In relation to access to genetic resources, all countries are highly inter-dependent. Australia is among the countries with the highest degree of dependency, estimated at between 88% and 100% for the 20 most important crops grown in the country. In relation to forest genetic resources, exotic tree species will continue to play an important role in Australia, and international exchange of forest genetic resources will continue to be fundamental to breeding and sustained production.
Agriculture and forestry have always been based on access and exchange, not on exclusivity; seed has, from time-immemorial, moved along the routes of trade, war and love. International trade and exchange of germplasm of Australian tree species, as mentioned before, has been pursued for over 200 years. Forestry has, over the years, enjoyed a tradition of good will among international collaborators, based on such a history of institution-to-institution connections and scientist-to-scientist contacts. Save some exceptions related to species providing for example foliar oils: Eucalyptus polybrachtea in the 1950s, and more recent, largely self-imposed regulations regarding Melaleuca alternifolia, there are currently very few restrictions on the export of forest tree seed from Australia, or any other countries, provided that plant health and availability of material of the required quality in the required quantity, are adequately catered for (Anon 1994, 1996; Drielsma et al. 1997; Midgley 1999a).
Forestry, and the issues related to forest genetic resources are, however, becoming part of a larger international debate on use and benefit sharing. There are many different policies and regulatory approaches which relate to the ownership and use of biological resources in Australia, where the States have responsibility for management of forests and where the collection of seed from native forests is controlled by State and Territory land management agencies. Emerging social, policy and legal issues will likely increasingly influence the access to, and exchange of, Australian forest genetic resources in the future (Anon 2002).
The range-wide provenance collections of Eucalyptus camaldulensis, “Operation Camal”, was referred to earlier in this paper. One could mention, as an example, that to gain access today to a comprehensive collection of provenances of Eucalyptus camaldulensis, like the one collected and distributed in the 1960s, would require official permits from more than 15 agencies and organisations in six States and Territories, and additional permits from several indigenous communities and other private landowners (Midgley 1999, 1999a).
In the case of the ATSC, the Material Transfer Agreement presently accompanying all seed dispatches, requests users to abide by a number of basic requirements (Anon 2002a). The MTA will likely in the future dynamically change in response to new requirements and legislation. In recent Government led discussions regarding access to Australian genetic resources, it was stressed that Australia will control access to indigenous biological resources in accordance with the provisions of the CBD, and that international access to such resources may be granted on the basis that the contracting parties recognize Australia’s rights of ownership of the genetic material collected; involvement in research on biological material of Australian origin; and fair and equitable returns on, and proportionate ownership of, commercial products developed from Australian biological resources. It was, further, noted that the Commonwealth and State Governments reserve the right to set fees or royalties, or affect other charges relating to the granting of access to Australia’s genetic resources; and to receive all data, materials and reports of research relating to the commercial potential of those resources (Anon 1994, 1996; Voumard 2000).
