Agricultural action exemptions

When there is a bushfire emergency, keeping people and property safe always comes first.

Learn more about bushfire management and national environment law.

Most activities in Australia don’t need an environmental assessment under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).

Parliament has amended the EPBC Act. Changes include Section 43B of the EPBC Act. You must consider if you need an environmental approval under the EPBC Act.

You can’t claim a continuation of use exemption to clear vegetation:

that hasn’t been cleared in the last 15 years (unless it is part of a forestry operation)
within 50m of a watercourse, a wetland or a drainage line in the GBR catchment area.

Land clearing includes removing native or non-native vegetation from land that changes any of its:

use
structure
ecological function.

This includes woody vegetation (trees and shrubs) and non-woody groundcover like grasses. You can remove declared weeds at all times.

You should undertake a self-assessment of the works in the first instance. You may need to refer this type of action for assessment.

Most activities on developed agricultural land don’t need to be referred for assessment. Their environmental impacts are low and below the thresholds set by national environment law.

Reasons for change

The EPBC Act aims to protect Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES). The new national environment laws create a consistent approach to protecting the environment across all industries.

Clearing of native vegetation is a major driver of habitat loss and fragmentation. This has caused the decline of many of Australia’s threatened species.

While the ecological value of regrowth varies, many species use regrowth from around 15 years of age. This regrowth is valuable habitat for threatened species.

Restoring and protecting riparian vegetation (plants growing on the water’s edge) is one of the most cost-effective strategies for reducing sediment delivery to the GBR. The 50m buffer zone is common for riparian area and streambank vegetation.

Applying the EPBC Act to agricultural actions

The EPBC Act applies to agricultural actions when they could have a significant impact on a MNES. If an action is likely to have a significant impact on a protected matter, refer it for assessment under the EPBC Act.

Protected matters include, amongst other things:

threatened plants, animals and ecological communities listed under the EPBC Act
Ramsar wetlands
migratory species
the GBR.

If an action meets the exemption criteria, don’t refer it for assessment even if it may result in a significant impact.

See the following flowchart to determine if EPBC Act approval is required.

Agricultural activities that may be exempt under the EPBC Act

Use the flow chart to determine if your action qualifies for an exemption under the EPBC Act.

The list isn’t exhaustive. If you have any doubts about your eligibility for an exemption, contact us.

Question 1: Do you have a pre-2000 authorisation?

If YES, no EPBC approval is required.
If NO, move to question 2.

Question 2: Do you have a continuous use exemption (s43B)?

You may be exempt from the EPBC Act if:

the activity was occurring lawfully before July 2000
the land use has continued without interruption, or, its cycles weren’t interrupted.

Changes from 1 December 2025:

You can’t clear land that you haven’t cleared in the last 15 years.
You can’t clear land within 50 m of a watercourse in GBR catchments.

If YES, no EPBC approval is required.

If NO, move to question 3.

Question 3: Can you manage the activity so that it wouldn’t have a significant impact?

If YES, the action can proceed. However, this may be subject to future improvements, like a Ministerial ruling on ’significant impact’.
If NO, get EPBC approval before proceeding.

Agricultural exemptions

Decisions made under the EPBC Act protect Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES). The assessment process considers ways to balance the achievement of:

environmental outcomes
economic outcomes
social outcomes.

You don’t need approval for agricultural actions likely to significantly impact protected matters in 2 cases:

Prior environmental authorisation
You have authorisation before 16 July 2000 when the EPBC Act commenced, and it remains valid. Most state -based authorisations don’t meet this requirement. They were introduced after 16 July 2000.
For example, the Queensland Property Map of Assessable Vegetation (PMAV) system was established after 16 July 2000. It isn’t a prior environmental authorisation under the EPBC Act.
Lawful continuation
You were conducting these agricultural actions with authorisation before the EPBC Act commenced on 16 July 2000.

Continuous use exemption

You don’t need to refer your agricultural action under Section 43B of the EPBC Act if:

The action with a lawful continuation of land use that was occurring before the EPBC Act commenced in July 2000. The exemption applies where:
- the land use has occurred without interruption
- if the use is cyclical and has no breaks in cycles
- the land use has no:
  - enlargement
  - expansion
  - intensification
- there has been no substantial increase in impact from the use of the land as result of:
  - a change in where the land use occurs
  - a change in how the land is being used
If the land use involves the clearing of vegetation:
- the land was cleared in the last 15 years (unless it was part of an established forestry operation)
- the clearing doesn’t occur within 50m of a watercourse, wetland or drainage line in the Great Barrier Reef catchment area.

If you meet all the criteria, you can continue using the land under the continuous use exemption.

Continuous use exemption isn’t subject to approval requirements under Part 9 of the EPBC Act. This exemption continues if you continue to meet all eligibility requirements.

The following activities aren’t ‘continuous use’:

activities that weren’t continuous use before 16 July 2000
activities that involve expansion
activities that intensify an existing use of a land.

You can manage many routine farm activities in ways that don’t significantly impact the environment. Achieve this and you don’t need approval.

Examples of continuous land use and associated actions
Land use	Associated action
Grazing	Changing the stocking rate within the historic range of stocking numbers. Interchanging grazing strategies without enlarging or intensifying the use of the grazing land. E.g., set stocking and rotational grazing. Clearing native regrowth at a regular, uninterrupted interval, at less than 15 years. E.g., a 10-year cycle.
Grazing modified pasture	Improving native pasture by sowing legumes in a native pasture at a regular interval. E.g., a 3-year cycle. This remains exempt if the interval is less than 15 years with no intensification.
Cropping or horticulture	Maintaining drainage channels through routine clearing of the channels. This must be done outside of drainage lines in the GBR catchment area. Interchanging cropping activities without substantially increasing their impact. E.g., irrigated cereals and pulses. Applying fertiliser at a regular interval without intensifying the use of the land.
Grazing, cropping or horticulture	Continuing weed control methods without increasing cultivated land or intensifying its impact.
Bushfire Management	Maintaining existing fire tracks and trails, including slashing to maintain defendable space. In the last 15 years, if you haven’t carried out clearance activities in these areas, you can’t start doing so. Maintaining existing firebreaks and Asset Protection Zones. In the last 15 years, if you haven’t carried out clearance activities in these areas, you can’t start doing so. Maintaining existing tanks, dams and other water points.
Weed Management	Continuing weed control methods without increasing the cultivated land or intensifying its impact.
Water infrastructure	Maintaining existing dams, pumps, troughs and pipes. De-silting existing dams and water channels outside of drainage channels within the GBR catchment area. Removing dangerous trees.

Environmental authorisation issued before 2000

Your action has a prior environmental authorisation if:

you received an environmental authorisation for the action before July 2000, and it specifies the action
you were issued the authorisation under an Australian Government or a state or territory law with any of these objectives:
- protecting the environment
- promoting the conservation and ecologically sustainable use of natural resources
before July 2000, you didn’t need more authorisation to undertake the action
the authorisation is still in force when you undertook the action
you had the authorisation renewed:
- the renewal was for the same action or land use
- you didn’t need any more environmental assessment.
There shouldn’t be any pre-2000 environmental authorisations under Section 43A of the EPBC Act in effect over agriculture in Queensland.
Contact us before you undertake any activity if you believe you have an authorisation in place before 2000.

Note: The Property Map of Assessable Vegetation (PMAV) came into effect in 2004. It isn’t a pre-2000 authorisation.

The 15-year timeframe

To determine the 15-year timeframe, measure backwards from the time you plan to carry out the current clearing.

The continuing use exemption only applies to activities that don’t:

enlarge
expand
intensify
change the location of land use.

The updated rules codify this principle. In most cases, clearing vegetation older than 15 years wouldn’t qualify for exemption. The time gap shows that land use has n ’t been continuous.

If you cleared vegetation within the last 15 years, the exemption applies only if the activity doesn’t:

enlarge
expand
intensify land use.

The exemption doesn’t apply to clearing vegetation within 50 metres of a drainage line in the GGBR catchment.

The 15-year timeframe doesn’t allow for variation in:

growth rate
inadvertent timing out
intent to clear.

It is the likely age when regrowth starts providing habitat for protected matters.

Land use likely to be below a significant level, even if no longer exempt

Activity can’t proceed if it is not covered by an exemption. The activity is likely to significantly impact on one or more MNES. It needs to undergo an EPBC Act assessment.

If you can avoid significant impacts on MNES by adopting land management practices, you don’t need an EPBC Act assessment.

Examples of work that don’t cause major impacts:

Removing hazardous trees from near fences, tracks and waterways. The number of trees is small.
Clearance of less than a hectare to establish new fence lines, tracks, and so on. This doesn’t create barriers between habitat patches.
Moving or changing fencelines in paddocks where remnant vegetation isn’t present.
Weed management methods that do n ’t remove important features like mature trees with hollows.
De-silting existing farm dams and channels to manage storage and water quality.

Changes to the GBR catchment

For activities in the GBR catchment area, you can’t clear any vegetation from land within 50m of a:

watercourse
wetland
drainage line.

Learn if you are part of the Great Barrier Reef Catchment area.

A watercourse is a river, creek or other natural watercourse (whether modified or not) in which water is contained or flows. This includes permanent flows or only flows from time to time.

Extracting water from existing farm dams is exempt in the GBR catchment.

Queensland-specific considerations

In Queensland, Property Maps of Assessable Vegetation (PMAV) approvals aren’t prior authorisation. The system started after the EPBC Act began in 2000.

Category R and Category C can’t be exempt from the EPBC Act.
Some Category X areas may be exempt if they meet the requirements for:
- prior environmental authorisation
- continuous use.

Possible financial incentives to retain vegetation

You may have new sources of income if you retain vegetation. This includes retaining trees younger than 15 years old.

You can register a project with an applicable method under the:

Further exemptions

We use a fair and proportionate compliance approach and work with you in good faith. We expect everyone to use the right resources to check if actions could significantly affect MNES.

A formal safe harbour isn’t available as it could shield deliberate non-compliance.

Where unlawful or unapproved clearing occurs, compliance responses will be informed by the:

nature of the behaviour
level of environmental harm.

Deliberate breaches causing serious damage will face strong enforcement actions.

We assess each instance of potential non-compliance separately.

All activities must comply with the updated requirements.