Finally it has been made public that Queensland Stock Squad police are investigating the alleged disappearance of cattle owned by Great Southern investors (John Andersen’s story in today’s Townsville Bulletin). In particular, the Stock Squad are investigating the alleged vanishing of cattle from Great Southern-leased Crystalbrook cattle station – in relative terms, not far from Great Southern-owned Wrotham Park (both are near Chillagoe, north Queensland). Apparently the Stock Squad will be visiting a Charters Towers property today, regarding cattle that were Great Southern owned. They had put in an earlier appearance at the Townsville auction of Great Southern-owned Wrotham Park and Chudleigh Park, in June, however there was no public investigation at that time. Apparently the Stock Squad are investigating the whereabouts of 2,000 Great Southern investor-owned cattle and offspring. This is not as many cattle as the 3,000 head three men (John and Clive Pickering and David Keating) were jailed for stealing from Strathmore station (Croydon) when found guilty in 1989. However the 2,000 being publicly investigated now might be just the tip of the iceberg.
While people in the bush have been talking about Great Southern management (or lack thereof) for years, until it all went leg-up, there were no publicly made accusations and evidently no official investigations. (Typical – nothing is done until it all falls in an unfixable heap.) Three years ago I was told of a cattle station in WA that was being given an absolute flogging, and of a cattle station in Queensland that was not mustered (so incredibly overstocked – which makes soil and vegetation damage inevitable). What puzzles me most is that if the extreme mismanagement of Wrotham Park is true, why has the department of lands not been doing the job it used to do and that I thought it was still supposed to do – i.e. ensuring that leasehold land and cattle station assets are maintained in good condition. Wrotham Park manager Gordon Arnold used to have to supply regular reports, plans for future capital works, and had regular inspections to ensure everything was in good shape. What on earth is the point of leasehold land, if leaseholders aren’t made to look after the land? It’s like a seriously bad joke, why not just make the whole of Australia freehold title and be done with it? It is all the more aggravating given the Queensland Government’s obsession with such extremist conservationist obsessions as agricultural land runoff theoretically damaging the reef (but ignoring urban runoff) and the obsession with not allowing rural landholders to chop down trees on their own land, for fencing and other purposes (but ignoring urban development clearfelling), etc. It is evident that the current Queensland Government pays a vast amount of attention to fashionable topics that suit them whilst turning a blind eye to other genuinely serious issues.
Janette Townshend, owner of Melbourne financial planning service Townshend Prudential, has been one of the prominent drivers behind ensuring there is a thorough investigation into Great Southern management. Janette was a prominent member of the Independent Woodlot Co-operative which was formed by Great Southern investors in July, in the hope of taking direct control over Great Southern’s blue gum forest plantations and managing them effectively. Regarding Great Southern’s management of cattle, Janette told Senator Bill Heffernan in June, ‘the main problem is that it was never clear which were Buntine’s cattle and which were investors,’ and, ‘there was no transparency in the reporting’.
Livestock branding was invented way back when people first started claiming ownership of livestock, so that who owned the animals was indisputable and clear for all to see. On smaller cattle properties breeding and calving is controlled – bulls are put out into cow paddocks for only 2-3 months of the year, so that all calves are born within weeks of one another. This means there only has to be one muster to yard the mob to draft out the bulls (and return them to the bull paddock), and one muster when the calves are old enough to brand. On vast northern cattle stations cattle are scattered in huge paddocks, the climate is harsher and pasture not as high quality – so to maximise calving numbers, bulls are out with the cows all year round. Most calves are still born within weeks of one another, because most of the cows cycle at the same time, when seasonal conditions were just right; however there will be some calvings all year round. On most well managed properties, stock are mustered twice a year during the dry season (two mustering ’rounds’) and calves are branded as soon as they are mustered, to avoid the risk of the stock straying and ending up with someone else’s brand on their hide. Cattle (and sheep) are also earmarked. When cattle are sold or transported anywhere, the brands are supposed to be noted (roadtrain drivers fill in logbooks and collect signed paperwork); and when cattle go to the meatworks the brands are supposed to be recorded, in case of ownership disputes. All brands must be registered or they are not legal. When stock are sold to another owner then it is usual for the new owner to cross brand, i.e. add their own brand to every animal purchased. Obviously these sales must be very clearly recorded, and the records kept in the event of an ownership dispute. The Queensland Government’s *Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation & Qld Primary Industries and Fisheries website states: ‘Brands and earmarks are used to prove ownership of livestock but are not compulsory, except for cattle and pigs when they are being sold. However, it is recommended to do so to avoid ownership disputes over stray animals.’ Ever since brands were invented, of course, the unscrupulous have tried to brand over the top of an existing brand when stealing cattle, in an effort to obliterate the real owner’s brand underneath their own. Cunning neighbours would try to register brands deliberately designed to stamp neatly over the top of the brand on the cattle owned by the cattleman over the fence. Smart staff in brand registration offices would reject the registration of such brands. Light fingered neighbours still do help themselves to any cattle that have escaped mustering and are unbranded. Some suspicious cattlemen will deliberately run a distinctly different breed of cattle to ensure there is no confusion over ownership. When a cattleman is doing it tough and he resides beside someone who appears to not care less about running a good show, with unbranded stock running wild everywhere, the urge to help themselves is often irresistible. Stock theft has long been viewed rather lightly by the general public however it involves vast amounts of money – potentially many millions of dollars – and can send the victim broke. Obviously it is critical that musters are as clean (thorough) as possible to reduce the numbers of cattle that have escaped branding, to ensure they don’t end up in the hands of unscrupulous neighbours who will be only too happy to apply their own brand to the cleanskin hide. Over two centuries of Australian white settlement, many a cattle station empire has been built up by a hardworking battler conveniently situated beside a lax cattle station manager, who hasn’t maintained boundary fencing in good condition or mustered rigorously enough.
So there shouldn’t be a problem determining where Great Southern owned cattle have gone and exactly who owns what. Unless cattle were sold, the brands of the new owners not applied, and accurate records were not kept of stock numbers bought, sold and transported elsewhere. One thing that puzzles many is how Great Southern investors could possibly own a handful of cattle managed by Great Southern, as has been reported. How on earth would you keep track of who owns what animals – whose cows died, whose cows had a calf and whose cows didn’t have a calf – or had a calf that died before sale? It would be tricky enough on a closely settled farming area in southern Australia, but in northern Australia, where calving rates are low, death rates higher, and mustering never 100% clean with cunning cattle in difficult terrain, such a scheme would be utterly impossible to manage with any degree of accuracy whatsoever. It could only work if investors owned a percentage of the overall herd. How this cattle ownership and leasing scheme was meant to work exactly, has not been publicly explained.
To find out the complete truth regarding the running of Great Southern owned cattle stations and cattle, first hand accounts are required. Anyone with first hand information, or pointers in that direction, can provide confidential information to Senator Bill Heffernan.
Alarm bells should have rung in the ears of every single investor when they received financial reports that did not clearly list the cattle stations owned and the cattle stations leased. Why was the lack of Annual Report specific information on asset ownership no queried by those in charge of scrutinising Annual Reports? If nothing else comes of the investigation into Great Southern, I at least hope that the rules regarding providing investors with accurate and detailed information on assets owned are tightened up and/or actually enforced; and it is ensured that those pastoralists who run down good quality leasehold land and assets, cease to do so.
*PS: The ludicrousness of this ridiculously lengthy term, for what used to simply be the Queensland Department of Primary Industries, and the lumping of so many subjects together – from employment and innovation to primary industries – illustrates the Queensland Government’s appalling attitude to agriculture. Perhaps it is also a clue as to why nothing at all seems to be done about the small handful of pastoralists who give the rest a bad name, by flogging their leasehold country to death and letting valuable waters and fencing go to rack and ruin, with impunity.