are used for shelter by many small animals. How can the proponents say that the taking of say, half-a-million of these plants has no effect on other species? Apart from the effect on fauna, no studies appear to have been undertaken to establish the consequences of continual harvesting on the plant. [36]

Sphagnum moss.

16.25 Sphagnum is a genus of mosses which occur throughout Australia and is the major component of peat bogs. Peat bogs provide a critical ecosystem function, particularly in stream flow regulation and water filtration. They are confined to subalpine and alpine areas of Tasmania, Victoria and New South Wales.

16.26 The principle use of dried Sphagnum is in potting mix, but is also used as an absorbent material in other applications. The main environmental benefit of Sphagnum harvesting is that it may provide a viable alternative to the more disruptive activity of peat mining, or provide an economic incentive for landholders not to drain peat bogs. There is, however, a very high risk associated with this activity because Sphagnum bogs are highly susceptible to disturbance and take a long period to recover, particularly where stream flow is altered.

16.27 Australia is a net importer of Sphagnum from other countries but there is a small industry in Tasmania based on Sphagnum harvesting, as described by Environment Australia:

One operator in Tasmania has been harvesting moss continuously from one bog since the early 1970s. The sheer longevity of this operation suggests that it is economically, and ecologically, viable in the long-term. This operator has, through trial and error, developed a harvesting system which causes minimal disruption to the surface of the bog: after initially using a system of flying foxes, the harvester now uses a system of boards which are used as rails for a modified ride-on mower which hauls harvested material from the bog. The harvester has also experimented with fertilisers to encourage faster and richer moss regrowth following harvesting and Environment Australia has funded research by Dr Jenny Whinham to identify sustainable harvest rates and identify sensitive bogs which should be protected. Essentially, however, the maximum quantity of moss which can be harvested is static, which means that the business has little opportunity for expansion at this site. The limited availability of large Sphagnum bogs elsewhere in Australia also limits the ability for the business to expand. [37]

16.28 The North Coast Environment Council is opposed to the harvesting of Sphagnum moss on the basis that build up of moss is essential to the survival of peat bogs and continual harvesting will not allow this to happen. The Council is also concerned at the use of fertilisers to promote growth after harvesting, because the majority of native plants usually grow in nutrient-poor soils. [38] However, the Tasmanian Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries states that the industry is in fact 'only minor'; the volume taken being about 125 cubic metres. [39]

Essential Oils

16.29 There is a growing interest in essential oils in Australia and the current value of production is about $20 million (excluding tea-tree oil but including exotic species, such as lavender and peppermint, and the refining of imported eucalyptus oil). [40] According to RIRDC, the current farm-gate value for industries based on essential oils and plants extracts is about $6 million. [41] RIRDC has contributed R&D funding for some years and because the industry has become established, now expects a 25 per cent industry contribution.

16.30 The essential oil industry in Australia is small, fragmented and diverse and over the last few years there has been an increasing focus on native species. The strengths of the industry are its 'clean-green' image, the abundance of genetic diversity in native flora and a good technology base to support innovation. [42] The three most prominent Australian plants being exploited for flavours and fragrances are Eucalyptus species, Boronia megastigma and Tasmania lanceolata.

16.31 With the exception of eucalyptus and tea-tree oil distillation, most commercial activities are based in Tasmania and, to a lesser extent, Victoria. Seven main companies form the core of the industry. In Tasmania, the company Essential Oils was established as a venture between growers, the university of Tasmania, and the Tasmanian Development Authority and was subsequently purchased by an international company. [43] The industry in Tasmania operates a voluntary research levy. [44]

16.32 According to RIRDC: 'Australia has a comparative advantage as a reliable supplier of clean, good quality unique essential oils and plant extracts based on the use of high technology in both production and extraction' and the 'increasing use of essential oils and medicinal herbs in aromatherapy and other healthcare areas offers new opportunities for the industry'. [45]

16.33 One of the most promising oils, extracted from brown boronia, produces a high-value flavour additive and base for perfumes. [46] Another important oil is that extracted from the Tasmanian mountain pepper, Tasmania lanceolata, which is currently being farmed in Tasmania and the oil exported to Japan for use in chocolates, toothpaste and chewing gum. [47] The present value of the oil extracted from T. lanceolata is about $50,000. [48]

16.34 RIRDC has developed a five year plan for the industry which includes the following R&D strategies:

16.35 Essential oil markets, both domestic and export, are dominated by overseas companies and the industry in Australia currently suffers from a lack of collaboration and a lack of information about markets and trends. Threats to the industry include low-cost overseas competitors, declining government support for the rural sector and loss of control of genetic resources. [50]

Eucalyptus Oil

16.36 The extraction of oil from a number of native species of Eucalyptus and Cinnamonum by steam distillation has had a long history in Australia and it is now much smaller than it used to be. The current output is about 110 tonnes annually compared to 1,000 tonnes at its peak in the decade between 1939 and 1948. [51] The main commercial species harvested is E. polybractea and production is increasingly being based on cultivated trees. The industry comprises two companies that operate in Victoria and NSW and Australia is a producer, importer, exporter and re-exporter of eucalyptus oils. The potential for developing an industry in Western Australia, based on mallee species, is currently being assessed with the establishment of 5,000 hectares of trail plantations over six sites.

16.37 The major end uses of eucalyptus oil are in pharmaceuticals, toiletries, antiseptics, solvents, fragrances and confectionery. The major trade is in import and re-export in products. Australia's major competitor is China and its major importers are France, Germany, UK and USA.

16.38 RIRDC has noted that the two major threats to the industry are competitors having lower labour costs and what is perceived to be restrictive legislation in Australia. [52] Despite renewed interest in eucalyptus oil production in recent years, primarily a result of conservation and agroforestry initiatives (particularly in Western Australia) and the desire by some farmers to diversify farm incomes, the industry has suffered through competition from China where oil is sold at prices below the cost of production. [53] The future of the industry in Australia is very much linked to trends in world prices and now depends very much on its ability to reduce production costs. Other key factors include its ability to increase production efficiency, to develop new cineol-based medicinal products, to develop new industrial solvents and to find 'substitution' markets to replace synthetic solvents such as trichloroethane. RIRDC has included eucalyptus in its 'Essential Oils & Plant Extracts Program 1996-2001'.

Tea-Tree Oil

16.39 The native shrub tea-tree (Melaleuca alternifolia) occurs naturally on the northern New South Wales coast where it has been harvested for oil distillation for nearly 100 years. The industry in Australia is currently worth about $12 million, with good future growth dependent on the receipt of formal medical acceptance. [54] Production is currently about 200 tonnes per annum, which could increase to 500-600 tonnes, possibly resulting in an oversupply of oil if market resistance continues. [55] The industry is well established in northern NSW and is increasing in Queensland where tobacco growers are seeking alternative crops. Production is now largely plantation based, but bush picking under licence still exists in some areas. The industry is considered at the moment to be 'highly profitable'. [56] However, because tax investment schemes have encouraged investment in plantings, supply may outstrip demand within a few years.

16.40 While there is plentiful anecdotal evidence of the efficacy of tea-tree oil as an antiseptic, there is very little scientific data about its effect on bacteria, fungi and viruses. [57] Australia produces some 99 per cent of the world's tea-tree oil but, in the face of possible competition from overseas (US, Malaysia, Indonesia, India, Vietnam, China and Zimbabwe), RIRDC is concentrating research on identifying the best genetic resources in order to optimise production. RIRDC has also identified a number of other research issues, including:

Bushfood

Industry Development

16.41 Despite the fact that Aboriginal people survived and thrived on native foods for many thousands of years, interest in bushfood among European people in Australia only began in earnest some 15 years ago and it has only been in the last couple of years that the industry has gathered commercial momentum. It is still, however, small, fragmented and largely undercapitalised. RIRDC has developed in consultation with the bushfood industry, a five-year plan for research and development and has assisted in the formation of a national peak body, the Australian Native Bushfood Industry Committee. There is an increasing number of regional and special interest bush foods associations with their own peak body, the Committee of Regional Bushfood Organisations.

16.42 There are two methods of obtaining supplies of bushfoods - harvesting 'bush tucker' from the wild and growing native plants as crops. At the moment, the majority of retailed bushfoods (about 80%) is harvested from the wild by licensed seasonal collectors or by Aboriginal communities. However, with the high cost of wild harvesting (it is very labour intensive) and unreliability of plant production, the industry is steadily moving towards cultivation of crops.

16.43 State regulations vary on the harvesting of bushfood from the wild. For example, in Tasmania there are no restrictions on harvesting from state forests but a licence is needed to harvest from Crown land, while in Queensland licences are required in all areas. The plants most commonly harvested include wattle (for seed), bush tomato, Illawarra plums, lemon aspen, lemon myrtle, pepperleaf and pepper berries, riberry, aniseed myrtle, quandong, bunya pines (for nuts), lilly pilly, bush cucumber, warrigal greens, native mint, kurrajong, bush banana, wild limes, muntries and munthari and the kakadu plum.

16.44 Along with the wildflower industry, the bushfood industry has pioneered economic values for many native species of plants. There have been three main areas of commercialisation: the horticultural development of native plants as 'bush-tucker plants' for sale in retail nurseries; the development of products for retail sale in supermarkets and gourmet food shops which contain bushfood wholly or in part; and the development of products for use in restaurants.

16.45 Australian Native Produce Industries Pty Ltd, for example, is a fully integrated business comprising:

16.46 In association with culinary use of bushfood, has been the increased promotion of meat from native animals (kangaroo, wallaby, possum, crocodile, emu and fish such as barramundi), and the development of associated products such as cook books. [59] The 'Red Ochre' name is franchised to a number of restaurants in Australia which specialise in foods prepared with native plant and animal ingredients. Restaurants operate in Cairns, Alice Springs, Adelaide, Melbourne and Brisbane and several overseas franchises were scheduled to open in 1998. There are now suppliers of bushfoods throughout Australia and a large number of products are now found in supermarkets. According to RIRDC, the current farm-gate value for plant-based bushfoods is $10 million. [60]

Industry Potential

16.47 The strengths of the bushfoods industry lie its new and unique flavours which, along with game meats, has inspired a truly Australian cuisine, its 'clean-green' image and its involvement with indigenous people. There are a number of important opportunities associated with the industry, including the ability of Australian rural producers to diversify into 'natural' crops, the prospect of producing food crops in areas previously devoid of horticulture and the possibility of interlinkages with eco-tourism.

16.48 The Australian Native Bushfood Industry Committee reports that bushfood sales were over $14 million in 1996, and the market is expected to grow to $100 million by the year 2000. [61] The Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation believes that the bushfood industry has a 'good future' in terms of new flavours and new fragrances and has assisted the industry in a number of ways (in particular, by holding workshops and sponsoring studies). During 1997, a draft R&D plan for the bushfoods industry was released for comment. [62]

16.49 According to Mr Noel Beynon, Manager of Rural Industry Policy of the Federal Department of Primary Industries and Energy, the bushfood industry faces a number of technical problems in the development of environmentally sustainable cultivation to replace bush harvesting. Other problems include: the development of an appropriate and accepted industry terminology; issues relating to quality assurance and labelling; the long lead time in the development of cultivated varieties; and the fact that the industry is fragmented and largely comprises small, under-capitalised and under-skilled businesses, all of which may constrain economic development. [63] However, Mr Beynon noted that despite these constraints: 'Bush food harvesting has the potential to provide a sustainable and profitable industry to complement particular grazing areas'. [64]

16.50 The Australian Native Bushfood Industry Council represents all aspects of the industry, from wild harvesters, growers, manufacturers, processors, retailers and Aboriginal communities. In its submission to the Committee, the Council highlighted a number of issues which need to be addressed nationally. These were:

16.51 The Australia Native Bushfood Industry Council, in evidence to the Committee, stressed the fact that a number of environmental benefits could be attributed to the growth in interest in native produce. Native vegetation could now be viewed as a resource and farmers wanting to revegetate could now begin to do so with native species with a view to farm income diversification. This in turn resulted in benefits such as provision of habitat for native wildlife, decreased erosion and salination, decreased susceptibility to drought and a reduction in the use of fertilisers and biocides. [66]

16.52 Attitudes to the use of native plants as food have changed considerably over the last decade and bushfoods present an opportunity for new culinary flavours. The benefits of bushfoods include the fact that most are naturally high in acid and therefore do not require artificial preservatives and have a long shelf-life, they hold their colour well and look attractive. Bushfoods generally have a high nutritional value; wattle seed for example, has a higher protein level than meat. [67] Bushfoods now retail in a large number of supermarkets throughout Australia and ingredients are being used increasingly in restaurants and by airlines and railways for catering. [68]

16.53 While the bushfoods industry is young and expanding, in the opinion of the Council, it is not 'buoyant' and is in need of assistance and guidance from the Council, and support from government. [69] The industry is totally comprised of small business, which are largely undercapitalised. There is concern among these business that, once the problems with production and marketing have been resolved, larger companies will 'come in and take it away'. [70]

16.54 According to the Australian Rainforest Bushfood Industry Association, the issues of particular interest to the bushfood industry include:

16.55 Another issue of concern, both to the bushfood industry and to Aboriginal people, is the question of rights to traditional Aboriginal knowledge about bushfoods. As highlighted by the Australian Rainforest Bushfood Industry Association:

In accepting and respecting a marriage between the two cultures in the bushfood industry, it is necessary to acknowledge that various view points will be occasionally presented. These times are an opportunity to learn about each other's culture and how to work together as a model of grass-roots reconciliation. [72]

16.56 A recent study commissioned by RIRDC, identified a number of issues related to production, processing, manufacture, wholesaling and retailing. The most important of these were: the lack of genetically improved cultivars of most species; possible overplanting of some species and a danger of oversupply of some bushfoods unless demand was increased; and lack of product quality and food safety information. The report also noted that being an Australian product or a 'novelty' product alone was not sufficient to justify high retail prices and that harvesting and production costs must be sufficiently low for bushfood produce to be more acceptable to main-stream manufacturers and to allow for a competitive 'shelf' price. [73]

Plant Property Rights

16.57 The question of property rights to native cultivars was of concern to people in both the wildflower and bushfood industries. [74] It is also important in the context of pharmaceutical companies which wish to use native Australian plants for research and development.

16.58 While plant variety rights allows the registration of cultivated varieties in Australia, and to date a dozen or more varieties of native species have already been registered with the Plant Breeders Rights Office, [75] businesses have no control over native Australian plant material that is taken out of the country and cultivated overseas.

16.59 The Committee notes that the issue of plant genetic resources is being addressed by a Commonwealth-State working Group on Access to Australia's Biological resources and also by the Plant Genetic Resource Advisory Committee under ARMCANZ.

Summary and Conclusions

16.60 Over the last decade in Australia there has been a dramatic expansion in the range of native plants used for commercial purposes. These include native wildflowers, garden plants, essential oils, bushfood and other specialist applications. There is also increasing interest in native plants for medicinal and pharmaceutical applications. The use of products from these industries in Australia and their export has assisted in the development of a truly Australia identity.

16.61 The Committee notes the concern of conservation groups that environmental damage could occur through poorly managed plant harvesting practices. However, the Committee received no clear and convincing evidence that current plant harvesting practices were causing widespread or irreversible environmental damage. The Committee urges Federal and state governments to continue to adequately monitor the environmental impact of harvesting activities.

16.62 However, the Committee did receive evidence that not only did plant harvesting have the potential to benefit the environment by providing incentives to preserve habitat, but that these benefits were already being realised. The Committee believes that industries based on Australian native plants should continue to receive government assistance in areas of research and development and that bodies such as RIRDC should continue to assist in the identification of economically and environmentally viable plant-based industries.

16.63 The Committee notes that considerable potential exists for the identification of plants which may have medicinal or pharmaceutical applications and urges government to assist industry in this area. The Committee also notes that indigenous people have a strong affiliation with and knowledge of plants in their traditional lands and believes that efforts should continue to be made to include Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders in such projects, particularly in the tropical north of Australia.

Footnotes

[1] Evidence, p. RRA&T 21.

[2] Evidence, p. RRA&T 22.

[3] RIRDC 1994 The Australian Wildflower Industry – A Review (A Report for RIRDC by Karingal Consultants) Research Paper No. 94/9, ISBN 064220478, p. xiv.

[4] Submission No. 296, p. 4.

[5] RIRDC 1996 op cit, p. 25.

[6] Submission No. 329, Appendix 15 Wildlife Licences Issued in 1995-96 (Western Australia).

[7] Evidence, p. RRA&T 470.

[8] Evidence, p. RRA&T 475.

[9] Evidence, p. RRA&T 471.

[10] Evidence, p. RRA&T 472-3.

[11] Evidence, p. RRA&T 524-5.

[12] RIRDC 1996 Program Plans and Guidelines for Researchers 1997-1998, ISBN 0642246076, p. 25.

[13] Evidence, p. RRA&T 471, 475.

[14] Evidence, p. RRA&T 1118.

[15] RIRDC, 1996 R&D Plan for the Wildflower and Native Plants Program 1995-2000, ISBN 0642246106.

[16] Evidence, p. RRA&T 1128.

[17] RIRDC 1996 op cit, p. 25.

[18] Submission No. 296, p. 4.

[19] CALM, Management of Commercial Harvesting of Protected Flora in Western Australia 1 July 1995 to 30 June 1998.

[20] Evidence, p. RRA&T 522.

[21] Evidence, p. RRA&T 514.

[22] Evidence, p. RRA&T 487. Other submissions expressing concern about over-harvesting included Submission No.s 22, 48, 60, 203.

[23] Evidence, p. RRA&T 649.

[24] Submission No. 22, p. 2.

[25] Evidence, p. RRA&T 522.

[26] Submission No. 296, p. 4.

[27] Evidence, p. RRA&T 902; Submission No. 338, p. 1; Submission No. 315, p. 11.

[28] Response to questions taken on notice, Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries, Tasmania, dated 6 February 1998.

[29] Submission No. 299, p. 4.

[30] Submission No. 88, p. 5.

[31] Submission No. 318, p. 3.

[32] Submission No.s 22, 139.

[33] Submission No. 198, p. 61.

[34] Submission No. 318, p.3.

[35] Submission No. 198, pp. 60-61.

[36] Submission No. 22, p. 1.

[37] Submission No. 198, p. 62.

[38] Submission No. 22, p. 2.

[39] Response to questions taken on notice, Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries, Tasmania, dated 6 February 1998.

[40] RIRDC 1996 op cit, p. 21.

[41] Evidence, p. RRA&T 1118, Submission No. 296, p. 3.

[42] RIRDC 1996 R&D Plan for the Essential Oils op cit, p. 9.

[43] Evidence, p. RRA&T 1130.

[44] Evidence, p. RRA&T 1130.

[45] RIRDC 1996 op cit, p. 21.

[46] Evidence, p. RRA&T 1122-3.

[47] Evidence, pp. RRA&T 903-4, 1007, 1131; for more information, see RIRDC Final Report Tasmannia lanceolata – A New Natural Flavour Product, December 1995.

[48] Response to questions taken on notice, Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries, Tasmania, dated 6 February 1998.

[49] RIRDC 1996 op cit, p. 21.

[50] RIRDC 1996 R&D Plan for the Essential Oils, op cit, p. 9.

[51] Submission No. 296, p. 3.

[52] RIRDC 1996 R&D Plan for the Essential Oils, op cit, p. 13.

[53] Evidence, p. RRA&T 1129.

[54] Evidence, p. RRA&T 1123.

[55] Evidence, p. RRA&T 1129.

[56] Submission No. 296, p. 3.

[57] Evidence, p. RRA&T 1123.

[58] RIRDC 1996 op cit, p. 24.

[59] See for example, Robins, J 1997 Wild Lime - Cooking from the Bushfood Garden, Allen & Unwin, ISBN 1 86448 082 3.

[60] Evidence, p. RRA&T 1118.

[61] Submission No. 198, p. 38.

[62] Evidence, p. RRA&T 1120-1122.

[63] Evidence, p. RRA&T 5-6.

[64] Evidence, p. RRA&T 6.

[65] Submission No. 304, p. 3.

[66] Evidence, p. RRA&T 994, 999.

[67] Evidence, p. RRA&T 997.

[68] Evidence, p. RRA&T 1000.

[69] Evidence, p. RRA&T 999.

[70] Evidence, p. RRA&T 1001.

[71] Australian Rainforest Bushfood Industry Association, Newsletter No. 1, Autumn 1996, PO Box 6407, Lismore NSW 2480, p. 3 President's Report.

[72] ibid.

[73] 1997 Prospects for the Australian Native Bushfood Industry – A report prepared for the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation by Caroline Graham and Denise Hart, RIRDC Research Paper No 97/22, ISBN 0642246424, pp. 1-2.

[74] Evidence, pp. RRA&T 472, 1000.

[75] Evidence, p. RRA&T 6.