WHEN he was growing up, Trenton Hindman listened to stories about his grandfather joining renowned Queensland government botanist and poisonous plants expert Selwyn Everist to trial the aerial application of herbicide onto brigalow, using Tiger Moth planes at the family properties.
With irrepressible enthusiasm and an ability to quickly recall obscure scientific facts, Mr Everist personified the mutually beneficial relationship between landholders and government workers - each dedicated to improving farm production capacity while mitigating environmental risks.
But over half a century later, the once-respectful relationship between landholders and government is sinking into the abyss.
Central to this distrust is recent environmental policy, especially the decade-long battle between landholders and the Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM) over vegetation management laws.
In contrast to the days of his grandfather, Mr Hindman drew headlines across the State in December. He was fined $110,000 for clearing 1314 hectares of 'not of concern' vegetation on his property - Alpha Station at Wyandra near Charleville - without a permit in 2007 and 2009. He was also ordered to pay legal and investigation costs totalling $13,770.
The clearing was discovered through analysis of satellite imagery by DERM's State-wide land cover and trees study.
And while DERM assistant director-general Dean Ellwood warned at the time that landholders should not be under the mistaken impression they can get away with illegal clearing, the decision at the Charleville Magistrate's Court angered many landholders.
Mr Hindman has repeatedly argued he was renovating country degraded by turkey bush so native grasses could regrow.
He said an appeal could cost him $200,000 (including the fine and additional legal fees) but he believed it was a gamble which must be taken because of a broader principle.
A court date is expected before the end of the year.
Mr Hindman was adamant science supports the idea that thinning treatment can have a positive environmental outcome on the ecologically resilient pastoral resource.
He believed factors supporting his theories were not given adequate consideration during the last court hearing.
These included the fact DEEDI considered using his property as a demonstration site for rehabilitation, and that a CSIRO study found practices carried out over a 20-year period by landholders in far western NSW on a similarly degraded landscape, using the same methods, were consistent with ecological restoration and increases in native grasses.
But Mr Hindman said he had a broader concern for the direction of relations between landholders and government departments.
It was important for landholders to stand up for themselves against government tactics, he said, but in the long term more should be done to bridge the gap of understanding so that practical solutions could be found.
He accused the public services of suffering a 'crisis in leadership', especially as more senior workers exit the public service and chase lucrative jobs with the resource sector. This, he said, is leaving knowledge gaps and adding to misunderstanding, mistrust and communication failures.
"There was a different mindset in the old days. Selwyn Everist used to bring vet students out to the family properties 'Bendemere' at Yuleba and 'Cypress Downs' at Jackson in the 1950s, using the visits to educate students on poisonous plants," he said.
"Why can't the government take graduates to properties where the landholder wants do some clearing or development, to work with the property owner on the best plan? That would be a better option than just trying to catch and prosecute people."
Email a friend