Australian rural landscapes overview jl

Australian Rural Landscapes: an overview

Jane Lennon, AM PhD ICOMOS ISCCL Australian coordinator for the World Rural Landscape project Aug 2014

WRL_ANN_R.AP_1.08.14_en

1

This paper presents an overview of the extent, types and use of Australian rural landscapes as a contribution to the ICOMOS International Scientific Committee on Cultural Landscapes World Rural Landscapes project. The project is more concerned with productive rural landscapes rather than the vast desert, coastal or mountain landscapes which are promoted as national icons of Australia’s rural landscape.

The paper is in nine sections: introduction, brief history of Australian rural development, rural land use, rural production and distribution, land use change, drivers of change, rural heritage listing and protection, changes and threats and conclusion.

1. Introduction

Australia occupies a whole continent whose vegetation clothing the landscape has been forged by fire. The first inhabitants used this tool for 60,000 years to ‘care for country’ by burning a mosaic of small areas for ensuring food resources, clearing pathways, signalling, ceremonial activities and marking boundaries (Gammage, 2011). Today, although about 20 % of Australia is controlled, owned by or has been given back to Indigenous Australians through the native title tribunal process, only a few areas have exclusive hunting and gathering and this is mostly in 60 declared Indigenous Protected Areas or outstations in the north and north-west of Australia.

Map 1: Indigenous Protected Areas, 2013 Rural landscapes range from the wild subantarctic high country of Tasmania to coastal plains and rolling plains on the western slopes of the Great Dividing Range, from inland deserts to lush tropical forest in northern Queensland and the rugged rocky Kimberley plateau. Mount 2

Kosciuszko, the highest mountain is only 2228 metres and the major river, the Murray flows 2570 kilometres from there to the sea at Encounter Bay, South Australia.

Australia's National Landscapes go beyond individual national parks, World Heritage Areas, and even state borders. It is the distinctive landscape itself, and the experience offered by the environment, that defines each of the 16 National Landscapes. Australia's National Landscapes program is a tourism and conservation partnership managed by Tourism Australia and Parks Australia to provide a framework to consider tourism infrastructure, conservation and marketing in a united way, encouraging collaboration and partnerships. It brings together the tourism industry and conservation sectors to promote Australia's world class visitor experiences, enhance the value of tourism to regional economies, increase the role of protected areas in those economies and build support for protecting our natural and cultural assets [http://www.environment.gov.au/parks/national-landscapes/index.html].

However, unlike many European countries it does not champion agricultural landscapes and continues the Australian preoccupation with wild nature as major component of national identity.

Map 2: Australian National Landscapes program

The National Reserve System is Australia's network of protected areas, conserving examples of our natural landscapes and native plants and animals for future generations. Based on a scientific framework, it is the nation's natural safety net against our biggest environmental challenges. The reserve system includes more than 10,000 protected areas covering 16.52 % of the country - over 127 million hectares. It is made up of Commonwealth, state and territory reserves, Indigenous lands and protected areas run by non-profit conservation organisations, through to ecosystems protected by farmers on their private working properties.

3

Nearly two thirds of the protected area estate on mainland Australia is publicly owned and managed by the Australian government or state and territory governments. These are included in over 10,400 protected areas covering more than 118 million hectares or 15.45% of Australia.

Indigenous community owned and managed lands are protected as Indigenous Protected Areas in Australia. They form the second largest component of the National Reserve System covering 4.75 % of Australia.

There are 2690 protected areas on private land covering one % of Australia; they perform an important role in protecting biodiversity value on private land in the agricultural and pastoral regions of Australia.

Map3: National Reserve System This paper considers agricultural landscapes as continuing living landscapes –a subset of the wider rural landscape. It includes horticulture, viticulture and agro-forestry which has been supplanting abandoned dairying and grazing landscapes along the east coast. The use of the term ‘traditional’ in rural practice or activities is problematic. Although there are still the yam ‘fields’ and traditional fish trapping landscapes of Indigenous Australia, immigrants in the 19th and 20th centuries who created today’s settler society also practised ‘traditional’ European farming.

By trial and error and assisted by government organisations like CSIRO, modern sustainable farms have resulted and the heritage landscapes of these need to be identified and protected.

4

The following Table adapted from Lindenmayer et al., 2012:19 illustrates the temporal span of land use in Australia.

Table 1: Agri-environmental time line for Australia -60,000 years BP to the present 60,00010,000 BP First humans; Climate change shift from coastal to inland hunter gathering – natural response of vegetation to climate change; extinction of megafauna

10,0004,000 BP Human occupation of most of the continent; firestick farming; management of landscape to increase herbivores; vegetation shift to fire prone species; Human population limited by ecological constraints

4,000- 18th century Development of stone tools; introduction of the dingo; sustainable resource management continues; mainland large fauna extinction, eg thylacine; Europeans arrive 1788.

Late 1800s 1900AD European settlement expansion; Aboriginal displacement; cessation of Aboriginal land management; sheep and cattle grazing; land clearing for cropping, grazing and construction; native fauna declines and some extinctions

1900-1950AD

1950-present

Closer settlement; Soldier settlement; increased mechanisation; increased cropping; increased no. of parks and reserves; large scale habitat loss and degradation, salinity, soil erosion; feral impacts on native species

Vast scale agricultural clearing; agricultural intensification; irrigated crops and pastures; massive bird losses; rise of environmental movement and Landcare; increase in private land conservation.

2. Brief History of Australian Rural Development Australia was originally settled from Sydney Cove in New South Wales in 1788 as a convict outpost of the British Empire. This was partly to forestall other imperial powers from occupying this continent, partly to supply the Empire with resources that might be found and partly to send convicts to the ‘ends of the earth’ to relieve population pressure at home. The new settlers took over Aboriginal lands as they regarded the natives as ‘nomadic savages’.

‘Pastoralism’ which refers to grazing cattle and sheep on large areas of land was the force that impelled the spread of modern human settlement across rural Australia. In that process, pastoralism created the setting for the environment beyond the coastlines expressed in today’s maps of Australia. After 1815 stock and their keepers spread across natural grasslands and watercourses; distinctive Australian breeds such as the merino sheep were developed through trial and tribulation, dependent on variable seasons and distant markets, and the evolution of technology and transport across the long paddocks of Australia. Pastoralism was a major impetus for the modern settlement of the continent beyond the coastal convict garrisons. It played a key role in establishing a national psyche (as well as many national myths) and had widespread implications for the landscape (Pearson and Lennon, 2010).

The birth of farming had very humble beginnings. Three months after the arrival of the first fleet in January 1788, the livestock in the colony consisted of seven horses, seven cattle, 29 sheep, 74 pigs, five rabbits, 18 turkeys, 29 geese, 35 ducks and 209 fowls. Shortly after the 5

fleet’s arrival at Port Jackson, farming was initiated at Farm Cove, now the site of the Royal Botanic Gardens in Sydney.

In 1790, Captain Arthur Phillip assigned land to the ex-convict James Ruse at Rose Hill (now Parramatta). This was the first land grant in Australia for the purpose of establishing farming on a larger scale. ‘Experiment Farm’ as it was known, was the location of Australia’s first wheat-farm. By 1860, after only 70 years of European farming settlement, there were already 1.2 million acres (or 480,000 hectares) under crop and livestock numbers had increased to 25 million head (ABS,2012:1301.0).

Our pastoral story is often forgotten and obscured now that 90% of Australians live in urban areas and on the coastal fringe and 60% live in the five biggest cities: the bush is far removed from where most of us spend our lives. The rural way of life that once saw Australia ‘ride on the sheep’s back’ no longer defines us; yet it is largely our life as a pastoral nation that has endured in heritage places and which is carried in the mythology of what it means to be Australian. The rural population, engaged primarily in pastoralism, agriculture and mining, has always been male dominated. This reflected the Australia-wide trend, with the adult male population gradually falling from 80% of the total in 1800, to 50% by 1947. The dominance of the urban population is a relatively recent phenomenon: in 1861 over 60% of the population lived outside the towns, and by 1900 when the British colonies federated to become the Commonwealth of Australia, 30% were still living on the land.

While in ecological terms it is not long since the first livestock were introduced to Australia, their impact has been profound. The endeavour of developing livestock able to prosper in the Australian environment met with many obstacles, but Australia quickly became, and remains, the leading producer of fine fibre wool in the world. Pastoralism became the economic mainstay of Australia. Wool has been Australia’s single most significant product. Wool exports replaced whale and seal products as the staple for the colonies by 1835 and while the massive returns from gold mining in the 1850s and 1860s swamped wool export earnings during the gold rushes, wool had regained its premier position by 1871 and stayed there.

Wool exports peaked in 1951 when wool represented 65% of Australia's total exports (excluding bullion and specie), and about 131 million sheep were being grazed, about 15% of the world total, producing nearly 30% of the world's wool clip. There were real boom years in the late 1970s and 1980s. While wool was predominant, the cattle industry at that time was producing up to 700,000 tons of meat annually, about a quarter of it for export.

Australia is the world's largest wool producer, accounting for about a quarter of total global production. In the last twenty years or so, wool production has more than halved, to around 353,000 tonnes in 2009–10. Almost all of Australia's wool is exported, the major markets being China, Italy and India (Pearson and Lennon, 2010).

Graph 16.35 shows total wool production for the years 1911 to 1973 and shorn wool production from 1974 onwards.

6

Our vast pastoral landscapes have pockets of supporting agriculture developed initially in the nineteenth century for fodder crops for horses and vegetable growing on pastoral or ‘squatting’ stations often maintained by market gardeners of Chinese birth who had come for the gold rushes. These pockets are found on the edges of country towns, valley floors and floodplains for fodder crops, waterholes and oases.

Australia’s rural landscape in the better watered areas of the coasts and inland slopes was originally one of large colonial estates and squatting stations, often with small village style settlements for the workers located near the main homestead. These estates were subdivided in the 1860s, 1890s and 1920s for closer settlement in smaller farm allotments, often 640 acres and this size of farm formed the main unit in the closer settled rural landscape in the twentieth century. Over the last 150 years, the rural landscapes of south-east and south-west Australia have largely been defined by a mix of cereal cropping, livestock and dairy farming, and commercial forestry in native and plantation forests. Until the late 1980s most of the small towns and regional centres depended on these industries for their viability (Race, Luck and Black, 2011:20).

Climatic extremes challenged farmers leading to inventions and methods of production that have often put Australia at the forefront of world agricultural development: inventions of the combine header harvester and stump-jump plough, improved strains of drought and diseaseresistant wheat. Australian farmers have also been quick to adopt large scale mechanisation, irrigation practices and grain handling and storage systems in order to remain pricecompetitive. The challenges of access to fresh water, the legacy of high amounts of fertilisers, massive clearing, over grazing, a tyranny of distance, transport costs and feral animals, have tested Australian farmers to their limits. In response, farming has become more mechanised and reliant on technologies, as well as holistic as it seeks to become more sustainable such as the widespread adoption of cropping cultivation practices involving minimum tillage and direct seed drilling.

3. Rural land use

Land use is fundamental to understanding landscapes, agricultural production and the management of natural resources and may include the production of goods (such as crops, timber and manufactures) and services (such as defence, recreations, biodiversity and natural resources protection). It also includes urban and rural settlement. Land use choices have a 7

major effect on food production, the natural environment and communities. Land use change is central to much current debate in Australia around agriculture and food and fibre security, forestry, water management, mining, climate change mitigation and adaptation, population, urban expansion, biodiversity protection, community development and landscape aesthetics (Mewett et al., 2013:4).

Rainfall, or the lack of it, is the most important single factor determining land use in Australia. About one quarter of Australia's 769 million hectares is mostly desert and not used commercially. Early settlements established near reliable water supplies resulting in population concentrated along the coast, mainly in the comparatively fertile, well-watered east, south-east and far south-west. The establishment of irrigation schemes also played an important role in populating areas of eastern inland Australia from 1900. The discovery of the Great Artesian Basin provided reliable water for the pastoral industry in the dry inland grazing country from the 1880s.

Climate and soils play a major role in determining where agricultural activities occur. As the driest continent in the world (excluding Antarctica), effective rainfall (where rainfall exceeds evaporation) is extremely important in Australia.

Map 4: Annual average rainfall across Australia Most of our soils are naturally infertile and shallow, with deficiencies in phosphorus or nitrogen. Thus superphosphate and nitrogenous fertilisers are widely used. The choice of crop

8

and pasture species within a farming system is also important to return nutrients to the land system, maintain soil structure and minimise water logging.

Areas that have been cleared for crop and pasture production tend to coincide with five to nine months of effective rainfall per year. In areas of effective rainfall of more than nine months, generally only higher value crops or tropical crops and fruits are grown, while in areas with effective rainfall of less than five months, cropping is usually restricted to areas that are irrigated.

The total area of land used for agriculture in Australia in 2005-06 was almost 456 million ha or about 59 % of the continent (ABARE-BRS 2010). Livestock grazing on natural vegetation and modified pastures is the most widespread activity, accounting for 429 million ha or 56 % of Australia (Map 5; Figure 1). Much of this occurs in the arid and semi-arid regions of Australia. Other agricultural uses occupy a much smaller portion of the continent, including: cropping (27 million ha or 3.5 % of Australia) and horticulture (0.5 million ha or less than 0.1%) (Figure 1).

Map 5: National scale land use map 2005-6 (ABARE-BRS 2010) 9

Intensive land uses, a class which includes intensive plant production (e.g. glass houses and nurseries) and animal production, manufacturing, residential, services, utilities, transportation, mining and waste, occupied in 2005-06 a relatively small proportion of the continent (3 million ha or 0.4%; Figure 1), mainly centred around the capital cities.

Approximately 283 million ha (36%) of Australia was used for conservation and natural environments. This was made up of formal nature conservation such as national parks and conservation reserves which occupied 8 % of Australia, other protected (including Indigenous) lands which occupied around 13 % and minimal use (other natural areas with minimal production use) which occupied a further 16%.

In 2005-06, production forestry (commercial production from native forests on public and private land) used 11.4 million ha (1.5 % of Australia) and plantation forestry (including environmental and other plantings) used 2.3 million ha (0.3%) (ABARE-BRS 2010).

Grazing (55.8%) Conservation and natural environments (36.7%) Cropping (3.5%) Forestry (1.8%) Water (1.6%) Intensive uses (0.4) Horticulture (0.1%)

Figure 1 Proportion of major land uses in Australia (2005-06) Over 90 % of Australia’s rural landscape is either grazed rangelands or nature conservation reserves. This is in great contrast to European style modified pastures, cropping and horticulture.

In 2011-12 Australian agricultural land uses were worth $42.6 billion in production. In the same year agriculture and forestry (including support services) employed around 478,000 people (ABS 2013). Agricultural land uses also provided a range of benefits for biodiversity, soil and water management, over and above their value for food production.

10

Australia can be divided in 3 agricultural zones as indicated in Figure 2.11: 1. High rainfall zone     

Occurs in a narrow strip along Australia's east coast, Tasmania and the south-west corner of Western Australia.

Rainfall relatively high (> 500 mm annually) and reliable.

Fruit and vegetable growing and dairying are very important in the south, while the growing of sugar cane, tropical fruits and vegetables are prevalent in the north.

The dominance of sown pastures allows high stocking rates of beef cattle throughout the region. The region is generally too wet for sheep.

This highly productive coastal region comprises about 6 % of Australia and contains all its major cities.

2. Wheat belt  

  

Transitional zone between the continent's moist coast and its arid interior.

Produces almost all of Australia's cereal grain. Most farms also raise livestock. Wheat is grown throughout the zone, but in the south it is combined with sheep farming and the growing of barley and oats. In the north, cattle are widespread with sorghum and oilseeds also grown.

Livestock densities in the wheat belt are lower than on the coast, particularly in the north where pastures are not sown.

Under irrigation, the region produces fruit and wine grapes and in the north, cotton crops.

The wheat belt represents 14 % of the continent's land area.

3. Pastoral zone  

 

Agriculture is restricted to the raising of livestock on native pastures.

Most of Australia's inland area (comprising 72 % of Australia) is too dry to sow pasture or crops. However, three-quarters of this arid region has sufficient plant cover to support extensive grazing, provided ground water is available.

Beef cattle are raised on huge properties in the north while sheep farming predominates in the south.

In far northern Australia (comprising 8 % of the continent), monsoonal rains allow vigorous growth of native grasses during the wet season. However, once the rain stops, these grasses dry very quickly and cease to be nutritious leading to very low cattle stocking rates.

Within these areas there is also some irrigation based farming, drawing on stored surface water (much of it from dams on major rivers and streams) and underground sources.

1

Much of the following section on distribution and production has been derived from Commonwealth Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 2005. Australian Agriculture and Food Sector Stock Take.

11

■ ■ ■

Pastoral — 5400 farms Wheat–sheep — 54 300 farms High rainfall — 57 800 farms

Figure 2: Australian agricultural zones, 2003 Much of the pastoral zone is characterised by low rainfall, less fertile soils, and large area farming activities involving the grazing of cattle for beef and sheep for wool and mutton. As the name implies, the principal farming activities in the wheat–sheep zone are cropping (principally winter crops), and the grazing of sheep (for wool, lamb and mutton) and beef cattle. Prime lamb, beef and wool production are undertaken in the high rainfall zone. The coastal part of the high rainfall zone is also where much of Australia’s dairy industry is based, with some dairying in inland irrigation areas.

Water availability for agriculture is becoming critically important for the maintenance and further development of agriculture in many areas. Access to irrigation water from bores or river systems is licensed by the States, which also own major storages on rivers. Distribution of irrigation water from State owned facilities is mainly by private irrigation companies to which users pay fees for delivery. Increased trading of water is contributing to a more economically efficient allocation of the resource between competing users. Such trade proved to be particularly useful in ensuring that scarce water was available for higher value end uses in the 2002–10 drought.

Around 75 % of the water used in Australia is in irrigated agriculture, with the output accounting for a substantial proportion of the gross value of agricultural production.

Commodity production that is wholly or partly dependent on irrigation includes rice, cotton, grapes, fruit and vegetables, sugar and dairying.

In common with other types of agricultural pursuits, irrigated agriculture has incurred significant environmental cost in some areas. Land and water degradation in Australia, excluding weeds and pests, is estimated to cost up to $3.5 billion a year. One-third of Australian rivers are in a degraded condition as a result of high water extraction rates and high nutrient runoff from surrounding land. At least 2.5 million hectares, or 5 % of cultivated land, is affected by dryland salinity.

The situation can be expected to improve, however, as users of land and water resources become more conscious of the adverse effects of environmental degradation on agricultural sustainability. For example, increased efficiencies in water use achieved through the adoption of newer technologies and better on-farm water management, as the allocation of water becomes increasingly market determined, will help reduce some of the degradation stemming from previous irrigation practices.

12

4. Agricultural production and distribution

The contribution of agriculture to the Australian economy can be measured in a number of ways. The most direct measurement available is the gross value of agricultural production. In 2010-11 the gross value of total Australian agricultural production was $46.0 billion, an increase of 16% (or $6.3 billion) from 2009-10. This increase can be partly explained by recovery from the long drought. The gross value of crops in Australia rose by 18%, while the value of livestock products increased by 25% to $7.2 billion, driven predominantly by increased prices (ABS, 2011b).

Irrigated agricultural land comprised less than 1% of all agricultural land in Australia in 2009–10. However, the gross value of production from irrigated land was $11.5 billion, which represented 29% of the total gross value of agricultural production.

In 2009–10, 26.0 million hectares were sown to crops, excluding land used for pastures and grasses. Western Australia cropped 8.6 million hectares while New South Wales and South Australia cropped 6.9 million hectares and 4.1 million hectares respectively. Wheat was Australia's biggest crop in terms of area used, with 13.9 million hectares planted, or over half the land area dedicated to cropping. In terms of production, sugar cane for crushing reaped the most plentiful yield, with 80.2 tonnes per hectare.

In Australia, cereals are divided into autumn-winter-spring growing (winter cereals) and spring-summer-autumn growing (summer cereals). In temperate regions, winter cereals such as wheat, oats, barley and rye are often grown in rotation with pastures, such as subterranean clover, medics or lucerne, and with other winter crops such as canola, field peas and lupins.

Rice, maize and sorghum are summer cereals grown in rotation with winter cereals in some

13

areas.

Broad acre grain crops Wheat is produced in all states but primarily on the mainland in a narrow crescent known as the ‘wheat belt.’ Inland of the Great Dividing Range, the wheat belt stretches in a curve from central Queensland through New South Wales, Victoria and southern South Australia. In Western Australia, the wheat belt continues around the south-west of the state and some way north, along the western edge of the continent.

Graph 16.16 shows wheat production in Australia from 1910 to 2010.

In 2009–10, farmers planted 13.9 million hectares to wheat and harvested 21.8 million tonnes. Western Australia planted and harvested the most wheat followed by New South Wales and South Australia (graph 16.17).

New varieties of wheat have enabled it to be grown in more marginal areas. In particular, the 14

development of dual purpose winter wheat varieties which, like oats, allow grazing of the plant up to a few months prior to harvest, have become very popular in some areas.

Cotton Cotton is grown mainly in inland areas of northern New South Wales and southern Queensland, primarily for its fibre (lint), and relies heavily on irrigation water to produce profitable yields. When the cotton is mature, seed cotton is taken to a gin where it is separated (ginned) into cotton lint and cotton seed. The lint is used for yarn while the cotton seed is further processed at an oil mill, where the short fibres (linters) remaining on the cotton seed after ginning are removed. These fibres are too short to make into cloth, but are used for wadding, upholstery and paper. The seeds are then separated into kernels and hulls. The hulls are used for stock feed and as fertiliser, while the kernels are crushed to extract oil. The oilcake residue (crushed kernels) is ground into meal and used as a stock feed.

In 2009–10, cotton lint production was estimated at 352,000 tonnes from 196,000 hectares harvested. New South Wales was the dominant growing state, with 61% of total production (214,000 tonnes) on 109,000 hectares. Queensland harvested 88,000 hectares and produced 138,000 tonnes of cotton lint.

Sugar cane Sugar cane is grown commercially in Australia along the east coast over a distance of more than 2,000 kilometres from Maclean in northern New South Wales to Mossman in Queensland. In 2009–10, a total of 389,000 hectares of sugar cane was cut for crushing.

More than 90% (29.3 million tonnes) of the 31.2 million tonnes of sugar cane cut in 2009–10 was grown in Queensland from 370,000 hectares.

15

Horticulture –fruit and vegetable distribution Australia’s horticulture industry comprises fruit, vegetables, nuts, flowers, turf and nursery products. The industry is labour intensive and mostly seasonal, often dependent on overseas backpackers. It comprises mainly small-scale family farms. However, there is a growing trend towards medium to larger scale operations. Australia’s horticulture industry has long enjoyed a domestic and international reputation for quality, primarily due to our high standards across all stages of the supply chain, from farm to consumer.

In 2009-10 Australia’s horticultural industry was the nation’s third largest agricultural industry—based on gross value of production –behind the meat and grain industries. The major product groups had the following gross value of production in 2009-10: fruit and nuts $4,060 million; vegetables $3,023 million; nursery, flower and turf production $1,324 million (ABS, 2011b).

The horticultural industry contributes significantly to the prosperity of people living in rural and regional Australia. There are 63,300 people employed in Australia to grow fruit, vegetables and nuts for the domestic and export markets. A further 9,800 are employed in fruit and vegetable processing (excluding wine manufacturing) (DAFF, 2011). The value of production for annual and perennial horticultural crops are approximately equal, with the total area under production in Australia around 250 000 hectares.

The major horticulture growing areas in Australia include the Goulburn Valley of Victoria; the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area of New South Wales; the Sunraysia district of Victoria/NSW; the Riverland region of South Australia; northern Tasmania; southwest Western Australia and the coastal strip of both northern New South Wales and Queensland.

Nursery production generally occurs close to the capital cities. Some horticultural produce from the southern states is directed to processing. Queensland vegetables typically supply the southern states during the cooler June to October period.

16

Banana, pineapple, mandarin, avocado, mango, fresh tomato, capsicum, zucchini and beetroot production is concentrated in Queensland; stonefruit, oranges and grapes in New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia; processing potatoes in Tasmania; fresh pears, canning fruit and processing tomatoes in Victoria; and apples and fresh vegetables in all States.

Australia has a significant tropical horticultural industry including large irrigation schemes in the Ord River in Western Australia and the Burdekin River in Queensland. Bananas, mangoes, avocados, papaya, lychees, cucurbits (rockmelons, watermelons, pumpkins) together with tropical nursery plants and vegetables are important industries. There is also a growing “rare and exotic fruit� industry producing fruits such as: rambutans, durians, tamarillos, carambolas, jackfruit and mangosteens.

Value (millions of dollars) of exports of horticultural commodities 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 Fruit & Nuts 829 774 760 898 778 651 Vegetables

365

410

384

397

372

460

Total

1194

1184

1144

1295

1150

1111

(ABARES: Agricultural Commodity Statistics 2011, Table 134) In 2010-11 Australia exported $1.111 billion of fresh and processed fruit, nuts and vegetables. Export of fresh produce (particularly fruit) is limited by quarantine restrictions in a number of countries including Japan, USA, mainland China, South Korea and Taiwan.

In 2010-11 Australia imported $1.808 billion of fresh and processed fruit, nuts and vegetables. A wide range of fresh produce is prohibited from entering Australia on the basis of quarantine restrictions. Produce is imported into Australia out of season or during periods of domestic shortage due to production failures, an inability to produce the commodity and/or production shortfalls relative to demand.

Vegetables Australia produces an extremely wide variety of vegetables. Many vegetables, such as spring onions, mushrooms and fresh tomatoes are grown close to major capital cities, taking advantage of proximity to markets and low transport costs. However, the majority of vegetables are produced in the major irrigation areas of each state and territory, where access to land and water are the key drivers of investment.

In 2009-10, potatoes were by far the largest vegetable crop in terms of both area and production, covering 36,400 hectares and producing 1.3 million tonnes. South Australia, Tasmania and Victoria produced over 75% of the total potato crop. Tomato production ranked second, with Victoria and Queensland producing over 80% of the 472,000 tonnes grown nationally.

Fruit (excluding grapes) A wide variety of fruit is grown in Australia, ranging from tropical fruit such as mangoes and bananas in the north to pome, stone and berry fruits in temperate regions. The most significant crops in terms of production weight in 2009-10 were oranges, bananas and apples.

17

Wine grapes Grapes are a temperate crop optimally requiring rainfall during the winter period and warm to hot conditions for ripening. In addition, most grape producers in Australia use irrigation water to supplement rainfall. An absence of late spring frosts is essential to prevent the loss of developing fruit. Grapes are grown for winemaking, drying and table use. The better known grape producing areas are the Adelaide Hills, Barossa Valley, Clare Valley, Riverland, McLaren Vale and Coonawarra (all in South Australia); Sunraysia and the Yarra Valley (Victoria); the Hunter and Riverina (New South Wales); the Swan Valley and Margaret River (Western Australia); and the Tamar Valley and Coal River Valley (Tasmania). There are boutique vineyards in all States.

In 2009-10, Australia's vineyards produced 1.5 million tonnes of wine grapes on 152,000 hectares of bearing vines. South Australia produced 48% of the total grape harvest, with 731,000 tonnes, while New South Wales (443,000 tonnes) and Victoria (284,000 tonnes) also produced large quantities.

Beef Cattle Cattle farming occurs in all States and Territories. While dairy cattle are mainly found in southern and coastal districts, beef cattle are concentrated in Queensland and New South Wales.

Beef cattle distribution Beef cattle production is often combined with cropping, dairying and sheep production. In the northern half of Australia, cattle properties and herd sizes are very large, pastures are generally unimproved, fodder crops are rare and beef is usually the only product. The industry is more intensive in the south, with higher stocking rates per hectare, improved pastures and use of fodder crops, rotational grazing practices and increased inputs such as fertiliser and animal health products. The beef cattle farming industry remained the largest sector in 2009-10, comprising nearly a third of businesses classified to the agriculture 18

industry.

Cattle numbers in Australia increased to a peak of 32.7 million in 1976, after which seasonal conditions and profitability saw numbers drop dramatically. For the five years from 1984, the size of the herd remained relatively stable. Between 1989 and 1998, cattle numbers increased gradually, despite unfavourable weather conditions continuing in many parts of Australia.

After a slight decline in 1999, cattle numbers increased to 27.9 million in 2002. Dry conditions over much of the country in 2002-03 saw cattle numbers fall but improved conditions in some regions in the following three years resulted in the national herd reaching a 30-year high of 28.4 million head in 2005-06.

Dairy cow distribution By 30 June 2010, the Australian cattle herd numbered 26.6 million head, consisting of 2.5 million milk cattle and 24.0 million meat cattle. Victoria had the most milk cattle (1.6 million) while Queensland grazed the most meat cattle (11.2 million). Graph 16.25 shows total cattle (milk and meat) numbers in Australia from 1890-2010.

19

Sheep Sheep and lamb numbers reached a peak of 180 million in Australia in 1970. Poor market prospects for wool after 1990 had a marked impact on the flock size, with numbers generally falling until 2003, when there were 99 million head. Following a slight recovery in 2004 and 2005, sheep and lamb numbers had fallen to 68 million head by 2010 – their lowest level since 1905. In 2010, New South Wales carried the most stock with 24.4 million head, followed by Western Australia (14.7 million) and Victoria (14.4 million).

Wool production and associated sheep meat Graph 16.26 shows total sheep and lamb numbers in Australia from 1890 to 2010.

20

Forests2 Area of native forest by state, 2006

Note: ACT native forest area (123,000 ha) too small to show.

(Bureau of Rural Sciences, 2008, Australia’s State of the Forests Report 2008).

Forests are classified as land with trees with an actual height greater than two metres and 20 % crown cover. It is estimated that when Europeans settled Australia in 1788, forests covered one-third of the continent. This had fallen to less than one-fifth (19%) in 2006, when Australia’s forested area totalled 149.2 million hectares. Native forests accounted for 147.4 million ha and plantation forests covered 1.8 million ha.

About two-thirds of Australia’s native forest (81.7 million hectares; 66.6%) is woodland forest with 20–50% crown cover. An estimated 81.9 million hectares (67%) of Australia’s native forest is privately managed on private and leasehold lands, including Indigenous owned and managed lands (DAFF, 2013).

One of the most important uses of native forests is their significance for biodiversity 2

This section is abridged from Australia's Environment: Issues and Trends, Jan 2010 (ABS, 2010)

21

conservation. More than 16,500 plants and 3,800 animals have been identified as forestdependent and 1287 forest-dwelling species are listed as threatened (i.e. vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered) under the Australian Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). Sixteen % of Australia's native forests were formally protected in nature conservation reserves in 2006.

Plantations are intensively managed stands of trees of either native or exotic species, created by the regular replacement of seedlings or seeds. Hardwood plantations are chiefly composed of eucalypt species, while softwood plantations are mainly pine species. Australia’s total commercial plantation forestry area was 2 million ha in 2011-12 (0.26 % of Australia's area), an increase of 36 % since 2000 (Gavran, 2013). Most large scale plantations are in the higher rainfall areas (greater than 600 mm per year) with only a small proportion occurring in major agricultural areas such as the Murray-Darling Basin. In 2011-12, Victoria had the largest areas of plantations, followed by Western Australia and New South Wales (Table 2).

The area of plantations has increased significantly since 2000 in all jurisdictions except the Australian Capital Territory. New plantations are defined as those established on land not previously used for plantation forestry. About 4 200 ha of new plantations were established in 2011-12, or about 0.2 % of all plantations. This is the smallest area of new plantations established since the early 1990s (Gavran, 2013).

Table 2 Change in plantation forest area in area, 2000 to 2012

Australian Capital Territory New South Wales Northern Territory Queensland South Australia Tasmania Victoria Western Australia Total Data source: from Gavran 2013.

2000 ‘000 ha 15

2012 ‘000 ha 8

Change 2000-2012 % -48.1

319 7 191 136 185 319 314 1 485

392 42 233 188 311 434 405 2 013

22.9 504.5 22.2 39.0 67.8 36.1 29.1 35.6

Although the major purpose of plantations is to produce wood for harvest, plantations have a range of environmental benefits, just like native forests. They can help improve water quality, mitigate dryland salinity and contribute to carbon sequestration (removal of atmospheric CO2for use in photosynthesis). They can also provide important habitat for Australia’s native plants and animals.

22

Eucalypt native forest Acacia native forest All other forest Data source: National Forest Inventory 2011

Map 6: Australia’s native forest coverage 5. Land use change3 Land use change arising from intensification, diversification and innovation provides increased economic returns to farmers, improved productivity and outcomes that have implications for natural resources such as soil, water and biodiversity. Information about the areal extent of land use and land use change is therefore central to decision-making in Australia around issues such as food and fibre security, water management, mining (including coal seam gas extraction), biodiversity protection, climate change mitigation and adaptation, urban growth and community development.

In 2010-11, the ABS estimated there were 135 447 farm businesses in Australia, a reduction almost 6.5 % from 1997-98 (Table 3). This trend was not reflected across farm size classes (Table 3).

Changes in farm size can arise from a range of factors including pressures to increase economic productivity and efficiency as well as sub-division for peri-urban lifestyle blocks or for more intensive production. Farms may become bigger when they are amalgamated to improve their financial viability - larger farms tend to be more productive and more profitable, and are better able to benefit from changes in production technology (Sheng et al.

3

Much of this section is based on Mewett J, Paplinska J, Kelley G, Lesslie R, Pritchard P and Atyeo C, 2013.

23

2011). Between 1997-98 and 2010-11 the number of properties greater than 2 500 ha in area increased by 0.9 per %. Alternatively, farms may become smaller when they are subdivided with more intensified operations in response to increasing land value. Between 1997-98 and 2010-11 the number of properties less than 50 ha in area increased by 11.7%. Farms between 50 and 2 500 ha declined from 101 112 properties in 1997-98 to 88 048 properties in 201011, a decrease of 13 % (Table 3).

Table 3 Number of farm holdings in Australia, 1997-98 and 2010-11 Number of holdings Farm size (ha) 1997-98 2010-11 50 ha and below 30 043 33 571 50 to 2 500 ha 101 112 88 048 Greater than 2 500 13 705 13 828 ha Total 144 860 135 447 Data source: ABS 1999; ABS 2012a.

% change 1998 to 2011 11.7 -12.9 0.9 -6.5

Livestock grazing (on both native and modified pastures, including dairy) accounted for more than 429 million ha or 56 % of the continent in 2005-06 (ABARE-BRS 2010). Beef cattle increased by around 19 %, and dairy cattle also increased by around 11 %. Regionally, changes in the area under grazing between 1992-93 and 2005-06 were variable. Increases in the proportion of area under grazing were largest in the coastal regions of New South Wales and southern Queensland where dairying and mixed farming has declined. Decreases in the area under grazing were most evident across much of the southern Australia.

Between 1992-93 and 2005-06 sheep numbers declined by 34 % from 138 million head to 91 million head (ABS 2012a) mainly through western Victoria, central New South Wales and south-western Western Australia. This may have been due to a significant change in relative returns from wool as compared with cropping and other livestock enterprises. A shift from wool to meat sheep also occurred (ABARE 2007). Regionally, declines in the area of land used for grazing are generally associated with increases in the area of land used for cropping, and nature conservation. Grazing decreased and cropping increased in 62 % of statistical local areas (SLAs) where both land uses occurred. Grazing decreased and nature conservation increased in 44 % of SLAs where both land uses occurred. Areas where direct conversions from one land use to another have occurred cannot be identified from the data used in this analysis.

The area of land used for cropping increased by around 7.5 million ha or 39 % to 27 million ha between 1992-93 and 2005-06. Increases were evident across much of southern Australia for example inland New South Wales, western Victoria, parts of South Australia and southwest Western Australia, probably in response to climatic and economic conditions. There was a small decline in the area of northern cropping.

Investigation of changes in canola and cotton production between 1985-86 and 2005-06 also show increases within the Murray Darling-Basin for both commodities. Canola had lower production and a small spatial distribution in 1985-86 but by 2005-06 it had expanded to most of south-west Western Australia and south-east South Australia. Cotton also expanded its distribution with the higher production areas moving south. This may be a response to climatic factors such as water availability.

24

cropping dominant pasture dominant cropping/pasture no/rarely crop or pasture

Map 7: Cropping and pasture patterns, 1992–93 to 2005–06 Conservation and natural environments is defined as land used for nature conservation, managed resource protection and other uses including stock routes, residual native cover, defence and Indigenous use. In 2005-06, an area of 283 million ha (37 % of Australia) was classified as conservation and natural environments with the largest areas located in central and northern Australia.

There was an increase of 15 million ha (37 %) in the area of formal nature conservation (a component of conservation and natural environments comprising strict nature reserves, wilderness areas, national parks, natural feature protection, habitat/species management areas and protected landscapes) between 1992-93 and 2005-06, especially in south-west Western Australia, the southern parts of South Australia, and coastal New South Wales. In some regions, decreases in the area of land used for grazing are associated with increases in the area of land used for cropping and nature conservation. In summary, over all of Australia the biggest land use changes in 13 years were increases in land used for cropping and land reserved for nature conservation.

Ownership change

25

From 2004 to 2008, approximately 17% of land in the agriculturally productive area of rural Australia changed ownership. Change tended to be higher in the more densely populated states (NSW, Vic, Tas) due to the relatively greater strength of non-agricultural demand for land in the former states. The cropping belt exhibited a relatively higher incidence of aggregations than other parts of rural Australia and there is a strong ‘neighbour effect’ in land aggregation, with more than half of all aggregations involving the acquisition of contiguous land parcel (Pritchard et al., 2012). Currently, foreign ownership of agricultural businesses, agricultural land and water entitlements is quite low.

Current pressures on land resources and issues surrounding land use change include mining and other extractive industries (such as coal seam gas) and peri-urban growth. Policy interventions to promote climate change mitigation, including carbon farming, are also likely to influence land use change in the future. The productivity of land used for agriculture varies widely, and there is concern that even agricultural land at the more productive end of the spectrum is under pressure from competing land uses. As a result, a growing number of Australian state agencies are reviewing the classification of agricultural lands with the aim of identifying productive or strategically important agricultural land.

Mining A number of regions across Australia are being explored and developed for mineral and energy resources. Mining operations occupied approximately 0.02 % of Australia in 2005-06 (ABARE-BRS 2010). Some of these industries have been operating for a long time and include extraction of coal, uranium, iron ore, nickel, bauxite, gold, lead, copper, zinc, mineral sands, coal seam gas (CSG) and diamonds. Depending on the resource being mined, extraction generally involves surface (open cut) or sub-surface techniques.

26

Map 8: Agricultural areas by value of production with coal and coal seam gas extraction [Data source: Geoscience Australia 2012; ABS 2012b] The surface footprint of individual mining activities can vary and has the potential to impact land and water resources not just within land occupied by the mine, but in the surrounding area where there are potential cumulative impacts. This is the case with the rapid and extensive expansion of the CSG industry in Australia, which has led to increased pressures on land and water resources in some regions. Over 80 % of prime farmland in Gippsland, Victoria, is under licence to mine brown coal and CSG. All prime cropping land in Australia, for example - Liverpool Plains NSW and Cecil Downs Queensland, is under threat right now from CSG mining and is only being stopped by farmer blockades and slow environmental court determinations. Turning prime cropping land into 100s of CSG wells or huge quarries will prohibit ever using the land for agriculture again. There is not one example of a major cropping operation co-existing with CSG in Australia (Keane in D’Occhio et al., 2014).

Peri-urban lands Peri-urban lands, that is those that lie on the fringe of the major built-up areas of cities, are among Australia's most productive agricultural lands. Although broadscale agricultural production remains important, the declining viability of some traditional agricultural enterprises is leading to a number of responses, such as increasing numbers of landholders leaving traditional farming and a rapid transition into new activities including people taking up residences on acreage, hobby farms, the running of intensive production enterprises in areas close to major population centres with desirable climate and scenery.

It appears that the primary motive for land ownership in these areas may be changing from production values to lifestyle values. The term ‘peri-urbanisation’ is being used to describe these changing rural lands, and is defined as the process of increasing population and associated infrastructure such as road building, water supplies, fencing and housing in the rural areas of Australia (MacLeod and Kearney, 2011). The process has given rise to three new categories of land use described as: 1. Production agriculture:  large areas remain devoted to traditional agriculture - dominant agricultural activities are financially viable  adoption of new technologies and farm aggregation are critical to increasing productivity and viability  land values are generally determined by potential for agricultural production  off farm income supplements farm income to maintain family welfare.

2. Amenity agriculture:  areas on the periphery of cities, large towns and near the coast  often concentrated in areas where farms are small and not financially viable  off-farm income is critical to family welfare while agricultural income plays a supplementary role  large changes in farm ownership with both amalgamation and subdivision occurring at the same time – a process termed 'churning'  land values are generally determined by their amenity values.

3. Mixed urban/rural agriculture:  proliferation of small blocks around cities and large towns  agriculture as a hobby and often irrelevant as a major source of income  essentially these are 'residential' areas with increasing population and high turnover.

27

Peri-urban lands can be characterised as having non-urban zoning, lower population density and larger plot sizes than suburban areas (Aslin et al. 2004). As cities and towns expand, the growth of built up areas at the fringe may compete with agricultural lands. The value of agricultural commodities produced (VACP) as a proportion of the state total is often many times higher than the equivalent proportion of land area used for agriculture (Table 1). The Melbourne region (ABS Statistical Division), for example, had only 2 % of the total area of Victoria's agricultural holdings in 2010-11, but this area produced 10.3 % ($1.2 billion) of the State’s VACP (Table 1).

Table 1 Value of agricultural commodities produced (VCAP) in state capital city statistical divisions and the area of agricultural holdings Statistical Division (SD)

Sydney (New South Wales) Melbourne (Victoria) Brisbane (Queensland) Adelaide (South Australia) Perth (Western Australia) Greater Hobart (Tasmania) Darwin (Northern Territory) Data source: ABS 2012a; ABS 2012b.

VACP as a % of the state

6.4 10.3 4.3 3.3 7.6 3.6 13.4

Area of agricultural holdings as % of state 0.2 2.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.5 0.6

As urban areas expand, agricultural production may intensify, with a shift to higher yielding or higher value production - for example, a move from grazing to intensive horticulture. Less intensive agricultural activities may relocate or decline. Horticulture accounts for a much higher proportion of VACP for capital city statistical divisions than for the corresponding States as a whole (Table 2). Peri-urban farmers often benefit from being close to a larger, wealthier consumer base and a larger labour market. They can, however, be negatively affected by restrictions on farm activities such as noise, odour, stock movements and the use of agricultural sprays.

Table 2 Horticulture as proportion of VACP for capital city statistical divisions and states Statistical Division

Sydney (New South Wales) Melbourne (Victoria) Brisbane (Queensland) Adelaide (South Australia) Perth (Western Australia) Greater Hobart (Tasmania) Darwin (Northern Territory)

Horticulture as proportion of VACP for SD 47.3 62.0 50.7 92.3 61.0 49.5 79.1

Horticulture as proportion of VACP for state 11.9 22.5 23.7 20.5 14.5 30.1 23.6

Note: Horticulture includes cut flowers and turf, fruit, and vegetables.

Data source: ABS 2012a; ABS 2012b.

28

There is a complex relationship between the process of urban growth and the consequent changes in the area of agricultural land and agricultural intensification in capital city regions (Error! Reference source not found.3). For example, in Sydney between 2009-10 and 201011, both the area under agriculture and the number of agricultural businesses declined by 13 % and 11 % respectively (Error! Reference source not found.3), while population increased.

In contrast, in the Adelaide region, the area under agriculture and the number of agricultural businesses increased by 18 % and 2 % over the same period. This occurred along with an increase in population of over 9 000 people. The changes in area under agriculture reflect the dynamic nature of land use change in response to environmental, social and economic factors, however, it is not possible to confidently say which land uses were converted from or to agriculture.

Figure 3: Agricultural intensification in capital city regions The Teng and Ha families have cultivated a seven ha Chinese market garden on sandy loam soils at La Perouse in southern Sydney for the last 100 years producing parsley, shallot, bok choy, spinach and broccoli for local markets including restaurants, but it is under threat from expansion of the nearby Southern Metropolitan cemetery (SMH, 16-17 Aug 2014).

Horticulture is the “big sleeper� in the food security debate in Australia. Until alternative forms of horticulture are developed, including hydroponics, horticultural production will continue to depend on high-value agricultural land. Irrespective of where horticulture occurs in Australia it is under extreme pressure from alternative uses of productive landscapes (D’ Occhio and Alders, 2014).

Since settlement, coastal horticultural plains have progressively shrunk and are continuing to shrink because of urban expansion. Figure 3 highlights the ongoing pressure on rich nearurban agricultural land. The water allocation issues in the Murray-Darling Basin and

29

elsewhere are well documented. Other competing economic demands within high-value agricultural zones include coal, mineral and gas extraction.

Horticultural production relies heavily on fertilisers and there is considerable global pressure on sources and costs of nitrogen and phosphorus. Horticulture is also reliant on the regular movement of food from farm to point of sale. This makes it highly vulnerable because of Australia’s heavy dependence on imported fossil fuels. An interruption to motor fuel could cause urban shortages of chilled and frozen foods within seven days and dry food within nine days. Even with the present low national consumption of fruit and vegetables, Australia is considered a net importer of vegetables when processed food is included.

A national campaign to increase fruit and vegetable consumption would need to seriously consider whether Australia has the capacity (land, water, nutrients, finance) to expand horticultural production on a scale required to meet the increase in global demand.

The analysis identifies 2007 land parcels subdivided into 10 or more new land parcels sized between 4000 and 80 000 square metres and excludes any non-residential developments (such as industrial).

Map 9: Major peri-urban land parcel subdivision, February 2007 to February 2008 Land use intensification is also evident in urban and rural–residential expansion at the fringe of major cities and other areas of population growth. This generally involves a move out of broadacre agricultural land uses, an increase in population, changes to community composition and to the structure of the local economy. Land parcel subdivision is also part of this process. An ABS analysis of land parcel subdivision in Australia between 2007 and 2008 shows periurban locations where land parcel subdivision has taken place (map 9). These locations are concentrated around mainland capitals and are widespread across eastern New South Wales, south-western Western Australia, Victoria and coastal Queensland.

30

6. Drivers of Change 4 Changes in agriculture are a result of the developments of a range of underlying driving forces—both direct and indirect— and their many interactions. According to the International assessment of agricultural knowledge, science and technology for development: global report, for UNEP (Macintyre et al., 2009), the main indirect drivers are: 1. Demographic developments, including changes in population size, age and gender structure, and spatial distribution 2. Economic and international trade developments, including changes in national and per capita income, macroeconomic policies, international trade, and capital flows; 3. Sociopolitical developments, including changes in democratization and international dispute mechanisms; 4. Scientific and technological developments, including changes in rates of investments in research and development and the rates of adoption of new technologies, including biotechnologies and information technologies.

5 Education, cultural and religious developments, including changes in choices individuals make about what and how much to consume and what they value; 6 Global environmental change, including nutrient cycling, water availability, biodiversity and soil quality—all of which are affected by global environmental change.

In addition, a number of direct drivers relevant to agricultural systems are: 1. Changes in food consumption patterns, i.e., consumptions levels of crops and meat products; 2. Land use change, i.e., land availability as a constraint to agriculture; 3. Natural resource management, i.e., the impact of agriculture on natural resources and the constraints of natural resource availability and management on agriculture ; 4. Climate change, i.e., the impacts of climate change on agriculture ; 5. Energy, i.e., the relationship between energy and agriculture and the impact of large-scale bioenergy production; 6. Labor, i.e., the relationship between agriculture and the demand and supply of labor force.

Economic, environmental and social drivers, as well as government policy are factors influencing agricultural land use change in Australia. Economic drivers include changes in industry performance arising from market and production cost pressures, the introduction of new technologies and new market opportunities. Environmental drivers for agricultural land use change result from pressures on resource availability including the condition of land and the availability and quality of water for agriculture. Social factors include changing income distributions, urban-rural interactions, the vulnerability and adaptive capacity of communities and population change. Policy interventions by governments such as subsidies, taxes, property rights, infrastructure and governance arrangements are also influential (Lambin et al.

2003).

Identifying the principal factors determining future competitiveness and sustainability of agriculture and food supplies includes both domestic and international influences. Prices received for agricultural and food outputs and the amounts of product entering markets are determined by global demand and supply as well as by multilateral and bilateral trade 4

This section is based on chapter 3 of the Australian Agriculture and Food Sector Stocktake, 2005,

updates from ABS and commentaries.

31

arrangements. Prices and access are also affected by national specifications concerning pest and disease risks and other matters such as food safety and labelling.

Within Australia, commercial interactions along the supply chain are central to competitiveness, as are the innovative capacity of technology, impact of skills and expertise and management of the natural resource base. In addition, Australian farmers and the food sector are operating in a dynamic environment of community expectations about animal production practices, production inputs and protection of the nation’s flora and fauna.

A more detailed discussion of the issues follows: Marketing challenges and consumer tastes Globally, consumers are becoming more affluent, sophisticated and discerning. Tastes are changing and converging across national and cultural borders. Consumer preferences for product range, quality and food safety are driving change throughout the food production chain. Manufacturers and retailers are changing processes and developing new products to meet mainstream consumers’ needs for taste, convenience, choice and price. As well, the number of brands in each category in supermarkets is narrowing as retailers endeavour to maximise the turnover of product per unit of shelf space.

The growth in niche markets catering to tastes outside the mainstream will continue to provide important opportunities for some farmers and manufacturers. For example, ‘organically certified’ food grown and prepared under specified conditions represents a still relatively small but significant segment of the market that has developed and grown in response to expanding consumer demand for ‘natural’ foods.

International trading environment Australian farmers have remained competitive in a global food market despite Australia having low levels of subsidies relative to our major competitors. Future growth in Australian agriculture is likely to depend more on export markets than on the comparatively small domestic market. Important trade related factors likely to affect the agriculture and food sector include world market conditions, barriers to trade such as tariffs and import quotas, quarantine and technical requirements such as labelling, maintenance of global competitiveness and market image, and biosecurity related decisions in Australia and elsewhere affecting imports and the disease status of exports.

Australia has seven Free Trade Agreements currently in force with New Zealand, Singapore, Thailand, US, Chile, the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) (with New Zealand) and Malaysia, and five bilateral FTA negotiations underway with China, Japan, Korea, India and Indonesia, and four plurilateral FTA negotiations: the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP), the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), the Pacific Trade and Economic Agreement (PACER Plus), and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP). High-quality, comprehensive free trade agreements can play an important role in supporting global trade liberalisation and are explicitly allowed for under the World Trade Organization (WTO) rules.

Biosecurity With the Australian agriculture and food sector becoming more globalised, there is heightened risk to this country’s favourable pest and disease status. Factors contributing to this increased risk include growing volumes of trade, a significant rise in international travel, 32

demographic and environmental changes, intensification of agricultural production, and the threat of bioterrorism.

Intensification of food production tends to exacerbate the occurrence and impact of diseases, and climate variability and change has introduced another layer of complexity in the emergence and spread of diseases. The success of agriculture in Australia has been due, in part, to the relative freedom from diseases that impact food production elsewhere. Indeed, the high biosecurity status of Australia ensures safe and healthy domestic food and gives Australia preferred status in global food markets. However, recent funding cuts in quarantine and agriculture departments remove the ability to identify, intercept and control biosecurity threats so that Australia’s clean green image is under threat (Langridge et al., 2014).

Food traceability requirements and systems are likely to be increasingly mandated in response to demands from consumers and governments in Australia and overseas. These processes will be important for addressing disease incidents, as well as concerns about potential bioterrorism. Product traceability mechanisms such as the National Livestock Identification System will become more widespread and impose particular management requirements through the supply chain from the retail level to farm business.

Supply chain dynamics Globalisation and deregulation over the past 20 years have meant that structural change in industries around the world will increasingly affect Australia. There is a wide differential in the relative size and market power of participants in the food supply chain. The nature of farming is that the majority of businesses tend to be small to medium sized family businesses.

This is in contrast to predominant business structures higher up the supply chain, where there is a global trend for food and beverage industries to be dominated by large multinational manufacturers and retailers.

Australian food and beverage manufacturers will need to exploit a range of factors in order to be successful in the global marketplace. Such features include a plentiful supply of food raw materials at world market traded prices; agricultural production systems that are widely perceived as environmentally clean and largely free of many of the diseases prevalent in competitor countries; and a strong food regulatory framework that helps underpin the safety of Australian food products. Australia also rates favourably in terms of its transport infrastructure, research and development, education and skill levels, management competencies, relatively low sovereign risk, and proximity to major Asian growth markets.

However, an impediment to the expansion of food manufacturing is that it is relatively labour intensive and Australian labour costs are high compared with those in many other countries, particularly in the Asian region.

While there is public concern about fewer and larger companies operating in the food supply chain, multinational companies operating in Australia can also bring benefits through linkages to major international customers. Furthermore, by moving away from wholesale market based purchasing to direct contracts with farm suppliers, large retail chains are likely to have a direct influence in the adoption of better farm level production processes aimed at producing higher quality output on a more economically sustainable basis. However, Australian farmers are the highest cost producers in the world because of Australian standards and regulations imposed including wheat as well as intensive horticulture. Farmers are then expected to compete domestically and internationally with imports which do not have the same regulation (social/environmental) imposed on them or the farmers are 33

compensated for the cost of the regulation as with the EU CAP (Brighenti in Langridge et al., 2014).

Infrastructure in the agriculture and food sector Transport costs are a significant proportion of total farming costs; up to 21 % of the value of grains produced in Australia is spent on transport (Tulloh and Pearce 2011). Many Australian farms are located considerable distances from ports or other transport hubs and from processing plants. Weather also imposes logistical constraints: monsoonal rains mean that some roads in northern Australia are inaccessible for months each year.

Development will depend on the capacity of Australia’s infrastructure to handle future volume growth. Infrastructure of key importance includes transport, ports, telecommunications including provision of broadband internet and mobile phones, energy distribution and irrigation facilities. Australia needs to plough A$600 billion into agriculture by 2050 if it is to realise the opportunity from the global increase in demand for food. Much of that investment will need to be in infrastructure, rather than production. Without this funding, Australia’s ageing road, rail and ports will come under increased pressure, while whole new systems will need to be constructed if the north is to join other parts of the country as a major farming area. Expanding agriculture will therefore require a large-scale investment in this infrastructure. And, crucially, this infrastructure needs to be in place before significant food production begins. The government has a very important role in contributing to infrastructure development across northern Australia as part of nation building.

Industry and federal and state governments want to increase Australia’s food production in order to contribute to the unprecedented global demand for food, particularly in China. They see northern Australia as having significant potential for food production despite previous large scale failures [see Dr Bruce R. Davidson’s seminal work, The Northern Myth: Limits to agricultural and pastoral development in tropical Australia, 1972]. The agricultural industry must itself look at non-traditional sources of capital for infrastructure. Resource companies' recent major investment in the northern beef industry is an interesting development, which illustrates the capital reserves of resource companies, their large investment potential, and their capacity to drive major transformations in how industries operate (D’Occhio et al., 2014).

Investment in irrigation infrastructure is particularly important to agriculture and much of the irrigation infrastructure is ageing and needs replacement presenting a challenge for water supply authorities and water users. Very few new water storages have been constructed over the past decade due to public opposition driven by environmental concerns and costs. New irrigation opportunities are likely to be restricted largely to water derived from water saving and recycling projects.

Management skills and labour supply Australia faces challenges with its ageing agricultural workforce where the average age of farmers is 56 years. The current mining and resources boom has exacerbated agricultural workforce pressures. The number of agricultural graduates produced every year in Australia may only be one-fifth of total demand (Office of the Chief Scientist 2012). This trend is partly countered by the increase in the average size of agricultural holdings, increasing mechanisation and other technological advances. For example, a farm of approximately 1000 hectares in the Ord region of Western Australia would only need between three and six permanent staff, depending on the crops produced and farming methods.

34

With increasing requirements for business planning, enhanced market awareness, the use of modern technology such as computers and global positioning systems and better agronomic management, modern farm managers will need to become increasingly skilled. Higher levels of formal education will increasingly be a feature of farm manager credentials, particularly for new entrants, as will increased use of information technology on farms. Better performing farmers appear to make greater use of modern communication tools and are more adept than the average at investigating market opportunities, at researching customer requirements, at business planning and financial management, risk management and at adopting the latest farming techniques.

A modern agronomist will need the traditional knowledge of cropping systems, fertiliser regimes, field pathology and also know techniques for assessing crop health based on analysis of the light reflected from crops and captured on images generated from drones or satellites. Farmers are already using computer models to assess the status of their soils, crops and farming systems to support their decision making.

Innovation and research and development Agriculture is among our most technologically advanced industries, yet most Australians are largely unaware of the revolution that is occurring on our farms. Agricultural R&D capability ranks among the best in the world, and more recently Australia has developed a strong capability in climate change research including studies on impacts, adaptation and mitigation.

This capability can be implement to enhance agricultural production both in Australia and its region (Langridge et al., 2014).

A key driver in improving farm performance is the provision and adoption of new technologies. Increasing the competitiveness and sustainability of the Australian agriculture and food sector requires a more consistent national strategic agenda for agricultural research and development; more active involvement of research investors in collaboration with research providers developing programs of work; greater coordination of research activities across industries, research organisations and issues; and investment in human capital to ensure a skilled pool of research personnel in the future as many current scientists retire.

The cost of adopting new technologies will influence research take up. Adoption and adaptation by the agricultural industries of publicly funded research outcomes is more likely under an ‘open access’ approach, rather than where restrictions are applied through intellectual property rights and an overemphasis on commercialisation. Finding a balance will be increasingly important to the future progress of the sector.

However, despite the current government’s northern development strategy plan, Australian agriculture may contract as declining oil production accelerates. The days of cheap energy are over, so Australia needs to invest in developing non-fossil fuel technologies while still being productive. Encouraging organic produce is a requirement as the chemicals which fostered the 'green revolution' are running out fast. People need to be encouraged to choose farming as a career. Yet there are few indications that any politician (let alone any political party) has fully grasped the immensity of the challenge facing Australia to continue to be able to feed the nation let alone export.

An imminent food boom to replace the mining boom in Australia is expected to double agricultural outputs to feed growing Asian demand. Much discussion and swift debate about 35

this economic opportunity has ensued in the past 12 months, demonstrating Australian responsiveness and entrepreneurship. But a longer-term strategy based on genuine scientific inquiry is also needed to answer fundamental questions like where would the land, water, nutrients and farmers come from? Agricultural scientists can help Australia ‘farm smarter, not harder’. Unlocking the ‘soil bank’ to access stored nutrients from past decades of fertiliser application can increase agricultural productivity and reduce farmers’ vulnerability to fluctuations in climate and fertiliser availability (Cordell in Langridge, 2014).

Biotechnology offers potentially significant benefits for agricultural productivity and natural resource management. Some of Australia’s major competitors, such as the United States, Canada, Argentina and Brazil, already make substantial use of genetically modified (GM) crops, and China is making large investments in the technology. Around eight million farmers in 17 countries are growing GM crops. Australia could be placed at a competitive disadvantage if it does not manage the adoption of GM crops appropriately.

A major issue, for both consumers and industry, is community acceptance of GM technology.

The development of GM products with direct benefits to consumers is likely to assist in this regard. However, partly as a result of community pressures, policies in most Australian states currently do not allow the commercial release of GM crops other than cotton and carnations.

Issues such as crosspollination with non-GM crops, segregation of supply chains and legal liability will also need to be addressed in order to gain wider acceptance of GM crops among Australian farmers. Much of the R&D for GM crops has been undertaken by commercial companies, whereas over 70 years of government agencies work in R&D has been abandoned or privatised and there is a policy assumption that world class R&D can occur on a 3 year contract system but there is an finite number of qualified persons willing to work in such an environment (Holmes in Langridge et al., 2014).

Community perceptions of farming Perceptions of farming in the broader community can be expected to affect the industry through what is viewed as acceptable or preferred in the marketplace and through (sometimes associated) policy approaches by governments. Issues including climate variability, water scarcity, animal welfare and animal rights, live stock exports, organic and free range produce, chemical use on farms, environmental degradation and declining biodiversity have led to increasing demands on farmers to conduct and communicate their farming practices so as to protect their ‘social licence to farm’. Farmers are increasingly expected to demonstrate their social and environmental responsibility as a pre-condition to being allowed to carry out their preferred farming and commercial practices. Current examples include the live animal export trade, battles over protection of aquifers from mining, and contests over rural carbon emissions.

As Australia becomes more highly urbanised and its economy more diversified, the community at large is steadily becoming less connected with agriculture and unable to understand the thinking behind how farmers run their businesses and concentrating rather on rural environmental issues. A social disconnection has resulted and draconian legislation to appease urban voters rather than working together. Farmers are ‘on the defensive against other industries, activities and land uses that compete for the same water, soil and land’ (The Land, 7 August 2014:5).There is also an ethical dimension. What would an agricultural system in Australia that does not exploit animals look like? What would be the yield, economic, social, health, environmental and climatic costs and benefits for moving towards such an agricultural system?

36

As resources become scarce and society’s expectations more diverse and demanding, farming can expect that social licence issues will become both more difficult and more important.

Defending the ‘right to farm’ is unproductive; farmers instead need to lead the community in establishing the terms of agriculture's social licence and telling their story showing others what it means to be a good modern farmer (Williams and Martin, 2011).

Sustainable management of resources Since the 1980s public policy discussion of natural resource management has focused largely on emerging physical land and water degradation problems and constraints affecting the productivity of agricultural and food industries. Resource management issues are likely to be pre-eminent among the various domestic policy challenges facing Australian government and agriculture over the next couple of decades especially in relation to reform of water allocation and climate change adaptations. One-third of Australian rivers are in a degraded condition as a result of high water extraction rates and high nutrient runoff from surrounding land. At least 2.5 million hectares, or 5 % of cultivated land, is affected by dryland salinity. The situation is improving however, as users of land and water resources become more conscious of the adverse effects of environmental degradation on agricultural sustainability, and adopt better on-farm water management, which as the allocation of water becomes increasingly market determined, will help reduce some of the degradation stemming from previous irrigation practices.

Innovation in wheat breeding has dramatically changed yields enabling ‘doing more with less water’. The average yield of Australia’s dominant grain crop, wheat, changed little during the 1960s and 1970s. Then, from the mid-1980s to the turn of the century, three changes almost doubled the average wheat yield in south-eastern Australia. The first was the idea of ‘waterlimited yield potential’. A benchmark was set: a crop should produce about 20kg of grain per hectare for every millimetre of water that it used. The second change was canola’s introduction into the cropping system. Farmers soon noticed that the yield of wheat was substantially greater if it was grown after canola, rather than after other crops. The third change was the increasingly rapid uptake of conservation farming techniques. Thanks to new and effective herbicides, tillage was no longer required to kill weeds (Passioura, 2013).

Conservation tillage in broad acre cropping helps promote improvements in soil carbon, water accession, reduced soil erosion and nutrient loss as well as cost savings and other production benefits. In 1996 conventional tillage (ploughing up the soil prior to sowing seed) was the most common practice, by area, in all states except Western Australia and South Australia. Fifteen years later, in 2010 it was the least common practice in all states except Tasmania; ‘no tillage’ had replaced it as the most common cultivation practice (Lesslie, Mewett, and Walcott, 2011:10).

In the last decade public policy concerns have extended beyond these matters to embrace future management arrangements for land, water and the diversity of native flora and fauna.

The underlying issues are complex and relate to matters of resource access, sovereign risk affecting investment prospects and costs of capital, resource pricing, trade in water and other resources, alternative means to manage public and private interests, and the respective roles of regulation and community based catchment planning in achieving local, regional and broader social goals.

In 2004, the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) agreed on the National Water Initiative (NWI) to enable a comprehensive range of water reforms including defining access rights, fostering water trade, providing water for environmental outcomes, assigning risk 37

transparently in response to reallocation of water from consumptive to environmental use, and accounting for the sourcing and disposition of water more clearly. A decade long drought has required further improvement to the operation of water markets, implementing a risk assignment regime associated with water property rights, and progressing transparent processes for water resource planning to determine allocations for consumptive and environmental purposes. The Murray Darling Basin plan is not fully accepted but wetter conditions have ameliorated the current environmental watering needs.

Biodiversity Management of native vegetation and enhancement of biodiversity, flora and fauna is a major issue. The impact of different land management regimes on the sustainability of productive resources and biodiversity is an important consideration in this debate, and just where landholder responsibilities for publicly sought outcomes begin and end is also a key issue.

Who should be accountable for those outcomes and what role farmers should play in funding their delivery? A range of policy approaches such as regulation, community/catchment based solutions and other market based instruments, such as stewardship payments, have been trialled. Regulations by governments to pursue land management and environmental objectives through the native vegetation retention legislation can be costly in terms of foregone production, missed development opportunities and rural community resentment.

The paradigm shifting, highly successful Landcare movement established in 1989 has resulted in a more treed environment as catchments are replanted and farmers realise the benefits of riparian and roadside vegetation corridors so that agricultural landscapes are now seen as not just ‘as sites of production…but as fragile and complex agro-systems incorporating a number of non-productive elements such as native flora and fauna.’(Lockie, 2000:26). Landcare is a national network of more than 4000 locally-based community groups. More than 40 % of farmers are involved in Landcare and many more practice Landcare farming. Landcare farmers make significant contributions to combating soil salinity and erosion through sound land management practices and sustainable productivity.

In Australia, biodiversity is associated almost exclusively with indigenous flora and fauna, separated in practice from agricultural production, and despite 200 years of massive clearing of forests and woodlands to create European style agricultural landscapes, the native vegetation is still very evident. Abandoned farmland is associated with loss of production and farming families but it may also contribute to increased biodiversity and alternate production values like tree plantations in higher rainfall zones (Beilen, Lindborg and Queiroz, 2011:244-5).

Changing land use reflects a general shift in Australian government policies from sociospatial equity to economic efficiency in agricultural production, and farmers are dependent on the marketplace with its contrariness in commodity prices (Tonts, 2000). While landscape change may be triggered by agricultural failure, non-farmers see it as ‘natural’ and back to nature. Conversely, over the time of Landcare in Australia, a ‘good farmer’ has come to mean one practising agricultural production and restoration of native vegetation, a major environmental transformation. Farmers are now actively involved in the natural resource management. In 2011-12, approximately 63% of Australian agricultural businesses reported having native vegetation on their holdings. Of these, 58% protected their native vegetation for conservation purposes (ABS 2013).

38

Farmers are looking to support outcomes like the Murray–Darling Basin 'Living Murray' Initiative, reducing the amount of water allocated to agriculture in the eastern states to help the environment. The Australian Government Biodiversity Fund assists farmers and land managers to enhance biodiversity and build greater environmental resilience across the landscape by providing support for revegetation of native plants or better management of existing native vegetation. However, State laws for retention of native vegetation, especially regrowth have been seriously contentious and opposed by many farmers and resulted in the murder of an environmental compliance officer by a disgruntled farmer in northern NSW in August 2014.

Climate change adaptations Adaptation to climate change is no longer a question of ‘if’ but rather of ‘how’, ‘where’ and ‘how fast’. For the regions of Australia in which most people live and most food and fibre is produced — i.e. the eastern seaboard and southern and south-western Australia — the greenhouse effect is leading generally to a hotter, drier climate, marked by more extreme weather events like fires, floods and cyclones, but less rainfall and even less runoff overall.

Rising sea levels and increasing heat stress might also constrain development. Climate variability and change has introduced another layer of complexity in the emergence and spread of diseases. Large bushfires in the key forested water catchments of south-western and south-eastern Australia have big impacts on biodiversity and the quantity and quality of water resources.

Climate change is real and long lasting and will have major implications for the way that natural resources are managed at the regional level. Changes in water availability will in turn have major implications for vegetation management. An extremely variable climate has always been a fundamental driver of ecological processes and land use systems in Australia, shaping adaptations among our unique biota and distinctive farming systems. Australia’s inherent climate variability –‘a land of droughts and flooding rains’ - is now being exacerbated by global warming, and underlying climatic parameters are moving (Campbell, 2008).

Research and development programs which can reduce greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural activity while increasing productivity and responding to the impacts of climate change are a priority. Government, industry and the wider community need to decide on what management support tools and training are required for farmers and rural communities to improve their use of climate information in planning decisions and developing strategies to ensure future production.

Many primary producers feel that climate change and mitigation efforts to reduce greenhouse gasses are no more important than other significant challenges they face including low prices, increasing costs, labour shortages and declining profitability. Rejecting climate change in this way allows them to cope with a difficult situation and to avoid the sense of powerlessness and the inevitable negative impact on their business and lifestyle. At the same time, primary producers understand and acknowledge the need for adaptation and mitigation strategies such as preparing for prolonged drought, improving productivity and reducing costs. The difference is that it is about improving their response and readiness to natural cycles of climate change and/or improving the efficiency and viability of their business. As a result, they have conflicting responses. While they may indicate that they do not believe in human induced ‘climate change’, many indicate that they have or would take up adaptation and mitigation initiatives for changes in climate and to improve the viability of their business.

39

Primary producers reported significant barriers to adapting to changes in climate such as financial stress from prolonged drought, an ageing workforce and succession issues (Donnelly et al., 2009).

Demographic change Rural landscapes are also changing as a result of demographic shifts with population decline resulting from restricted employment opportunities in remote pastoral and marginal dry land farming areas, and population growth from counter-urbanisation by ‘sea changers’ or ‘tree changers.’ The average farmer is 56 years and for the first time in about two centuries Australia's agricultural industry model would, in just 20 years time, not be based around the family farm, but will evolve into a more corporate business structure, even for those family farms that do remain (Salt, 2012) Rural landscapes are increasingly valued for their aesthetic and environmental qualities, with land prices in excess of its agronomic potential. Indicators of this, as well as land price rises, include increasing rural population, increasing numbers of rural landholders, increasing numbers of small rural properties (5-40 ha) is and decreasing numbers of farmers (Race et al., 2011:18). These multi-functional landscapes in the ‘rural commuting’ zone can offer commercial advantages for high value agriculture, horticulture and niche crops but there is concern over the ‘shared space’ of these new lifestyle properties and the newcomers lack of farming culture and local knowledge. Signs of a contested landscape are seen in the different values, aspirations and demands for services of newcomers and traditional residents and wealthier peoples’ values tend to dominate in creating new landscapes. The ‘churning’ of local population-where people arrive and leave after a short time- is another aspect of this demographic change (Race et al., 2011:17-19).

Analysis of landscape zones in Europe by Antrop (2002) is informative for Australia where changing lifestyles create new landscape zones such as the rural commuting zone as distinct from the ‘deep countryside’ or ‘outback’ in Australia. As noted in the previous section on peri-urban lands, ‘amenity agriculture’ is practised in these rural commuting zones which are largely seen in Map 9 and this is where rural population numbers are increasing.

Summary There seems to be confusion arising from the analysis of the preceding twelve economic, environmental and social drivers, as well as government policy for trade, marketing, biosecurity, infrastructure, R&D, climate change and natural resource management. Trends show declining terms of trade, increasing imports and decreasing production with high costs, ageing farm owners and increasing debt which does not fit the government ideas of a ‘food boom’ to supply Asia. A serious analysis of Australian's agricultural options is currently needed to discuss the limits, the targets and what support is needed to achieve those outcomes - without rosy spectacles.

All of these drivers of change will have an impact on the morphology of rural landscapes – paddocks will be larger and grain crops will stretch away to the horizon, animals will be free range especially those usually penned like pigs and poultry, trees will be planted carefully to recharge aquifers in the rolling hillside country, horticulture will continue to expand on alluvial flats and rich soils although maintaining current irrigation levels will be a challenge, dairying will be in large aggregations and not dotted over the wetter countryside in small family farms as previously. Technological innovation will continue to be a major influence in shaping rural landscapes.

40

7. Rural Heritage Listing and Protection

The countryside still bears the vestiges of the many droving routes to metropolitan sale yards, wool stores, abattoirs, wharf facilities, railways, roads, and river and ocean transport systems that were developed to link the pastoral interior with the urban and market infrastructure needed to distribute the pastoral product. Windmills, fences, homesteads, shearing sheds, bores, stock yards, travelling stock routes, bush roads and railheads all changed the appearance of the country. These features of our landscape, as much as the vast interior itself, form an important part of our heritage. They are symbols of pastoral Australia and of the foundations of our national identity. Many of the iconic homesteads and woolsheds are listed on State government heritage registers. Australia’s rural heritage is protected as designed colonial farms and estates, many convict built, and many now relict landscape features; the associated agricultural landscapes are not protected under heritage controls as they continue to evolve as productive farms.

Each State and the Commonwealth maintain heritage registers that encourage conservation of listed places through the planning system. These heritage registers have been developed after 1974, in response to the growing recognition of the value of heritage to the community.

States have the power in the Australian Constitution to regulate land use and heritage listed places are protected through provisions of the local government planning schemes. Some States have Local Environment Plans [LEPs] with Heritage Overlays which identify heritage items, mostly buildings, and aim to protect the visual character of distinctive farming areas such as the vineyards of the Barossa Valley South Australia, the dairying of Tilba Tilba New South Wales], the apple orchards of the Huon Valley Tasmania. Most cities have an identifiable ‘bread basket’ area nearby which supplies vegetables, such as the Hawkesbury and Nepean valleys for Sydney, Gatton and Laidley Valley for Brisbane, Yarra Valley and Werribee for Melbourne (See Figure 3). Key grain growing areas of great fertility are renowned such as the Darling Downs of southern Queensland and the Liverpool Plains in NSW. Since the gold rushes in the mid nineteenth century, many country towns had Chinese market gardens.

Australia ICOMOS in 1992/3 undertook a study of Pastoral Technology and the National Estate. It was recognised that the Register of the National Estate listed many pastoral homesteads and shearing sheds, ‘big and obvious structures appreciated for their architecture, and in many instances for the use of local materials and vernacular building techniques.’

Beyond these are many structures and other evidence of technology that influenced the spread of pastoralism and the character of operations and landscapes produced that are generally poorly represented in the heritage registers (Walker and Forrest, 1995). With the exception of the ACT with its distinctive shepherds’ huts and outstations, pastoral technology places were not considered to be adequately represented on heritage registers.

Many homesteads and woolsheds have been the subject of detailed architectural studies (Freeman 1980; Freeman 1982; Sowden 1979). But the ICOMOS study found that as well as the main homestead building and woolshed, approximately 75 other types of structures are commonly associated with the rural property complex, and these are poorly represented in heritage registers.

The construction of the heritage register databases has some problems. Search the nationwide Australian Heritage Places Inventory (AHPI) for ‘agricultural landscape’ in the 41

Australian Heritage Places Inventory yields 3 entries –all now in National Parks –Mt Jukes and Mt Blackwood both near Mackay, Qld and Stirling Range, Cranbrook, WA. Search for ‘farm’ in title and there are 403 records. Search by ‘agricultural’ significance and description of ‘farm’ and there are 102 records. Table 6 below shows these inconsistencies with Queensland having the most places yet Victoria and NSW would be the most closely settled.

In the Queensland case the long description of places often refers to their associations with nearby farms as in the case of churches, schools or even military areas resumed from farms.

Table 6: No. of ‘farm’ associated places listed in the Australian Heritage Places Inventory 2012 National –all of Australia NSW Victoria Tasmania Queensland South Australia Western Australia Northern Territory

977 151 91 109 465 43 68 3

The Queensland Heritage Register shows the concentration on early colonial buildings—such as Cressbrook, Tarong, Gracemere, Nindooinbah, Burrandowan, Eidsvold, Booubyjan, Kilcoy, Canning Downs, Mount Abundance—but there are few listings after World War I. This concentration on the early colonial structures is due to lack of knowledge of the complete extent of the heritage resource of pastoral properties. For example, the earliest survivors seem to have been adequately documented (property histories, measured drawings, historic and contemporary photographs, oral histories) but not the representative or biggest at different periods (Lennon, 2003). The same could be said for Western Australia and western New South Wales.

In New South Wales, active farms as listings are far fewer than 'historic cores of former farms', e.g. Bella Vista; Elizabeth Farm & reserve, Rosehill; Prospect Hill (only its ridge is listed); Horsley, Fairfield; Coombing Park, Carcoar; Horningsea Park (in a suburb now); Saumarez, Armidale; Dalwood House, Branxton still surrounded by vineyards as it has been since 1840s but they're not listed. There are 65 Farms (working or perceived to still be 'farms') on the State Heritage Register. The Victorian heritage database has 200 records for ‘farming and grazing,’ mostly homesteads listed on the State Heritage Register such as Woodlands (1842) and the German Lutheran farms at Thomastown (1851). For ‘agricultural landscapes’ the database has 158 records including most in the previous category, and the Silvan Agricultural Area [renowned for its horticulture]. However, for ‘cultural landscape’ it has 200 records many gardens, parks, memorials, small islands, abandoned townships, goldmining fields and memorial sites.

In Tasmania many convict built farm buildings are listed and the agricultural landscapes of Brickendon and Woolmers intact from the early 1800s are also listed. They are part of the serial World Heritage convict sites. The Hagley mill cultural landscape is also listed.

Rural planning schemes offer protection through the LEPs. Historic buildings, associated structures, stonewalls, etc may be identified on the heritage overlay maps. Natural vegetation has been mapped in great detail in the eastern States along with biodiversity ‘hotspots’; there 42

is provision for retention of open space in new subdivisions. However, old place names and property layouts disappear along with manual farming practices.

Many of the heritage listed homesteads have been in the one family for many generations but that is changing as young people seek other careers and lifestyles away from the land. Former farm labourers have been replaced by new technologies and less staff are required so that many ancillary buildings become redundant and low maintenance regimes become the norm as ‘old hands’ with the traditional farm skills are replaced.

Landscape is a strong thread in Australian art and literature shaping community appreciation of landscape aesthetics and ways of ‘seeing’ the landscape such as the ‘red centre’ and the ‘sunburnt country’ (Bonyhady, 1985). Landscape heritage is a confluence of scenic amenity – the visual values –with natural heritage, historic, aesthetic and social values or community attachment to landscapes (Lennon, 1999). Research for scenic amenity showed that Australians valued coastal, mountain and water-based scenery over working agricultural landscapes (Queensland Government, 2007). The National Heritage listing of the Glass House Mountains in Queensland used artistic depictions and literature of acknowledged authors were as well as the inherent geological value of the volcanic plug landscape to assess its significance (AHD). However, the surrounding cultural landscape with its agricultural history is not protected.

8. Changes and Threats to rural landscapes The Australian rural landscape evolved differently to that of Europe with its medieval field patterns and clustered villages. Rural village development in Australia was either private on big estates or a day’s horse ride at break of slope or creek/river crossings where a government surveyor laid out a standard grid with the government block, church reserves and private housing blocks big enough for detached dwellings with front garden, backyard vegetable garden, outhouse, fowl yard and cow bail.

Australia’s rural landscape is dotted with ruins - stone buildings of wheat farms beyond Goyder’s line of adequate rainfall in South Australia (fig.4) , abandoned pastoral homesteads, windmills, shearing sheds, yards and outstations in a wide arc of the inland, cane cutters barracks in the tropical north, timber farm houses and dairies on slopes of the coastal range from Queensland to Victoria, oast houses and apple packing sheds in Tasmania, tobacco kilns in north-eastern Victoria and northern Queensland. They reflect unwise expansion in good seasons and changing production methods and markets. The semi-arid areas have always been marginal agricultural land, especially for producing traditional commodities like wheat and wool, and unprecedented drought over the last decade has further limited their future viability.

How much change is acceptable in Australian rural landscapes, and to whom? This question was posed by Lennon (2003) in relation to the World Heritage listed wild landscapes of Tasmania and other rural cultural landscapes but the deafening silence suggests that only changes caused by natural processes are acceptable there. Heritage landscapes, those special ones we want to protect, are those where historic evidence of use and occupation of the natural features give a distinctive character which also provides memories and associations.

Rather than viewing the colonial estate or the selection block as an historical product, if the emphasis is on rural landscapes as a process then the farmers’ cultural practices show the

43

relationship with an evolving agricultural landscape with its resilient features such as soil type, vegetation cover and water supply.

In the past Australians have regarded the wheat belt as their bread basket and the local dairy farm as the source of daily milk supplies but with the massive scale of agribusinesses and the declining number of traditional farms, the connection to and sense of place is lost. There have been big changes in scale and machinery used but how long is it before these changes in turn become historic? For example, the change from hand milking cows, to machine milking using four or six bails, to a ‘rotolactor’ which revolved allowing the farmer to milk many more cows simultaneously in the 1960s and now dairy farms of 2000 cows milked by robotic machines.

National parks or conservation reserves that have been resumed from farmland or public land sometimes contain farm buildings, many of which are restored to a previous appearance from a static past or made into an archaeological site and the associated yards and structures fall into ruin while the open areas are allowed to revegetate. There are many abandoned buildings in the rural landscape and where fire breaks are cut around these to stop wild fire, ephemeral tracks, yards and links to the wider landscape are demolished.

New technologies such as plastic sheeting instead of glass houses for horticulture and huge plastic covered grass hay bales feature in the urban fringe belt of rural areas while extensive blue covered bins protect the wheat harvest at reception points rather than the old tall concrete silos which dotted the wheat belt and marked railway sidings and inspired artists.

Windfarms are an increasing feature in agricultural areas and the source of both admiration for renewable energy proponents and protest by those often living nearby. Are these acceptable changes in the continuum of agricultural practice?

The materiality of rural landscapes is threatened by mining–both open cut coal mining in Queensland and parts of NSW and coal seam gas with its unknown impact on underground aquifers. This is a major current political issue in Australia as the energy is for export while the residue will be an ongoing problem for rural property owners.

Loss of wooded grazed landscapes to increasing vegetation regrowth in conservation reserves and unmanaged rural lands is also changing the appearance of rural areas. The reduction in sheep numbers and rabbit control across a vast area of the wheat belt and its fringes has resulted in a less nibbled landscape enabling woody weeds or native shrubs to regrow giving the once ‘neat’ landscape a mottled, unkempt appearance. Plantation forests have been planted on marginal farmland but large acreages of these were part of failed managed investment schemes and they now sit growing but unmanaged.

Changing rural use is happening with decreasing sheep numbers and an increase in less labour intensive cattle raising but yards, sheds and farm buildings remain and become dilapidated because of owner inertia, reallocation of management funds or lack of demand for recycling. On the other hand lifestyle or niche farming on small acreages is increasing in a wide belt away from cities and with it an alternate economy of trade in specialty products, often organic. Weekend farmers markets selling direct to urban consumers are popular and widespread, and the Slow Food movement and similar healthy food initiatives are gaining momentum. The rate and widespread distribution of participation in agricultural activity and its products is increasing and small scale but it is creating a new sense of sustainable agriculture among urban and peri-urban dwellers.

44

9. Conclusion Rural landscapes in Australia are changing. While cattle grazing covers over half the Australian continent, agricultural cropping and horticulture occupy only four %. Farm holdings are increasing in size; cattle are predominant over sheep even though Australia is still the world’s largest producer of fine wool. Many inland rural areas are being given back to Aboriginal traditional owners to manage. Grain crops are increasing in size and productivity is linked to global chains of supply and demand. More is being produced on less land with a much decreased labour force.

The average farmer is 56 years and for the first time in about two centuries Australia's agricultural industry model will, in just 20 years time, not be based around the family farm, but will evolve into a more corporate business structure, even for those family farms that do remain (Salt, 2012). Australia had about 134,000 farm businesses based on the latest available figures and 99 % were family owned and run. The highest number of farms, 32 %, was in NSW where the most people were also employed on the land out of any State or territory.

Farmers are being urged to ‘farm smarter, not harder’ on their land and to conserve soil moisture with new varieties and techniques. Agricultural innovation is a key to long term sustainability. Land care and conservation of natural resources is a key.

In the outback, except for new mining towns and camps, there is an abandonment of rural houses and structures and as amalgamations occur in cropping and mixed farming zones, these too exhibit many examples of abandoned structures. Alternatively there is a movement out of large towns and cities to rural residential blocks, often called hobby farms, where one or more breadwinner commutes to off-farm employment. This has resulted in a subdivision zone of varying sizes around many towns with consequent new roads, houses and sheds dotting the countryside. Land care plantings often show new treed windbreaks on new property boundaries and revegetation along water courses.

Heritage protection is only afforded to a small percentage of colonial estates as these are mostly in private ownership and there has been little or no discussion of what is a ‘traditional farm’ in Australia and how much change can be made to it as its owners adapt to new markets and technologies. Forested mountain and large woodlands, some riverine forest and large wetlands, generally all public lands, are often reserved as national parks and conservation reserves contributing to the mosaic of landscapes in rural settings.

The guidelines required for protecting evolved farming landscapes vary from State to State depending on the dominant crops and pastoral uses and the issues faced there. While there should be State and national policies of landscape protection, the agricultural lands require a fine grained approach either based on catchments or regions.

45

References ABARE 2007, Benefits of adjustment in Australia’s sheep industry, Australian lamb 07.1, Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Canberra.

ABARE-BRS 2010, Land Use of Australia, Version 4, 2005-06, Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences, Canberra.

ABARES 2013, Australia’s State of the Forests Report 2013, Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences, Canberra ABS 2010, 4613.0. Australia's Environment: Issues and Trends, Jan 2010, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra.

ABS 2011a, 7121.0. Agricultural Commodities; Australia, 2009-10, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra.

ABS 2011b, 7503.0. Value of Agricultural Commodities Produced, Australia, 2009-10, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra ABS 2012, 1301.0.‘Farming in Australia,’ in Year Book Australia, 2012, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra ABS 2012a, 7121.0. Agricultural Commodities; Australia, 2010-11, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra.

ABS 2012b, 7503.0, Value of Agricultural Commodities Produced, Australia, 2010-11, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra.

ABS 2013, 4627.0. Land Management and Farming in Australia, 2011–12, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra.

ABS 2013, 8155.0. Australian Industry, 2011-12, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra.

[AHD]Glass House Mountains National Landscape entry in Australian Heritage database, http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahdb/search.pl?mode=place_detail;search=place_ id=105815 Antrop, M. 2002.Rural-urban conflicts and opportunities, in Jongman R. (ed) New Dimensions of the European Landscape, Wageningen University Frontis Series, The Netherlands Aslin H, Kelson S, Smith J and Lesslie R 2004, Peri-urban landholders and bio-security issues - a scoping study, Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra.

Beilen, Ruth, Regina Lindborg and Cibele Queiroz, 2011. ‘Biodiversity and Land Abandonment: Connecting Agriculture, Place and Nature in the Landscape,’ in Roca, Zoran, Paul Claval and John Agnew (eds), Landscapes, Identities and Development, Ashgate, Farnham, 243-256 46

Bonyhady Tim, 1985. Images in Opposition: Australian Landscape Painting, 1801-1890, Oxford University Press, Melbourne, Campbell, A. 2008. Managing Australian Landscapes in a Changing Climate: A climate change primer for regional Natural Resource Management bodies. Report to the Department of Climate Change, Canberra, Australia.

DAFF, 2005. Australian Agriculture and Food Sector Stock Take, Commonwealth Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Canberra DAFF, 2011, Australian Food Statistics 2009-10, Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Canberra Donnelly David, Rob Mercer, Jenny Dickson and Eric Wu, 2009. Australia’s Farming Future Final Market Research Report- Understanding behaviours, attitudes and preferences relating to climate change, prepared for Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry.

D’Occhio, Michael, Henry Beverley, Taylor Chris, Gonzalez, Luciano and Alders Robyn, 2014. ‘To grow agriculture in Australia, farmers need to think like miners’, The Conversation, 6 August 2014 D’Occhio Michael and Robyn Alders, 2014.’We need to grow the right food to feed a healthier diet in Australia’, The Conversation, 12 August 2014 Freeman, P. 1980. The Woolshed: A Riverina anthology. Oxford University Press, Melbourne.

Freeman, P.1982. The Homestead: A Riverina anthology. Oxford University Press, Melbourne.

Gammage, Bill. 2011. The Biggest Estate on Earth, How Aborigines Made Australia, Allen &Unwin, Sydney Gavran, M. 2013, Australian plantation statistics 2013, Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences, Canberra.

Landridge, Peter, Cordell Dana, D’Occhio Michael, 2014. ‘Agriculture in Australia: growing more than our farming future,’ The Conversation, 15 July 2014 http://theconversation.com/agriculture-in-australia-growing-more-than-our-farming-futureLambin EF, Geist H, Lepers E, 2003, Dynamics of land use and cover change in tropical regions. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 28: 205–241.

Lennon Jane, 1999. ‘Artists of south-east Queensland Forests,’ in Australia's Ever-Changing Forests IV, CRES, ANU, Canberra, 356 –371

47

Lennon, Jane, 2003. ‘Values as the Basis for Management of World Heritage Cultural Landscapes’, in Cultural Landscapes: the Challenges of Conservation, World Heritage Papers 7, Paris: UNESCO World Heritage Centre.

Lennon, Jane, 2011. ‘Beyond the Pale, the plight of remote area heritage,’ Historic Environment, 23 (2): 26-32.

Lesslie R, Mewett J and Walcott J 2011, Landscape in transition: tracking land use change, Science and Economics Insights 2011.2.2, Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences, Canberra.

Lindenmayer, David, Saul Cunningham, Andrew Young, 2012. Land Use Intensification – Effects on Agriculture, Biodiversity and Ecological Processes, CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood.

Lockie, Stewart, 2000.’Crisis and Conflict: Shifting Discourses of Rural and Regional Australia,’ in Bill Pritchard and Phil McManus (eds), Land of Discontent, The Dynamics of Change in Rural and Regional Australia, UNSW Press, Sydney, 14-22 MacLeod, Neil and Kearney,Fiachra, 2011 Landscapes in transition - improving the sustainablility of peri-urban growth http://www.csiro.au/Outcomes/Oceans/Coasts/LandscapesInTransition.aspx [accessed 20 Aug 2014] McIntyre, Beverly D., Hans R. Herren, Judi Wakhungu and Robert T. Watson, eds. 2009.

‘Outlook on Agricultural Changes and Its Drivers’ in (IAASTD) International assessment of agricultural knowledge, science and technology for development: global report, for UNEP, Island Press, Washington DC Mewett J, Paplinska J, Kelley G, Lesslie R, Pritchard P and Atyeo C 2013, Towards national reporting on agricultural land use change in Australia, ABARES technical report 13.06, Canberra.

Office of the Chief Scientist, 012. Health of Australian Science, Australian Government, http://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/wpcontent/uploads/OCS_Health_of_Australian_Science_L OWRES1.pdf Passioura , John, 2013. Australia’s farming future: doing more with less water, The Conversation, 7 June 2013 Pearson, Michael and Lennon Jane, 2010.Pastoral Australia: Fortunes, Failures and Hard Yakka, a historical overview 1788-1967, CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood.

Pritchard, Bill, Melissa Neave, Deanne Hickey, Laurence Troy, 2012. Rural Land in Australia: A framework for the measurement and analysis of nationwide patterns of ownership change, aggregation and fragmentation, RIRDC Publication No. 12/038, Canberra.

Queensland Government, 2007. SEQ Regional Plan 2005–2026, Implementation Guideline No. 8. Identifying and Protecting Scenic Amenity Values,. Queensland Government, Brisbane.

Race, Digby, Gary W. Luck and Rosemary Black, 2011,’Patterns, Drivers and Implications of Demographic Change in Rural Landscapes, in Luck, Gary W., Digby Race and Rosemary 48

Black (eds), Demographic Change in Australia’s Rural Landscapes, Springer, The Netherlands and CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Australia,1-22 Salt, Bernard, 2012, Queensland Country Life, 24 Feb, 2012 Sowden, H. 1972. Australian Woolsheds, Cassell Australia, North Ryde, NSW. [SMH] Sydney Morning Herald, 16-17 August 2014:4-5, ‘Last man on the field at La Perouse’.

The Land, 7 August 2014. ‘Bringing back the ‘salt of the earth’: farmers move to retain ‘social licence’; 5 and editorial, p.24 Tonts, Matthew, 2000. ‘The Restructuring of Australia’s Rural Communities,’ in Bill Pritchard and Phil McManus (eds), Land of Discontent, The Dynamics of Change in Rural and Regional Australia, UNSW Press, Sydney,52-72 Tulloh, C. and Pearce, D. 2011. Transport Infrastructure for Australia’s Agricultural Needs, Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, Canberra, at https://rirdc.infoservices.com.au/downloads/11-096 Walker, M and Forrest, P. 1995. Pastoral Technology and the National Estate. Australia ICOMOS Inc. Williams, Jacqueline and Martin, Paul (eds), 2011. Defending the Social Licence of Farming Issues, Challenges and New Directions for Agriculture, CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood

49