A report on agricultural industry initiatives seeking to improve natural resource management and minimise environmental impacts in the Great Barrier Reef catchments July 2005 Contents 1 Introduction...................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Rationale ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Scope of Report.............................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Report Authorship & Compilation................................................................................. 2 2 Broadacre Industries - Grazing and Grain ................................................... 3 2.1 Grazing and Grain growing in the Great Barrier Reef catchments................................ 3 2.2 Industry Environmental Initiatives................................................................................. 3 2.3 Future Directions............................................................................................................ 8 3 Cotton Industry ..............................................................................................11 3.1 Growing Cotton in the Great Barrier Reef Catchments ............................................... 11 3.2 Industry Environmental Initiatives............................................................................... 11 3.3 Future Directions.......................................................................................................... 26 4 Dairy Industry ................................................................................................27 4.1 Dairying in the Great Barriers Reef Catchments ......................................................... 27 4.2 Industry Environmental Initiatives............................................................................... 27 4.3 Future Directions.......................................................................................................... 32 4.4 Further Information and Contacts ................................................................................ 33 5 Horticulture ....................................................................................................34 5.1 Horticulture in the Great Barrier Reef catchments ...................................................... 34 5.2 Industry Environmental Initiatives............................................................................... 35 5.3 Future Directions.......................................................................................................... 43 6 Sugar Industry................................................................................................44 6.1 Sugar Growing in the Great Barrier Reef catchments ................................................. 44 6.2 Industry Environmental Initiatives............................................................................... 44 6.3 Future Directions.......................................................................................................... 50 7 Cross Industry Activity .................................................................................51 7.1 Farm Management Systems ......................................................................................... 51 8 Conclusions .....................................................................................................52 9 References .......................................................................................................53 10 Appendix 1...................................................................................................54 1 Introduction 1.1 Rationale This report has been prepared by Queensland’s agricultural industry to assist government meet its reporting requirements for the Reef Water Quality Protection Plan (Reef Plan) 2004/2005 Annual Report. Information presented in this report will help inform the Annual Report, particularly Focus Area 2 – Adopting Sustainable Production Systems. Action 9 of the Reef Plan, under Strategy I, Monitoring and Evaluation states peak industry bodies are to evaluate and report publicly on the management practices being implemented and developed by industries to address the environmental impacts of agricultural industries on water quality entering the Reef. Action 3 and 4, under Strategy A - Self Management Approaches can be summarised as supporting industry led development of best management practices for agricultural land. A significant component of this action is a review of uptake of best management practices in agricultural industries in the Great Barrier Reef catchments. Under Action A3, the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries (DPI&F) was given lead responsibility to conduct this review in consultation with industry. A separate report titled A Review of sources of data indicating uptake of Best Management Practice (BMP) by rural landholders in the Great Barrier Reef catchments, prepared by the Department, details the results of this review. 1.2 Scope of Report This report includes information relating to the cotton, dairy, horticulture, grains, grazing and sugar industries. Due to the Reef Plan’s focus on diffuse sources of pollutants, a conscious decision was made not to include in the report the intensive animal industries such as poultry and pork as well as prawn farming and aquaculture. The Intergovernmental Organisational Committee has endorsed the scope of the report. Taking into account the rationale as outlined above, this report emphasises the development and delivery by industry organisations of initiatives that support the adoption of environmental management practices, rather than reporting on actual implementation. However, where available, implementation data is presented. Information is presented on a commodity-by-commodity basis. It should be noted that information presented is applicable beyond the Reef catchments, as the industries are not found solely in the reef catchments. Data presented is not reef catchment specific unless otherwise indicated. Each industry has reported, where able to, on the following: • Background: - General introduction to the industry in the Reef catchments, including regions where the industry is located, estimations of the number of growers/producers involved, area under production and the economic value of the industry. • Industry Initiatives – Information on each industry-led initiative that seeks to minimise impacts on the environment arising from farming and/or promote improved natural resource management. Initiatives include things such as codes of practice, farm management systems, and /or training and extension programmes. Information reported where able to includes: o Recommended Best Practice: - the way in which best practice is used, types of best practice recommended, the research and development of practices. o Current Implementation Levels: -data on participation and implementation of initiatives where available. o Initiative Evaluations/Industry Environmental Audits: -details of past evaluations/audits as well as any planned for the future. o Investment: - costs of industry investment in the initiative. o Strengths, Weaknesses and Gaps: - brief assessment of the initiatives strengths, weaknesses and gaps. • Future Directions: -a brief account of the industry’s desired next steps in the area of environmental and natural resource management. 1.3 Report Authorship & Compilation This report has been prepared jointly by staff from AgForce and the Queensland Farmers’ Federation (QFF), including contributions from QFF member organisations, CANEGROWERS, Cotton Australia, Growcom, and Queensland Dairyfarmers’ Organisation. AgForce represents Queensland’s broadacre industries of cattle, grain and sheep and wool. The Queensland Farmers’ Federation is a collective of intensive rural industry organisations representing the cotton, sugar, horticulture, dairy, meat chicken, prawn farming, nursery, aquaculture plus a number of smaller industries. Information and data presented in this report has been compiled by drawing upon a number of internal and public industry publications and studies, commissioned government and industry studies by consultants as well as anecdote and qualitative data from the industry organisations. 2 Broadacre Industries - Grazing and Grain 2.1 Grazing and Grain growing in the Great Barrier Reef catchments AgForce is a peak organisation representing Queensland's rural producers, which strives to ensure the long term growth, viability, competitiveness and profitability of broadacre industries of cattle, grain, sheep and wool in Queensland. Grazing and grain production is widespread throughout the reef catchments. Grazing occurs extensively throughout all of the reef catchments and is valued at well over $1 billion at the farm gate per annum. In the Fitzroy Basin for example grazing occupies approximately 85% of the catchment and is the largest agricultural contribution with an estimated farm gate value of $850 million annually. Grain production in the reef catchments is concentrated in the Central Queensland Cropping areas, which occurs in the Fitzroy and Burdekin catchments. Grain production in the Fitzroy alone is valued at over $230 million annually. Grazing occurs in a range of highly diverse environments in the reef catchments. This ranges from the Wet Tropics in the North to the grazing savannas in the Fitzroy and Burdekin. As a result, prescriptive practices for grazing management are not appropriate. Unlike more intensive industries, where production systems may be relatively homogenous, the extreme diversity of environments that graziers operate in render prescriptive practices invalid. 2.2 Industry Environmental Initiatives Since the final publication of the Reef Water Quality Protection Plan AgForce has come a long way in meetings its requirements under the Reef Plan. Although these are mostly incorporated around Actions A3, A4 and I9, AgForce has been involved in a large number of ongoing processes that will effect the on farm management environment. AgForce was highly involved in the Vegetation Management Legislation that was passed in 2004 and is in current discussions with the State Rural Leasehold Land Strategy. Not one of these processes can be viewed in isolation, as they all affect the ability of producers to effectively and optimally manage the resources on which they farm. AgForce is also involved in a range of programs looking at broader issues in rural Queensland. The Blueprint for the Bush is a joint partnership between AgForce and the Queensland Government. It is a proactive attempt to develop a ten year plan focusing on rural community renewal and development. The blueprint will identify ways of improving economic, social, environmental and cultural development in rural communities. One early issue that is arising from Blueprint discussions is the lack of producer trust towards the Government. Increased regulation has changed the nature of government services and presence in many areas and commonly Departmental roles have been changed from extension to compliance. The Reef Plan and AgForce’s response to it is a genuine indication that AgForce is keen to pursue win-win outcomes for its members and the broader community. AgForce values sustainable production that optimises production and environmental outcomes. AgForce is proud of the achievements regarding Reef Policy thus far, but notes that this is just the beginning. With this in mind AgForce looks forward to moving its industries forward into the 21st Century. 2.2.1 Grazing The grazing industry has invested heavily in natural resource management in its productions systems with a view to improving the knowledge base of the diverse grazing production systems. Knowledge generation assists in the development of tools that can assist producers improve their on farm management practices. Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA) is a levy funded body and has completed significant research in the Reef catchments. The EDGEnetwork is owned by MLA and boasts a range of practical workshop sessions and learning opportunities that help primary producers gain knowledge and develop skills to improve their livestock enterprises. The EDGEnetwork in conjunction with the DPI &F has developed Grazing Land Management (GLM), which delivers strategies to increase both profitability and sustainability. GLM is a regional package that assists producers to become more effective managers. The workshop consists of 7 modules, that is: 1. Understanding the grazing ecosystem, 2. Managing grazing, 3. Managing fire, 4. Managing sown pastures, 5. Balancing trees and grass, 6. Managing weeds, and 7. Developing a grazing management plan. The workshop uses an interactive style, building on the participants’ knowledge. A locally relevant case study property is used to look at different management options. AgForce believes that GLM has the ability to assist many producers to become better producers, through increasing production and reducing their environmental risk. AgForce is using the strong leadership it has shown through AgForward (see section 2.3.3) to encourage producers to attend GLM workshops. Other programs that MLA is currently working on include: • Sustainable Grazing for a Healthy Burdekin Catchment – the objectives of this project are: . Validate and further develop sustainable grazing management practices for the Burdekin catchment, . Develop tools for evaluating and documenting the effects of a range of resource management practices, . Refine computer models so that they can predict sediment and nutrient transport into waterways and throughout catchments, . Provide quantitative measures of the short-term effectiveness of recommended sustainable grazing management practices, (for example: Ecograze) and their impacts on forage production, cover, and runoff of water, sediment and nutrients for reducing sediment and nutrient export from grazed lands, . Refine and validate tools for setting realistic and measurable targets for reductions in sediment and nutrient loads in rivers based on robust and reliable modelling tools, and . Inform and make more knowledgeable 50% of beef producers in the Burdekin about implementing best-practice management guidelines and their impacts on forage production, water use efficiency, and runoff. • Keeping it in place: Controlling sediment loss on grazing properties in the Burdekin River catchment – a discussion paper • Sustainable Grazing for Tropical Savannas – Wambiana Grazing Trial, – the objectives of this project are: . Quantify the medium-term (8 years) effect of different utilisation rates and grazing strategies on resource condition, animal production and economic return, . Identify key management principles for the sustainable management of tropical savannas, . Develop practical management guidelines that allow graziers to manage their natural resources in a sustainable and viable manner, . Develop practical decision tools that producers can use in pasture condition assessment and forage budgeting, using climate forecasts to adjust stock numbers and adjusting animal numbers in relation to feed supply, . Develop empirical relationships that relate pasture production, animal production and soil loss to utilisation rate, and . Make at least 60% of producers in the Burdekin and Flinders catchments aware of these principles, guidelines and decision tools. • Quantifying and predicting patch selection by cattle under different management strategies - the objectives of this project are: . The impact of utilisation rate on patch and landscape selection by cattle at Wambiana will have been quantified, . The major biophysical determinants driving patch and land type selection at the Wambiana field site will have been identified, . Robust empirical relations that relate patch and land type selection by grazing cattle to soil and vegetation characteristics will have been constructed for the Wambiana site and these relations tested in a large, commercial paddock, and . Preliminary management guidelines to enable graziers to manage large, spatially heterogenous paddocks in a sustainable and productive manner will have been developed. • Neighbourhood Catchments - Minimising the Impacts of Grazing in the Fitzroy Catchment – the objectives of this project are . Quantify runoff, soil erosion and pollutant transport at a paddock to neighbourhood catchment scale, . Understand the causes and processes that lead to a decline in water quality at a paddock, property and neighbourhood catchment scale, and relate responses to catchment condition, . Increase the adoption of sustainable grazing and resource management systems at a property, neighbourhood, sub-catchment and basin scale within the Zamia Creek catchment at Bauhinia Downs, west of Moura, central Queensland, • Evaluation of MODIS for groundcover and biomass/feed availability estimates in tropical savanna systems – the objectives of this project are: . Establish relationships for ground cover and pasture biomass/feed availability between field measurements and MODIS indices, . Write guidelines for the use of MODIS data in the estimation of groundcover and biomass/feed availability at a range of scales, . Provide participating producers with the tools and techniques for collecting field data for property/paddock based calibration in support of prototype MODIS estimates of ground cover and pasture biomass/feed availability, and . Develop a prototype framework for the automated delivery of prototype remote sensing products of groundcover and pasture biomass and report on the requirements for operational and near-real time delivery. Rangelands Australia (RA), an initiative within the research organisation, is a strategic response to national reports on education and training in order to support sustainable management of Australia’s pastoral industries. It addresses the need for curricula/programs in rangeland management, based on courses that are more aligned with stakeholder needs, encompass practical as well as theoretical aspects of management, and better integrate production and environmental issues. The outcomes will be: . a new generation of cattle and beef producers, more qualified in rangeland management and with strong business and environmental credentials, and . a larger pool of skilled, qualified rangeland professionals to better support further development and change in the cattle and beef industries. The abovementioned projects do not represent a complete list of projects involving grazing in Reef catchments but demonstrates the very real investment that the Grazing industry has and will continue to make towards improving on ground land management practices. 2.2.2 Grain The grains industry has in the past been involved in numerous environmental programs that occur in the Reef catchments such as the DPI&F’s Central Queensland Sustainable Farming Systems whilst at the regional scale, regional Natural Resource Management (NRM) groups are integrating the existing management into their catchment and sub catchment planning processes. AgForce Grains has appointed a specific taskforce to pursue the development of a training package similar to GLM to enhance the ability of Queensland graingrowers to deliver sustainable production. Initially the taskforce is investigating those packages that currently exist for grain production. Already, the Grains and Research Development Corporation (GRDC), the DPI&F and some universities have developed grain packages. AgForce does not intend to reinvent the wheel but rather, harness the good work that has been completed to deliver a package that achieves an optimal outcome for growers and the environment. The grains industry has invested heavily in investigating the management practise that grain producers implement. The Central Queensland Sustainable Farming Systems Project began in 1997. A major aim of the project was for the quick adoption of emerging technology to make farming in central Queensland more profitable and sustainable. Ten farmer groups were established, Kilcummin, Capella, Dysart, Gindie/Fernlees, Gindie/Orion, Bauhinia, Theodore, Baralaba, Jambin and Wowan. Each group had at least one development site to investigate issues important to the farmers in that group. Most groups also had ‘spin-off’ sites to enable ‘a short term look’ at an issue important to the group. During phase one of the project a number of issues and technologies were identified by the farmer groups that they considered important to improving profitable and sustainable farming in the area. These included: . Zero or minimum till, . Controlled traffic, . Opportunity cropping, . Improving water and nitrogen use efficiencies, . Increasing the use of legumes in farming (grain, annual and perennial), and . Weed management. The project played an important role in encouraging farmers in the uptake of this technology. When reviewed by GRDC in 2001, the project was given a very positive report by farmers within groups and in the wider community. Funding by GRDC for another five years was granted. To ensure that we are still working on the important issues and that farmer dollars are hitting the mark, GRDC has decided that a mid term review (August–September 2005) is appropriate. In the last couple of years, drought in most farming districts in central Queensland forced more trials to be conducted at either the Emerald or Biloela Research Station which meant fewer trials done on-farm. Farmers have valued the larger scale on farm development sites, frequently on similar soil types to their own. Recently many farmers have also seen the benefits of small, more complex replicated trials at research stations. Another GRDC funded project was titled ‘minimising the impacts of grain cropping at a paddock to neighbourhood catchment scale.’ The project quantified soil erosion rates and water quality (particularly nitrogen and atrazine) between downslope and across slope farming at the paddock scale, and the impacts of catchment condition on water quality. Current adoption rates of improved practices have been spatially documented, and the impacts of these improved practices on sediment loads to streams have been modelled. Outputs have been delivered to grower groups, conferences, NRM groups, etc. A telephone survey of 99 grain growers showed that 75% of properties had installed contour banks, 33% had adopted zero tillage with a further 50% undertaking reduced tillage. Controlled Traffic Farming, a relatively new technology, was adopted by 36% of growers. These results show that the grains industry has adopted technologies and practices that reduce sediment loads to the river network, thereby potentially reducing the impacts on aquatic environments (river, estuary and inshore). Results from this project (water quality monitoring, adoption data and modelling) have shown the need to manage natural resources at a neighbourhood catchment scale. Stream water quality is related to catchment condition, and reductions in sediment loads have been made due to the adoption of improved management practices in the grains industry. To realise the full benefit of the reductions that are possible, all landholders (grazing, cropping, etc.) need to be involved in improving the resource condition of their property to maximise off-farm benefits. Regional NRM Groups such as the Fitzroy Basin Association are also working closely with growers across the State and are developing a range of programs that fit in line with their regional planning processes. AgForce will strive for cohesion so that growers have a simple choice when approaching land management packages. 2.2.3 AgForward AgForce is the deliverer of AgForward on behalf of the major rural industries of Queensland. AgForward is a program that has been funded by the Queensland Government for 4 years and was formally launched on May 19 2005. It is focussed on training and moving rural industry forward. Its aim is to help producers fine tune their operations by using modern technology and information so producers can base their decisions on the latest information. Importantly, AgForce as the program deliverer will lead by promoting good land management and the supporting decision making tools. AgForward alone will not deliver all of the solutions and hence must link in to complementary programs and other planning processes such as the regional NRM groups. Phase one of AgForward will be the delivery of the foundation workshops throughout Queensland. At these initial workshops, there will be an analysis of the ‘big picture’ including future markets and their expectations. To assist producers fine tune their operations, a detailed overview of the States vegetation mapping including the Regional Ecosystem (RE) maps and Property Maps of Assessable Vegetation (PMAVs) will be essential. Property planning will also be discussed, including the drivers for planning and methods for property plan development. At this stage strong linkages will be made to other training programs that exist for various industries. Also, an overview of the regional planning processes will be made to ensure that regional linkages are strong. For grazing there will be encouragement for producers to attend GLM workshops, highlighting the positive production and environmental outcomes that GLM offers. Phase two of AgForward is still in development and will further deliver tools and information to landholders at a scale that is usable and effective. It will further build on the relationships developed in phase one particularly those with regional groups, Landcare, and other grower groups. There will be a strong initial focus on comprehensive property plans that are useful in the ongoing management of properties. In summary, AgForward represents an exciting opportunity for rural industry to show genuine leadership by developing and extending tools and information that will drive Queensland’s primary production into the 21st century. AgForward is a dynamic and flexible program that will lift industry standards to meet future expectations from markets, Government and the wider community. AgForce is committed to the delivery and success of AgForward. 2.3 Future Directions AgForce intends to significantly progress a number is issues and programs into the future. The sustainable use of Queensland resources is intrinsic to the sustainability of the broad acre industries in Queensland. These programs include the pursuant of a broadacre environmental audit, the roll out of AgForward, the delivery of GLM, and the development of a comprehensive grains package that will become integral to AgForward. Broadacre Environmental Audit AgForce is interested in investigating the development and implementation of an independent environmental audit/survey of members/landholders to demonstrate environmental credentials to the community. The audit/survey would be a state of the environment style report from a broadacre agricultural perspective including grazing cattle, sheep, goats and grain growing. The intent is to benchmark industry wide performance of landholders response to increasing environment requirements on balance with production of food and fibre. The end aim is delivery of an industry wide reporting mechanism would give governments and the community the confidence that landholders were looking after the environment, progress to date and future improvement. The report could be done across regions and state levels as well as industry level. AgForce is seeking funding through the NHT to get independent consultants to undertake the report. It is estimated that it would cost between $300 000 - $500 000. The TORs would include: • Conduct a comprehensive environmental audit of Queensland’s broad acre industries, including conducting a stock take of management practices across different farms, • Priorities for enhanced environmental management being identified in different bioregional areas, • Outstanding examples of voluntary farmer actions would be highlighted as a basis for learning and the development of improved environmental management, • Assessing stakeholder engagement in regional NRM planning and highlight reasons for any barriers to engagement, and • Consideration of the requirements of Government in regard to environmental improvements relating to Reef Plan, regional targets, and Government priorities. AgForce believes that this project would be extremely beneficial to Queensland’s broadacre industries and Government policy makers. AgForward Roll out Over the next four years AgForce will continue to roll out the AgForward program. Importantly phase two of the program will require more linkages to be made with regional NRM groups and other associated organisation. AgForward will need to streamline its program to suit other rural industries and there will be a real need to review workshops to ensure quality maintained. AgForce is committed to growing and lifting AgForward and is proud of this proactive step to address any community concerns. GLM development and workshops The development of GLM is near completion for the reef catchments. Moving forward the delivery of the workshops will require careful planning. AgForce will be encouraging ,members to attend the workshops, importantly, by highlighting the positive attributes of the cause. That is the ability to deliver win-win outcome for production and for the environment. AgForward is expected to generate a fair deal of interest in GLM and DPI&F, regional Groups and AgForce need to be able to manage the demand. Furthermore, demonstrable outcomes of the GLM implementation will need to be monitored, the environmental audit is a key component of this demonstration. AgForce will continue to develop a comprehensive grains package that will become integral to AgForward. AgForce grains will continue to pursue the development of a grains land management package that offers real value to growers. This process will not result in duplication but rather lever off the good work that has already been completed by the industry and associated groups. 3 Cotton Industry 3.1 Growing Cotton in the Great Barrier Reef Catchments The only commercial cotton growing undertaken in Great Barrier Reef catchments occurs in the Fitzroy Basin. Area planted to cotton under normal growing conditions is typically 20,000 – 22,000 hectares in the Emerald region and approximately 7,000 in the Theodore district. The region has experienced a small decline in area planted over the last few years due to the drought (7,000 hectares across the two areas). There are approximately 50 landholders who grow cotton in the Emerald region and 25 in Theodore / Biloela. 3.2 Industry Environmental Initiatives The cotton industry has undertaken a range of initiatives to improve the industry’s natural resource management and environmental performance. The primary initiative is the Australian Cotton Industry Best Management Practice (BMP) Program, which is a grower-driven, cotton industry initiative that combines sound science with proven practical management recommendations to benefit the community and the environment. A brief history of activity and initiatives includes: • The first industry-wide environmental audit. Undertaken by the Australian Cotton Foundation (now Cotton Australia), this audit examined activities across all industry sectors and made 75 recommendations (see section 3.2.2 for more information.) • A 1991 study looking at the impact of pesticides on the riverine environment. This study was a joint initiative of the Land and Water Research and Development Corporation, Murray Darling Basin Commission, and the Cotton Research and Development Corporation (CRDC). The study showed that whilst there was no impact at that time, there was a risk to the environment, and recommended the industry implement some strategies to manage this risk. • The Australian Cotton Industry BMP Program’s first BMP Manual was released in 1997, after 6 years of program development; in response to the 1991 study recommending industry take a proactive approach to dealing with the issue of risk. Programs and initatives from around the world were analysed in the development of the BMP Program. The BMP Manual contained four modules: Application of Pesticides, Storage and Handling of Pesticides, Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Farm Design and Management. See Section 2.2.1 for more information). • In 1999 the cotton industry began the Cotton and Grains Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative (RWUEI) program in partnership with the Department of Natural Resources and Mines. This program benchmarked existing water use efficiency practices and provided technical extension to growers to improve their water use. (See section 2.3) • The second edition of the BMP Manual was released in 2000. The content of the manual was updated and a new module on Farm Hygiene added. • A Petrochemical Storage and Handling module was released in 2002. • In 2003, the industry (through CRDC) commissioned a second industry environmental audit. This audit revisited the recommendations from the first audit and found the industry had made significant advances over the last 12 years. This audit also made a new series of recommendations for industry to progress, which the industry has embraced. (See Section 2.2.2). • In 2003 the cotton industry (through Cotton Australia and CRDC) was chosen as one of fifteen national pilot projects to participate in the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) EMS National Pilots Program. Through this project the cotton industry undertook to develop the Cotton BMP Program into a comprehensive Environmental Management System (EMS) through the development of a Land and Water module. • In 2003 the industry embarked on a RWUE Stage 2 program again with the Department of Natural Resources and Mines. This program was to build on the success of the first RWUEI. • In 2004 the industry conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Cotton BMP Program. This evaluation also demonstrated the effectiveness of the BMP Program in changing growers’ practices over the last five years. • In 2004, the industry (through CRDC) initiated a project with DAFF through their Pathways to EMS Program to investigate the linkages between environmental performance and quality to end users. • The industry (through the Cotton CRC) released Guidelines for the Management of Riparian Areas in 2004. • The BMP Land and Water Management Module was released to the industry in January 2005. This module is the industry’s commitment to natural resource management. 3.2.1 Australian Cotton Industry BMP Program The Australian cotton industry's commitment to reducing the impacts of cotton farming on the natural environment, neighbours, workers and the community is best seen by the way the industry has developed and implemented its Best Practice Management (BMP) Program. Implementation of the Program is one of the biggest undertakings of the cotton industry and is often seen as setting an example for the rest of the rural sector. The BMP Program is a voluntary environmental management program that seeks to ensure the potential environmental impacts of cotton production are minimised. Adoption of BMP involves the commitment to a process of continuous improvement. Growers develop flexible, practical plans for improving their farm management and environmental performance, and progress is assessed by an independent audit. The goals of BMP are to see the development of a cotton industry: • whose participants are committed to improving farm management practices; • whose participants have developed and follow policies and farm management plans that minimise the risk of any adverse impacts on the environment or human health; and • which can credibly demonstrate to the community stewardship in the management of natural resources and farming operations. BMP is a risk assessment process that contains the core elements of a simple environmental management system. It is based around the same plan-do-check-act adaptive management cycle that a formal EMS is. Growers involved in the BMP Program therefore already have in place many of the components of an environmental management system. Industry Commitment The cotton BMP importantly has the support of the key industry bodies, including Cotton Australia (responsible for implementation and policy advocacy), the Cotton Research and Development Corporation (development) the Australian Cotton Grower’s Research Association (support) and the Australian Cotton CRC (soon to be Cotton Catchments Community CRC at 1 July 2005) (research that underpins the best practice guidelines). The Australian Cotton Industry Council (ACIC) has endorsed BMP as a core program. Elements of the BMP Program The BMP Program is designed to help growers improve their farm management practices. The key tool for growers to undertake BMP is the BMP Manual. The BMP Program involves: • Growers reading through the information booklets contained in the BMP Manual and working through the self-assessment worksheets to assess their farm operation, • Growers then writing and implementing action plans to address issues identified through self-assessment. These action plans require growers to commit to timeframes, and • An independent audit is then arranged to assess the implementation of BMP. This provides the grower with recognition for the work done, as well as advice on areas that can be improved. The audit teams are appropriately skilled to conduct the audit and assist growers with any problems they may have with their planning and implementation. Auditing is undertaken against industry agreed certification standards. Growers are then certified to the Program on demonstration of having met or exceeded these standards and on demonstration of the continuous improvement philosophy, Five modules currently make up the core of the BMP Program. These include: Application of Pesticides, Chemical Storage and Handling, Integrated Pest Management, Farm Design and Management and Farm Hygiene. Two other modules: Storage and Handling of Petrochemicals and Land and Water Management are also available and are being implemented by growers. These two modules will become a core component of the Program in 2007. At present they are voluntary in order to allow growers time to adopt the Program without being overburdened with the content. In addition to the modules with an environmental focus, the industry also has an Occupational Health and Safety course/module, Managing Cotton Farm Safety, which sits beside the BMP Program to address on-farm health and safety issues. On-farm activities of the BMP Program The self-assessment sheets and workbooks in the BMP manual identify for growers ‘best practice’ activities that are designed to negate or minimise potential impacts of day-to-day farming activities. The best practice guidelines are underpinned on science. Below is an outline of the objectives contained in each module and best practice actions to achieve the objectives. Farm Design and Management Module The design and management of a cotton farm plays an important role in minimising the risk of pesticide being transported off the farm. The design and management of the farm can determine: • how and how much water is transported around a farm, and how much soil is moved by the water; • how much water can be retained on the farm; and • where water leaving the farm ends up. This section highlights practices that can help minimise the off-farm movement of pesticides in irrigation water and stormwater run-off. Objectives and best practice actions: • Minimise erosion and control water on-farm: . Water containment on-farm, . In-field erosion minimal – furrow lengths designed (where possible) to suit conditions, and . Laser levelling of low spots. • Minimise the impact of storms: . Written plan for managing storms is in place, . Run-off from most severe storms contained on-farm, and . First flush of run-off from a treated (chemically) area is retained on-farm. • Erosion and run-off control: . Groundcover is maintained where possible, . Strip cropping used in floodplain areas, . Opportunity cropping used where possible, and . Slope lengths reduced where possible. • Control and clean-up run-off on farm: . Run-off diverted away from sensitive areas where possible, . Drains or natural drainage lines used for filtration and sedimentation, and . Buffer zones utilised between cropping and sensitive areas. • Use of buffer zones: . Vegetative buffer zones used, and . Other methods of controlling pesticide drift utilised. Application of Pesticides Module When using pesticides the safety of people and the environment is the first consideration. If it is not possible to apply a pesticide safely then the application must be delayed until it is. It is an offence to let a pesticide contaminate another person, their property, or the environment. All parties – growers, applicators and consultants – must act responsibly when making decisions about pesticide applications. The core best management practice for safe and responsible pesticide use is to develop a Pesticide Application Management Plan (PAMP) for pesticide use on farm. A PAMP will help ensure that everyone involved in pesticide application has a clear understanding of their responsibilities. It also helps identify the risks associated with pesticide applications so that controls to minimise those risks can be put in place. Objectives and best practice actions: • To develop a Pesticide Application Management Plan (PAMP): . Plan developed to cover all pesticides used. • Establish good pre-season communication: . Detailed farm map is developed that includes – on-farm and neighbouring buildings, buffer zones, on-farm and neighbouring sensitive areas, neighbouring farming activities, rail and stock routes, aircraft hazards, windsocks, . All neighbours contacted pre-season to discuss above map and planned season activities, . Pre-season meetings held with anyone involved in the farming operation eg. consultant, aerial/ground sprayer to determine operating parameters for season, and . All workers aware of operating parameters for season and details on farm map. • Establish good in-season communication: . Agreed communication arrangements are followed during the season, . Application activities are monitored and recorded, and . Crop re-entry protocol is followed. • Apply pesticides during appropriate weather conditions: . Pesticide application occurs in appropriate weather conditions for the application method being used, . Weather prediction tools utilised prior to applications, . Appropriate conditions and limitations for each area to be treated determined by growers prior to application, . Wind direction and buffer zones considered and used where required, and . Weather conditions monitored pre and during applications. • Appropriate product selection and use: . Product selections take into account potential for off-target damage, . All people involved are trained and certified in chemical use, . All products used are registered for use on the crop, . Products applied as per label, and . Material Safety Data Sheets available for all products used. • Equipment selection and maintenance: . Low drift equipment used where possible, and . Calibration of equipment occurs frequently. • Record Keeping: . Comprehensive record keeping of all activities. Storage and Handling of Pesticides Module Pesticides are an important component in cotton production. However, they must be stored, used, transported and disposed of safely to ensure that they do not create significant risks to the environment or human health. Objectives and best practice actions: • To locate the storage facility in an appropriate place: . Facility located a safe distance from sensitive areas, watercourses, houses, property boundary, etc, and . Facility located on a site not prone to flooding, and level so any run-off does not reach sensitive areas. • An appropriate building for the storage facility: . Facility is a separate building or room or enclosure, . Facility has access to running water and emergency shower type conveniences, . Facility is large enough for quantity of chemical it has to store, and . Facility is constructed of fire and chemical resistant material as far as possible. • Spill containment: . Facility floor is impermeable, and . Facility floor is bunded to contain spills. • Good ventilation: . Facility is vented or one or more sides open to the atmosphere. • Good security: . Facility fitted with lockable doors or gates, . Facility is locked when not in use, and . Access to facility is controlled. • Safe work procedures: . Up to date records exist for facility contents, . Pesticides stored in original, marked containers, . All people involved with chemicals are trained and certified in chemical use, . Appropriate (according to label) protective equipment available and used when handling chemicals, and . First aid kit readily accessible. • Establish emergency procedures: . Basic emergency plan has been developed, . Emergency equipment is readily accessible eg. fire extinguisher, and . Clean up equipment/materials are readily accessible. • Appropriate signs: . Facility has clearly visible warning signs, and . An evaporation or disposal pits have clearly visible warning signs. • An appropriate mixing and loading site: . Mixing and loading carried out away from watercourses, drains, property boundary, sensitive areas, and . Closed transfer systems used wherever possible. • Good mixing and loading systems and techniques: . Closed transfer systems used wherever possible, . All equipment calibrated and checked regularly, and . Backflow to water source is prevented. • Worker safety during mixing, loading and application: . All people involved with chemicals are trained and certified in chemical use, . Appropriate clothing and protective equipment available and worn, and . First aid kit and supply of clean water available. • Equipment maintenance and cleaning: . All equipment checked prior to use, and . All equipment cleaned after use. • Minimise pesticide waste and dispose of waste properly: . Containers cleaned and returned as per label instructions, . Containers triple rinsed and rinsate is not dumped, and . Returnable or recyclable containers purchased whenever possible. • Safe transport of pesticides: . Pesticides not transported in with people or foodstuffs, . Containers secured during transport, and . Personal protective equipment available when transporting pesticides. Integrated Pest Management Module Integrated Pest Management (IMP) integrates all means of managing pest populations with the aim of reducing pesticide use while maintaining profitability. The following are the philosophies behind IPM: • the presence of pests does not automatically require the use of pesticides, as damage may not be significant; • when pest control measures are necessary, non-chemical pest control methods should be considered before a decision is taken to use pesticides; and • suitable pest control strategies should be used in an integrated manner and pesticides should be used appropriately. Although IPM is more a philosophy of management than a set of rules, it contains the following essential components: • the ability to identify pest and beneficial species; • an understanding of the biology and ecology of the pests and beneficial insects in question; • a reliable method of pest and beneficial insect population monitoring and crop damage assessment; • knowledge of economic or action thresholds for each pest; • a range of effective control methods from which to choose; and • an IPM plan for the farm designed to ensure that there is not an over-reliance on any one control method, particularly pesticides. Objectives and best practice actions: • To manage the crop for early maturity: . Varieties matched to region and likely pests and diseases, . Fertilizer application is based on soil and/or petiole testing, . Final irrigation timed to ensure most plant available water is used by estimated defoliation, . Growth regulators used to control excessive growth, and . Planting occurs as early as practical for region. • To regularly monitor fields for insects and damage: . Crops checked for pests and beneficial insects and crop damage approx. 3 times per week, . Sampling and monitoring results are kept, . Pest to predator ratios used as guide to determining whether to apply pesticides, and . Crop growth rates monitored to help determine crop’s capacity for compensation. • To preserve beneficial insects: . Records kept of beneficial insects in the crop, . Effect of insecticide application on beneficial population is considered, . Food sprays considered as an alternative where appropriate, and . Refuge and/or trap crops considered as part of pest management. • To prevent the development of insect resistance: . Insect Resistance Management Strategy for region is followed, . Specific cultivation to eliminate overwintering pupae undertaken if required, and . Application failures not re-sprayed with insecticide from same chemical group. • Host and trap crops: . Weeds well controlled on-farm, and . Ability of different crops to host pest and beneficials considered when setting crop rotation strategy. • Area wide management: . Active participation in area wide management groups encouraged, . Decisions on use of broad spectrum insecticides made through consensus, and . Use of spring and summer trap crops considered and coordinated. Farm Hygiene Module Cotton is susceptible to the adverse effects of a number of diseases, weeds and pests. Once a disease, weed or pest becomes established in a crop, it can be difficult to manage. Preventing the problem is therefore better than attempting to cure full-blown symptoms. Good farm hygiene will help prevent the build-up and movement between farms of disease, weeds and pests.’ Objectives and best practice actions: • Early detection and notification: . All entries to property are made aware of existence of any crop disease and asked to take precautions to prevent its spread, . Ginners and seed companies (where relevant) notified where possible of existence of disease affected cotton to be ginned, . Crops regularly inspected for disease, weeds and pests, and . Employees and contractors made aware of disease symptoms and requested to notify manager/owner of suspect plants or areas. • Clean down all equipment and machinery: . All vehicles and machinery thoroughly cleaned of soil and crop debris before entering or leaving property, and . Vehicles and machinery thoroughly cleaned after working in affected areas. • An integrated approach to managing disease, weeds and pests: . Tailwater and storm run-off are retained on-farm, . Disease resistant cotton grown where possible, . Crop rotation strategy used to help reduce crop diseases, and . Weeds well controlled in and around fields. • Safe destruction of plants affected by Fusarium Wilt: . Affected plants of a small outbreak within 2 meter radius destroyed on-site, . Affected area not irrigated and storm water contained on-site if possible, . Trash collected in tail drains from affected fields and burnt on-site, and . Machinery traffic avoided in affected area where possible. Storage and Handling of Petrochemicals Module Efficient cotton production requires petrochemicals to be stored on-farm for use in machinery and farm vehicles. Petrochemicals commonly stored on-farm include fuels (petrol, diesel, and aviation fuel), engine oil and lubricants. Petrochemical storage includes storage in above- ground tanks, underground tanks, mobile tanks, and in drums or other containers. Petrochemicals need to be stored and handled safely to avoid soil or water contamination, fires or explosions. Objectives and best practice actions: • Use an appropriate site for petrochemical storage tanks: . All tanks on property safe distance from watercourses, drains, houses, areas storing other chemicals, etc, . Tanks sited to allow safe access to all vehicles that need access, and . Tanks sited aware from flood prone areas or are protected from floodwaters. • Proper design and installation of petrochemical storage tanks: . Tanks are specifically designed and constructed to hold the liquid stored, . Tanks are properly installed by qualified or experienced persons, and . Tanks maintained in safe working order. • Spill containment: . Appropriate bunding for large tanks containing greater than 5,000 L petrol, or 10,000 L diesel, or 10,000 L engine oil, . Spills can be safely drained from the bunded area, and . Smaller and mobile tanks utilise ground slope, diversion channels, low bunds or kerbing to control spills. • Install appropriate signs: . All tanks have appropriate warning signs. • Ensure safe working conditions: . All workers aware of proper safety precautions and hazards associated with petrochemicals, . Material Safety Data Sheets available for petrol, . Ignition sources kept away from fuel storage areas, . Tanks are free from fire hazards, rubbish and farm equipment, . Vehicle engines turned off whilst fuel storage tanks are in use, and . A register is kept for all fuels stored on farm (Qld). • Establish emergency procedures: . Fire extinguishers are readily accessible and available, . An emergency plan has been established and documented, . All workers aware of emergency plan and actions. • Dispose of waste safely: . Used engine oil is stored safely until it can be collected for recycling, . Used engine oil is recycled through licensed waste oil collectors, and . Recyclable or reusable drums used where possible. Land and Water Management Module Cotton production relies on the sustainable use of land and water. Soils, water and crops need to be managed so that the farm is profitable well into the future, and so that the risk of adverse environmental impacts is minimised. Sustainable management of land and water requires growers to be familiar with the resources on their farm, and to use those resources within their capacity. Objectives and best practice actions: • Assess the farm’s resources: . Develop a farm which highlights the property’s natural features, soils, land use and infrastructure, . Record resource and property information, . Review catchment plans, and . Assess risk of landscape (catchment) scale issues. • Good soil management and monitoring (structure, nutrition, salinity and sodicity and erosion): . Monitor soil structural condition, . Avoid traffic on wet soils where possible, . Use implements that don’t cause smearing or compaction, . Use minimum tillage and controlled traffic, avoid bed shoulder compaction, . Increase soil organic matter, . Avoid sodic water, . Manage hard-setting soils, . Use crop rotations and deep tillage only as necessary, . Use soil conditioners as appropriate, . Undertake soil and leaf tests, . Apply nutrients efficiently, . Monitor and measure soil and water salinity, . Use high quality water or adopt a conjunctive water use strategy, . Apply water efficiently and uniformly, . Maximise distribution and storage efficiency, . Use good seedbed design and plant seeds to avoid saline areas, . Minimise recharge and lower the water table where necessary, . Identify areas of significant erosion risk and monitor high risk areas, . Consider field design, furrow lengths and tail drain design, . Laser level fields, . Use controlled drops in culverts, . Design tailwater drains to carry water at non-erosive velocities, . Develop a stormwater management plan and retain first flush storm water on-farm, . Maintain ground cover, including stubble or crop residues, . Reduce run-off and reinforce high-risk areas with rock, gravel or logs, . Use buffer zones, vegetation strips or silt traps, . Use temporary ponding if required, . Use opportunity cropping, . Plant rows and cultivate along the contour, . Use strip cropping, . Maintain vegetation in natural drainage lines, . Minimise cultivation during storm season, . Locate and design earthworks and other farm infrastructure to minimise the impact of flood flows, . Use low road formations, and . Remove fences or limit the number of fences used. • Efficient irrigation (storage & distribution and application): . Avoid constructing storages and channels on sites with highly permeable soils, . Proper design and constructive of the storage and distribution system, . Carry out regular inspection and maintenance of the storage and distribution system and fix any detected leaks or inefficiencies, . Reduce evaporation from farm storages, . Irrigate according to crop needs, . Use soil water monitoring tools, and . Monitor and measure water use, and calculate water use efficiency. • Efficient furrow irrigation: . Aim for uniform applications, . Use appropriate rates, . Optimise the duration of irrigation, and . Use good field design. • Efficient drip irrigation: . Plan the drip irrigation system, . Proper installation of the drip irrigation system, and . Proper operation of the drip irrigation system. • Efficient centre pivot and lateral move irrigation: . Plan the system, . Proper system design and installation, and . Proper operation of the system. • Good native vegetation management: . Obtain development consent if required, . Highlight areas of native vegetation on the farm map, . Describe and assess the condition of native vegetation, . Monitor the condition of native vegetation, . Protect native vegetation from weeds, pests, and other negative impacts, . Retain mature trees and other important habitat features, . Re-vegetate where practical, . Connect areas of native vegetation if possible, . Identify native animals on the farm, and . Avoid harming native animals. • Good riparian land management (Riparian vegetation management, stock management and water quality and stream bank stability): . Retain and protect existing native riparian, . Leave dead and fallen trees, and trees with hollows alone, . Obtain specialist advice on appropriate plant species and planting locations, . Consider connecting areas of remnant vegetation, . Develop a weed management plan, . Develop a stock management plan for riparian areas, . Provide off-stream or purpose built in-stream watering points for stock, . Exclude or limit stock access to areas with steep or eroded banks, or with dispersible or highly erodable soils, . Exclude stock from areas being re-vegetated, . Maintain filter strips near major waterways, rivers and streams, and . Identify and manage areas of bank instability and erosion. Auditing BMP The BMP Program contains an external, independent auditing component. In 2003 the industry, at the request of growers, established certification standards for the BMP Program. Auditing prior to this was against process and continual improvement, as with a formal ISO 14001 EMS audit. Cotton growers adopting BMP are now audited against both process and performance, with certification granted only to those growers who can demonstrate they have met or exceeded the agreed standards. Industry Uptake of BMP The cotton industry has embraced the BMP Program. Industry figures indicate and external evaluations support that approximately 95% of the industry has changed its practices as a result of the program. Audit figures supplied by the BMP Audit Office demonstrate that 30% of the industry has voluntarily undertaken an audit and are certified under the BMP Program. This represents approximately 60% of the area grown to cotton in Australia. In 2004 Cotton Australia made some changes to the audit program to encourage more growers through to the audit stage. This includes introducing a Pre-Certification Assessment (PCA) stage where trained (Environmental Systems Auditor training) Cotton Australia staff pre-assess growers against the certification standards and assist them in prioritising action plans prior to an audit. By participating in a Pre-Certification Assessment, the grower then commits to a twelvemonth maximum timeframe to move through to certification audit, thereby making a commitment to the Program. Cotton Australia is currently working to convert growers into this new system that encompasses performance standards. In terms of adoption of BMP in the Fitzroy Basin, as at the beginning of June 2005, 40 growers have been audited at least once by an independent auditor, and a further 9 have undertaken a PCA and are in the BMP system working towards full compliance with the certification standards. Industry Investment in the BMP Program More than $7 million has been invested into research in the development of the Best Management Practices (BMP) Program. According to the Macarthur Agribusiness study (Macarthur Agribusiness, 2004) CRDC expenditure on the Program since 1993/94, and including commitments to 2006 total $7.8 million. Within this, research accounts for fifty-two percent, development twenty-one percent and other twenty-seven percent. Table 1 details a breakdown CRDC expenditure over the life of the Program and committed expenditure till 2006. Table 1: - CRDC expenditure over the life of the BMP Program and committed expenditure till 2006. 1991 ’000 1992 ’000 1993 ‘000 1994 ’000 1995 ’000 1996 ’000 1997 ’000 1998 ’000 1999 ’000 2000 ’000 2001 ’000 2002 ’000 2003 ’000 2004 ’000 2005 ’000 2006 ’000 Research 50 52 92 466 523 377 357 204 425 486 269 318 360 0 0 0 Development 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 180 311 345 293 335 171 69 69 Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 180 515 469 248 383 126 135 8 TOTAL 99 104 184 932 1,046 754 863 688 1,833 2,691 2,062 1,802 1,826 390 408 15 GRAND TOTAL $7.8million Source: Macarthur Agribusiness (2004) Macarthur Agribusiness (2004) also estimated the cost to Cotton Australia for its commitment to implementation of the Program is currently in the order of $700,000 per annum. This equates to an approximate $4.9 million since the organisation dedicated resources to drive BMP implementation in 1999. BMP Program Strengths Strengths of the BMP Program include: • Industry driven and therefore a strong sense of ownership and commitment, • A maintained core focus on on-farm activities and impacts, • It is delivering results, and • It’s development around the risk assessment principle, to which other industry tools and issues can be aligned. An example of this is the Managing Cotton Farm Safety occupational health and safety program that sits alongside the BMP Program. BMP Program Weaknesses Weaknesses of the program include: • It is reasonably expensive to resource, and • Setting certification standards that comply with two State jurisdictions has been interesting and challenging at times. BMP Program Gaps & Opportunities An area of opportunity for the cotton industry is in benchmarking and trend reporting in the area of natural resource management. The industry has good data in the area of chemical use, but as the focus on natural resource management strengthens with the Land and Water Management module, work needs to be done to ensure adequate and complete benchmarking data sets to assess performance over time. 3.2.2 Cotton Industry Environmental Audits In 1991 the cotton industry undertook its first industry wide environmental audit. With the commissioning of this audit, the Australian cotton industry became the first major agricultural industry to seek a comprehensive external examination of its environmental performance. While many individual farmers had sought to grow cotton in an environmentally responsible manner, the commissioning of this audit marked the first cotton industry-wide commitment to improved sustainability. 23 The first audit provided a framework and focus for subsequent research, development and extension activities that have seen significant changes in industry environmental practices. These have been achieved hand in hand with improved economic efficiency and the production of higher quality cotton and despite growing economic pressures on cotton farmers. The improvements achieved since 1991 are well documented and scientifically validated: however, by 2003 the industry believed it was time to have its overall environmental performance tested externally once more to document changes arising from the first audit and identify further areas of environmental management that need attention. The second audit in 2003 found the cotton industry’s environmental management system, Best Management Practices, to be a major driver for improved environmental management on cotton farms and provides extensive evidence of this in the report. The industry takes pride in this program – not only for what BMP has achieved already but for the comprehensive environmental blueprint it will offer as it addresses future issues. Despite the many environmental improvements made since the 1991 audit, the industry acknowledges the areas the 2003 audit has identified as needing further improvement. Its key recommendations cover BMP, water use and management, pesticides and non-pesticide chemicals, waste management and vegetation management. Already, the new Land and Water Management module, released in 2005, addresses a number of the key recommendations in the 2003 environmental audit. (Taking Responsibility for our Future: The Australian Cotton Industry Action Response To The Second Australian Cotton Industry Environmental Audit 2003) 2.3 Cotton Australia and CRDC evaluation of the BMP Program In 2003 a comprehensive evaluation of the BMP Program was undertaken (Macarthur Agribusiness, 2004). Commissioned by Cotton Australia and the CRDC as part of the Cotton EMS National Pilots Project, the study aimed to, among other things, identify and describe the changes in practice on cotton farms from the start of the BMP program to the present. The study consisted of a literature review, grower (greater or less than 10 years growing experience) and stakeholder survey and focus groups. A total of ten face-to-face grower interviews, 40 telephone interviews with growers and a further 25 with stakeholders and five focus groups where conducted along with cost/benefit analysis on three farms to inform another aim of the study - compile information on the costs to growers and industry groups to implement BMP procedures. The study found beneficial changes in cotton grower behaviour and implementation of the Program’s practices across all of the Program’s modules – application of pesticides, storage and handling of pesticides, integrated pest management, farm design and management, farm hygiene and storage and handling of petrochemicals. In the reef catchment area (Fitzroy Basin) both the Emerald and Theodore growing district were surveyed as a part of the study but the limited survey numbers meant a reef specific picture could not be obtained. Given the size of the industry located outside the reef catchment area the low number of interviews conducted in the Fitzroy Basin is not surprising. 3.2.3 Research & Development The cotton industry, through the CRDC and the Australian Cotton CRC invest significant funds into research and development that benefits the industry, and to technical extension of this research to growers for adoption. The Cotton CRC is responsible for the important industry publications of technical packs that collate information in a useable form for growers. Current ‘Paks’ available to cotton growers include: SOILpak, MACHINEpak, SPRAYpak, ENTOpak, WEEDpak, NUTRIpak, DISEASEpak, and WATERpak, which was released in 2004 to address water use efficiency and related issues. The CRDC and Cotton CRC have also published Integrated Pest Management Guidelines for Cotton Production Systems in Australia (2nd Edition), designed to assist cotton growers implement integrated pest management strategies to suit their individual farming system. Another significant publication in 2004 was Managing Riparian Lands in the Cotton Industry, which consists of case study information and examples of best practice from across Qld and NSW of the management and use of riparian areas. 3.2.4 Rural Water Use Efficiency in the Cotton Industry The RWUE Initiative is a partnership between industry and government to improve the use and management of available irrigation water, thereby improving the competitiveness, profitability, and environmental sustainability of Queensland's rural industries. Adoption programs have been established to help farmers achieve best practice in irrigation water management on their properties. The cotton program involves Cotton Australia and the Australia Cotton Cooperative Research Centre (Cotton CRC). There have now been two RWUE program, RWUE 1 ran from 1999 – 2003, and RWUE 2 from 2003 – 2005. Rural Water Use Efficiency 1 had a Financial Incentives Scheme component to the Initiative, which was designed to encourage and assist irrigated cotton and grain producers implement activities identified as improving on-farm water use efficiency. The Financial Incentives Scheme was exceedingly successful in initiating change for growers, as well as accelerating the rate of change across the industries. The objective of RWUE 1 was to, by June 2003, increase irrigation efficiency in the cotton and grain industries by at least ten percent (10%) and have seventy percent (70%) of growers adopting best management practice guidelines for irrigation. Program highlights (Goyne, 2003) for RWUE 1 include: • The Program has dramatically improved irrigators’ awareness of and access to new technologies to improve irrigation management and system performance. Grower awareness and participation in the RWUE Initiative exceeded 75% by August 2001, and was estimated to be greater than 85% in some regions at completion of RWUE 1. • For the $1.5 million invested to date through the Financial Incentives Scheme from Government, cotton and grain irrigators have invested between $3.5 and $3.6 million. This money has been used to help irrigators implement on-farm changes to their management necessary to achieve best practice irrigation. • An increasing number of irrigators are now achieving irrigation efficiencies well in advance of the State benchmarks compiled at the commencement of the Program. Efficiency gains at the completion of the project were estimated to be in the order of over 11%, exceeding the objective of 10% set at the outset of the program. RWUE 2 was designed to build on the success of the initial RWUE program. The industry once again is working in cotton and grain irrigated systems, and has a team of technical extension staff located in cotton growing regions in Queensland. RWUE 2 is aiming for a further 8% efficiency gain, to have participation of at least 75% and to build capacity of the growers and industry service personnel within all regions to offer water use efficiency advice after the completion of the program. 3.2.5 DrumMuster and ChemClear DrumMuster – national chemical container collection and recycling scheme aimed at reducing the amount of plastic drums requiring on-farm disposal. Cotton Australia has been an active campaigner to encourage as many Shires throughout Qld and NSW to participate in the program. The BMP Program encourages growers to participate in such a collection program, or to use recyclable or returnable containers wherever possible. ChemCollect – a free collection, storage and destruction scheme for unwanted agricultural and veterinary chemicals used in primary production. The Environmental Protection Agency is coordinating the scheme in Queensland. It is estimated there are 270 tonnes of unwanted and potentially hazardous pesticides on Queensland rural properties. The ChemCollect scheme is targeting organochlorine pesticides. This program is an effective tool to manage the risk of chemical use and storage on-farm, by providing a safe, off-farm method of removal and destruction of unwanted product. 3.3 Future Directions The industry is continually reviewing the BMP tool for appropriateness, content and performance. This will continue, and will be strengthened with the greater focus on better data collection in the area of natural resource management. The industry is working closely with catchment groups in cotton areas, to link on-farm activities and impacts with sub-catchment and catchment scale activities and impacts. The Integrated Area Wide Management program that operates in the Fitzroy area originally in Emerald and now extending down to Theodore is viewed by the rest of the industry as a key program and the link it creates with on-farm practices (BMP Program) to catchment scale targets and outcomes. This project has been supported by the Fitzroy Basin Association (FBA) and is now being trialled in the non-reef catchments of Condamine Alliance and Qld Murray Darling Basin and across into the Border Rivers-Gwydir Catchment Management Authority in NSW. In the Fitzroy Basin, the industry is working in with the FBA’s Neighbourhood Catchments program. 4 Dairy Industry 4.1 Dairying in the Great Barriers Reef Catchments There are three distinct dairy regions located within the GBR catchment area. These are: Far north Queensland This dairying region is based on the Atherton Tablelands and is centred around the towns of Atherton, Malanda, Millaa Millaa and Ravenshoe. There are currently 104 registered dairy farms milking approximately 140 cows year round. Each farm in the region produces approximately 840,000 litres per annum, which across the region for 2004-2005 equates to approximately 87 million litres of milk. In the region, the dairy industry employs approximately 352 people directly on farm, in the processing plants and cartage, with additional people involved as vendors, and also in sales and distribution. The industry is the largest employer between Townsville and Cape York and it is estimated it is worth approximately $45 million to the local community, which multiplies to approximately $200 million across the region. The industry also contributes to the aesthetic appeal of the Atherton Tablelands, with many tourists attracted to the region to view ecological and sustainable agriculture being implemented. Central Queensland This region is based around Rockhampton, with 62 producers spread between Mackay (Eungella) in the north to Bundaberg in the south and inland to Monto and Biggenden. The average size milking herd is 150 cows with production per farm averaging 710,000 litres in 2004 (40.4 million litres for the region). There are more than 250 families directly involved in the industry including 90 farming families, 50 Parmalat factory employees, 20 distributors plus others working in transport, raw milk contractoring, packaging, suppliers etc. It is estimated that the farm gate value of milk is approximately $19 million with an accepted multiplier effect of three, gives a total value of dairying to the central Queensland region of approximately $57 million. Burnett - Mary This region includes farmers surrounding the townships of Munduberra, Goomeri, Kingaroy, Nanango, Maleny, Gympie and Marybrough with farmers supplying Dairy Farmers, Parmalat- Australia and some smaller milk and cheese processors. This region has approximately 180 dairy producers who produce approximately 750,000 litres per farm per annum. These milk producers receive approximately $50 million directly as farm income, which injects more than approximately $150 million into the local and regional economy. It also should be noted that the dairy industry in these regions has been, and still are, severely impacted by ongoing drought conditions. All of the regions have been classified as experiencing exceptional circumstances under the Federal Government’s drought program. 4.2 Industry Environmental Initiatives The dairy industry at a national and state level has undertaken a range of initiatives to improve the industry’s natural resource management and environmental performance. 4.2.1 Queensland Dairy Farming Environmental Code of Practice The Queensland Dairy Farming Environmental Code of Practice was approved under the Queensland Environmental Protection Act (1994) (EP Act) in February 2001. The code was compiled by representatives from the then Department of Primary Industries (DPI), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Queensland Dairyfarmers’ Organisation (QDO). The EP Act requires all Queenslanders to meet their “general environmental duty” which requires the use of all reasonable and practical measures to prevent or minimize environmental harm. The Queensland Dairy Farming Environmental Code of Practice is a voluntary code and contains the principles of sustainable farming practice and recommendations that promote a positive approach to responsible environmental management to ensure that farmers meet their general environmental duty as prescribed in the EP Act. The code of practice includes an industry overview, environmental outcomes and suggested management (planning and operation) practices for a number of farming activities including farm planning and site selection, effluent collection, storage and utilization, feed pads, loafing pads and feed storage facilities, managing yards and laneways, on-farm carcass and rubbish disposal, community amenity, riparian land management, fertilizer management and soil protection. It also acknowledges that every farm is different and that different farming systems are adapted depending on a variety of circumstances including local knowledge and experience, geography, local and state planning regulations and on-farm resources. This means that farmers implement on-farm management practices that address environmental outcomes in reasonable and practical ways and are therefore addressing the Queensland Dairy Farming Environmental Code of Practice. A study conducted by the Institute of Sustainable Futures in 2003-2004 on behalf of the Environmental Protection Agency, to review the effectiveness of codes of practice under the EP Act, including the Queensland Dairy Farming Environmental Code of Practice found that 66% of dairy farmers who took part in the Queensland wide survey used the dairy code more than once per year (Institute of Sustainable Futures, 2004). 4.2.2 Dairying Better N Better for Tomorrow Dairying Better N Better for Tomorrow was originally developed in 2001 (it was known then as Dairying Better N Better) as a set of tools to support farmers implement on-farm, better natural resource management activities. A central tool included in the newer version of the program is the Dairy Self Assessment Tool (DairySAT). This self-assessment tool helps farmers identify their on-farm natural resource management priorities. The tool also forms the basis of a three- part workshop series for farmers about information on better management of natural resources. DairySAT and the workshop content draw their information on improved practice from the Queensland Dairy Farming Environmental Code of Practice. DairySAT also includes a section on farmer’s legal requirements. To support the adoption of improved practices the Dairying Better N Better for Tomorrow aspect of the program was added in 2003. This aspect of the program involves farmer workshops where implementation of priority actions is encouraged through the documentation of an “action plan”, supporting financial resources are allocated and an on-farm monitoring plan is developed to track progress. Currently a third aspect of the program Dairying Better N Better Plus is under development. This aspect will enable farmers to develop a whole of farm approach to planning and management picking up areas such as quality assurance, financial management in addition to natural resource management. Table 2 details the various aspects of the Dairy Better N Better program in a step-by-step fashion. Table 2: - The various aspects of the Dairy Better N Better program. Stage 1 DairySAT (dairy self assessment tool) Outcome: • NRM issues identified and prioritised on-farm • Identification of linkages with catchment and regional NRM issues and priorities • Direct association and links with the Queensland Dairy Farming Environmental Code of Practice Stage 2 Dairying Better N Better for Tomorrow Outcome: • Local farmer group workshops with • Technical advise and support. Development and technical advice implementation of actions to address on-farm NRM • action plans change. • Farm based and sub-catchment • Monitoring plan implemented via the action plan monitoring (farm management system) Stage 3 Dairying Better N Better Plus Outcome: (continuing • Whole farm management option – under development) The implementation of the program is conducted on a sub-catchment basis with 10-15 enterprises participating in each group. The Subtropical Dairy Program and the Queensland Dairyfarmer’s Organisation have adopted the Dairying Better N Better program as the Queensland industry’s approach to addressing natural resource management and demonstrating its commitment to sustainable dairying. Current uptake The Dairying Better N Better Program is relatively recent and as such the Queensland industry has only just started to roll out the program statewide. A staged approach to implementing the program has been adopted, as adequately resourcing activities is proving a significant challenge. The industry is making headway in this area though by increasingly working with Regional NRM bodies, who are assisting by providing funding and on ground staff to support farmer activity. Staged implementation is now underway in number of areas across the State. In the Great Barrier Reef catchment a sub-catchment group on the Atherton Tablelands involving ten enterprises has been established. Each of the enterprises in the group has conducted the Dairy Self Assessment Tool and collectively they have participated in the first of four technical workshops. The participants will attend the full series of workshops and develop an Action Plan. This action plan follows the requirements of an Environmental Management System and will help the farmers to implement actions to address their on-farm priority. Further groups of dairy farmers in the Great Barrier Reef catchment have expressed an interest in participating in Dairying Better N Better program - which will be offered to all farmers throughout the region as resources become available. 4.2.3 Industry Environmental Performance Studies “Sustaining our Natural Resources – Dairying for Tomorrow” was a joint project between the Dairy Research and Development Corporation and the National Land and Water Resources Audit conducted in 2001. A national survey of 1800 farms was conducted as part of this project, which assessed current on-farm management practices. The survey found for those dairy farms in Reef catchment: • 85% of respondents soil test at least every 2-3 years, • 70% of respondents re-use their effluent either through irrigation, broadcasting or dry spread), and • 64% of respondents have an effluent holding pond or sump and dispersal effluent management system and the remaining 36% apply effluent directly to paddock. It is anticipated that this survey will be conducted again in late 2005-early 2006. 4.2.4 Other Industry Environmental Initiatives Other initiatives involving the Queensland dairy industry to improve the industry’s natural resource management and environmental performance include: Natural Resource Management positions Two positions have been funded by the dairy industry specifically to develop and implement natural resource programs throughout the subtropical dairy region, including the dairy regions in reef catchment areas. These positions have come about due to the strong commitment the industry has in addressing on-farm natural resource management in a pro-active manner and through a partnership with the Commonwealth Government, which partly funds one of the positions. The two NRM positions coordinate NRM projects including the roll-out of Dairying Better N Better for Tomorrow, development and implementation of other NRM initiatives, supporting farmers to participate in regional NRM programs and providing support for farmers to access resources to support on-farm adoption of better natural resource management activities. Eco-Efficiency Program Queensland Dairyfarmers’ Organisation entered into an Eco-Efficiency agreement with the Environmental Protection Agency in 2001. This project undertook a number of activities to derive on-farm resource use efficiency outcomes while also delivering environmental benefits. Resource areas covered included a range of themes, for example feed conversion efficiency, soil and nutrient management and energy management. Riparian management project The project is being conducted by the Department of Primary Industries & Fisheries with financial support from Dairy Australia. The project will run from 2003-2006 and will identify the critical factors associated with riparian condition in the sub-tropical dairy region. The project will collect sufficient data on riparian zone condition, and attitudes to riparian zone management, to inform policy development and identify the research and extension requirements of the Queensland dairy industry with respect to riparian zone management. A further objective of the project will be to increase the understanding of agency staff involved in riparian management of the constraints farmers face, and concerns they have, in managing riparian zones. North Queensland Sustainability Initiative - $1.6 million “Advancing Grow Malanda” This $9.8 million project has been recently funded over two years with support from Dairy Farmers, Dairy Australia, the Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries and local milk suppliers represented by the Grow Malanda group. The aim of the project is to increase milk volumes in the region by 30 per cent to 130 million litres and lift milk protein levels by at least 0.1%. The project is firmly focused on working with milk suppliers in the region to help them achieve a target return of 10 per cent on farm assets through the increased milk protein output. The project will also maintain and gradually increase dairy farm numbers, create more than 80 new jobs across the region and generally enhance business and technical competencies in the Atherton Tablelands. The program has nine interdependent modules that centre around the farmers and the existing Dairy Farmers Malanda milk processing plant, which produces packaged milk, cheese and protein, working together to increase each other’s long term viability and profitability. Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative The Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative was a partnership approach between the Department of Natural Resources and Mines, Queensland Dairyfarmers’ Organisation and the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries and was implemented between 2001-2004. A financial incentive package was attached to the program which supported 680 producers throughout the State, with farmers financial contribution being more than 3.4 times that of the program. A second phase of the initiative was launch in 2004 called “Dairy Water Use for Profit” which aims to support the implementation of better management practices associated with irrigation and effluent management. This initiative has developed comprehensive manuals and a workshop for both irrigation and effluent management and a small financial assistance package is also offered to producers to assist with greater adoption. Support for farmers to implement on-farm environmental works Many farmers are supportive of on-farm works that have a dual benefit of supporting the implementation of their sustainable farming system and also the provision of an improvement to community assets including protecting biodiversity and improvements to water quality. Farmers in the reef catchments area have been able to successful access more than $150,000 from funding sources such as the FNQ-NRM regional NRM body as well as through the Commonwealth Government’s Envirofund scheme. On-farm works have included fencing off remnant rainforest vegetation, fencing of riparian areas and providing for alternative water points for stock, planting locally native tree and shrub species and implementing more efficient and effective effluent management systems. Farmers have also contributed significantly to these programs with farmers contribution in excess of 370% of funds received. Food Safety Quality Assurance Management of food safety risks is paramount to the ongoing sustainability of the Australian Dairy Industry and the production of safe dairy food is regulated by Safe Food Queensland. All dairy farms are licensed through Food Safe Queensland and all processors have manufacturing and on-farm quality assurance schemes which are based on the application of Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) systems. The on-farm QA systems are independently audited on an annual basis. 4.2.5 Investment in Industry Initiatives Much of the investment in the natural resource management areas for the dairy industry is conducted at either a State or National level through organizations such as Dairy Australia (national research and development body), Subtropical Dairy Program (regional delivery arm for Dairy Australia), Queensland Dairyfarmers’ Organisation (Queensland peak body) or through Queensland State Government agencies. The following provides a summary of key investment areas and the partners in the development and implementation of initiatives: • Queensland Dairy Farming Environmental Code of Practice cost an estimated $1 million including investments from farmers, Queensland Dairyfarmers’ Organisation, QDPI and the Dairy Research and Development Corporation (now known as Dairy Australia). • The original Dairying Better N Better program was the development of support tools as a precursor for Dairying Better N Better for Tomorrow. Total investment for Dairying Better N Better I is estimated at more than $1.25 million with investment partners including Dairy Research and Development Corporation, Subtropical Dairy Program, Natural Heritage Trust, Australian Research Council, Queensland Dairyfarmers’ Organisation, Queensland Government (DPI&F and DNR&M), NSW Agriculture and the University of Queensland. • Dairying Better N Better for Tomorrow includes investment used for the development of the Dairy Self Assessment Tool. The total investment for the development of this project in the subtropical dairy region is estimated to be $150,000 from Dairy Australia, Subtropical Dairy Program and QDPI. A further $60,000 of investment, primarily from the Environmental Protection Agency has supported the implementation of the program on the Atherton tablelands. • The Sustaining our Natural Resources: Dairying for Tomorrow survey conducted in 2001 recorded an investment of more than $110,000, while the investment Dairy Australia contributes to NRM is approximately $2.5 million per annum. • The Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative was an initial investment of more than $3 million from project partners including Queensland Government (DNR&M and DPI&F) as well as Queensland Dairyfarmers Organisation and dairy farmers. The second phase of the Rural Water Use initiative is expected to leverage a further $1.8 to 2.2 million from the aforementioned project partners. • Other NRM initiatives and projects focusing on sustainability issues include the $9.8 million Advancing Grow Malanda (refer to section 3.4), QDPI riparian management project (expected investment of more than $500,000), NSW Agriculture climate management project on the Atherton Tablelands (estimated investment of $100,000) and the Mudtapilly Farmlets sustainable farming systems project (estimated $1.5 million). 4.3 Future Directions The Queensland dairy industry is committed to ensuring that the industry remains profitable and sustainable in the long term. The industry makes a significant contribution to regional communities - economically, socially and environmentally. The industry is committed to further supporting sustainability initiatives including voluntary NRM initiatives such as Dairying Better N Better for Tomorrow. Limited supply options: Farmers in the regions of the reef catchments have extremely limited options for markets of their product. Dairy farmers located in North Queensland can either supply Dairy Farmers Cooperative Ltd at Malanda or a limited number of farmers can supply Mungalli Biodynamic processors (as long as they are properly accredited). In central Queensland, the only viable processing option for farmers is through the Parmalat Australia factory based at Rockhampton. Although both of these company’s support their suppliers strongly, only having a single processing option for many farmers is an enormous business risk. NRM Coordination: Natural Resource Management continues to be key issue for the dairy industry and more investment in this area is expected in the future. Through the voluntary farm management system approach (Dairying Better N Better for Tomorrow) and collaborative approach with community-based NRM organizations and the Commonwealth and State Governments, investment in on-farm adoption and management of natural resources is expected to grow. Food Safety: Food safety and hazard management is a major issue for all consumers and particularly the world trading environment. Through the development and implementation of quality assurance programs, industry and governments are able to ensure robust systems for traceability and recording are used throughout the whole supply chain. Links with Regional NRM bodies: The dairy industry has been very pro-active in working together with key community based natural resource management organizations. Key groups that the industry are developing up a collaborative relationship with include FNQ-NRM, Burdekin Dry Tropics NRM Board, Fitzroy Basin Association and the Burnett Mary Regional Body. 4.4 Further Information and Contacts For further information relating to information presented in this section or dairy industry activity in the environment area generally please contact the following representatives: • Philip Chamberlain, Executive Officer, Subtropical Dairy Program. • Adrian Peake, Executive Officer, Queensland Dairyfarmers’ Organisation • Bronwyn Fisher, NRM Coordinator, Subtropical Dairy Program and Queensland Dairyfarmers’ Organisation. Ph: 07 3236 2955 Fax: 07 3236 2955 www. dairyinfo.biz or www.dairypage.com.au 5 Horticulture Horticultural industries make a major contribution to the economies and communities of the Reef Catchments. Horticultural producers have a strong commitment to sound natural resource management and have been introducing many improvements to farm practices over many years to improve the environmental sustainability of the industry. The current standard of environmental management in the industry is high. Growcom (formerly Queensland Fruit & Vegetable Growers) is the peak body for the fruit and vegetable industry in Queensland and currently delivers a range of projects and services that assist horticultural growers to continually advance on-farm management to achieve improved environmental performance. Minimising the potential impacts of horticultural production activities on the Great Barrier Reef is strong driver for horticultural growers and Growcom. Growcom is pleased to have the opportunity to contribute to this report to highlight the progress being made in the fruit and vegetable industry towards addressing reef water quality. It is important to note that this report will focus on the activities coordinated by Growcom. Many growers and grower groups are active in a range of additional projects and initiatives that are also making significant contributions to the objectives of the Reef Water Quality Protection Plan. A more comprehensive overview of the industry’s achievements and progress towards improved environmental management will be available following the completion of a major assessment of industry sustainability planned for 2005-2006. 5.1 Horticulture in the Great Barrier Reef catchments Horticultural industries in the reef region are diverse and highly valuable. Major horticultural crops grown include bananas, mangoes, fresh tomatoes, potatoes, tropical fruits (including lychees, avocados, pawpaws, pineapples), citrus and a broad range of vegetables. Growcom commissioned a major study in 2004, “The economic contribution of horticulture to the Queensland economy” (CDI Pinnacle Management and Street Ryan & Associates, 2004). The following data is taken from this report. Fruit and vegetable production in the catchments adjacent to the Great Barrier Reef had a farm gate value in 2001 of $860.5 million. The Coastal Wet Tropics region alone generated $342.3 million. Banana production, primarily located in the Coastal Wet Tropics, was valued at $345 million. Potatoes production, primarily located in the Atherton Tablelands, was valued at $47 million. Mangoes, produced in the Atherton Tablelands, Burdekin and Burnett regions were valued at $64 million. Fresh tomatoes, mainly in the Gumlu-Bowen-Whitsunday district, were valued at $135 million and capsicums and chillies in the same district were valued at $60million. The fruit and vegetable industry in Queensland directly supports 27 880 full time equivalent jobs. Casual labour in the fruit and vegetable industry makes a major contribution to supporting tourism industries in the state. The economic contribution report is available on the Growcom website on www.growcom.com.au. It should be noted that drought conditions over recent years across wide areas of the state have had a significant impact on individual horticultural enterprises, severely limiting the financial capacity of many growers. 5.2 Industry Environmental Initiatives The fruit and vegetable industry in Queensland has a strong commitment to environmental sustainability and growers aim to be responsible custodians of natural resources and rural environments. Growcom is committed to providing leadership and support services to the fruit and vegetable industry to assist growers to achieve environmental sustainability. Growcom and its members aim to work in partnership with governments, regional and catchment management bodies, research organisations, the community and other stakeholders to address natural resource and environmental management issues. Through a cooperative and holistic approach, we aim to deliver workable and balanced outcomes for the industry that also benefit the broader community. The current set of highly complex regulatory, policy and planning systems make natural resource management a major challenge for growers. Growcom, therefore, is advocating for an overarching framework that encourages and coordinates efforts at local, regional, industry, state and national levels to achieve sustainable natural resource management in agriculture. Growcom has worked closely with its members to prepare a natural resources and environmental management policy statement, which is available on our website www.growcom.com.au and is provided in an attachment to this report. (see Appendix 1) This section outlines the initiatives under way in horticultural industries to support sustainable natural resource management and address environmental issues such as water quality in the Great Barrier Reef. 5.2.1 Farmcare Code of Practice for sustainable fruit and vegetable production The Farmcare Code of Practice for Sustainable Fruit and Vegetable Production in Queensland (Qld Fruit and Vegetable Growers & Horticulture Australia 1998), (the Farmcare Code) was developed through a joint project by Growcom and Horticulture Australia. The Farmcare Code was developed through extensive research, technical input and industry consultation. The intent was to define acceptable industry standards for on-farm environmental management and to provide industry members with guidance on how to meet their general environmental duty. The Farmcare Code has been endorsed by the Queensland Government as an approved Code of Practice under Section 219 of the Environmental Protection Act 1994. The code was launched in 1998 and distributed to all fruit and vegetable growers in Queensland. The Farmcare Code provides growers with guidance on efficient and careful use of natural resources, particularly water and soils; minimising environmental impacts caused by horticultural land use, particularly run-off of sediments, fertilisers and pesticides into waterways; minimising waste and pollution from horticultural land use; careful use of pesticides; and minimising impacts on biodiversity. The Farmcare Code includes sections on: • land and soil management, • water management, • biodiversity management, • air management, • noise management, • waste management, and • integrated crop management. The Farmcare Code has been heavily promoted in the industry and incorporated into property and business planning programs and industry environmental management training courses. 5.2.2 Growcom Land & Water Program Since the early 1990’s Growcom has maintained an environmental program on behalf of the industry. The purpose of Growcom’s current Land & Water program is to: • deliver projects and services that help fruit and vegetable growers achieve sustainable management of natural resources and environmental protection, and • contribute to the development of workable policy and legislative frameworks that support improved natural resource and environmental management in horticulture. The Growcom Land & Water Program is multifaceted, in recognition that environmental sustainability in the industry will not occur simply through farm-scale management activities. The program includes: • policy analysis, • strategic planning, • advocacy services, • industry projects and support services that address environmental sustainability issues at a range of scales, and • the development of partnerships that support industry environmental sustainability and deliver incentives for enhancing on farm management practices. The Growcom Land & Water Program is delivered by 10 full time staff. The major projects under the Growcom Land & Water program are outlined below. 5.2.3 Farm Management Systems in Horticulture The fruit and vegetable industry, along with other intensive agricultural industries, has embraced the concept of Farm Management Systems (FMS) (see section 7.1) as a means for growers to take a systematic and documented approach to on-farm environmental management within a broader business management framework. A Farm Management System is a management tool a farm business can use to achieve efficient and integrated management of its natural resource, environmental, staff, financial and other business management needs. The use of an FMS approach should help growers to: • better plan their management processes, • assess their management performance and effectiveness of management practices, • identify opportunities for improvements or efficiencies, and • demonstrate management practices and outcomes to external stakeholders. Growcom believes the FMS initiative can provide the core mechanism for promoting, supporting and demonstrating uptake within the fruit and vegetable industry of good agricultural practices for environmental management. In 2003, Growcom negotiated with the Department of Natural Resources and Mines to include the development of a Farm Management System process for the fruit and vegetable industry in the second stage of the Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative. In April 2004, Growcom commenced work on the Farm Management Systems project. The aim was to investigate options for an integrated management framework for horticultural enterprises and develop a suite of tools and support services that could be offered to growers to assist uptake of an FMS approach. Because the majority of fruit and vegetable businesses already have third party certified food safety and quality assurance systems in place, the Growcom FMS process is being designed to use these systems as a base on which to build additional management elements. Growcom will recommend that growers implement a management system that incorporates three key elements: a management process that drives adaptive management and continuous improvement; management practices that are consistent with up to date industry and scientific standards; and a process for assessing and demonstrating management performance and outcomes. While the Growcom FMS program will encourage growers to implement a holistic and integrated management system, the initial focus will be on supporting growers to address natural resource and environmental management priorities. In reef catchments, the key priority will be the implementation of management practices and processes that minimise sediment and nutrient movement off-farm. To assist growers to implement an FMS, Growcom is developing an FMS support service, which will include: • A recommended process for assessing current and future management priorities, • An environmental risk assessment process, • Up to date fact sheets on current industry recommended practices and minimum standards for environmental management drawn from the Farmcare Code and a range of other sources, • Information on regional natural resource and environmental management priorities and suggested processes for accounting for catchment and landscape issues in farm scale risk assessment and management, • Recommended planning and management components for an FMS for a sustainable horticultural enterprise, • An integration framework that guides how to build a full FMS using the record keeping systems and management processes already operational in the business, • Templates for FMS records and processes, • Options for participating in or making use of catchment level environmental monitoring to inform farm scale management, • Recommended processes for conducting an internal review or self-assessment of management performance, • Guidance on how to address, and achieve recognition of, statutory property planning requirements such as Land and Water Management Plans through an FMS process, and • Options for environmental assurance auditing and certification along with alternative means of achieving community or government recognition of good on-farm practices. Growcom believes that independent auditing and certification of an FMS should not be a general requirement for horticultural businesses. Some horticultural businesses, however, are interested in achieving independent verification of environmental management. Accordingly, Growcom is investigating options for environmental assurance certification. Preliminary discussions have been held with Freshcare, the industry owned food safety certification program. Freshcare is developing a new environmental and workplace health and safety module as an additional certification option. This may provide growers with a means to seek independent assessment of the environmental management components of their FMS. Growcom has also maintained active involvement in a national horticulture industry project, Horticulture for Tomorrow, which is coordinating the development of national guidelines for environmental assurance in Australian horticultural industries. The project will also develop a generic national auditing checklist for environmental assurance. Delivering FMS support to industry members Throughout 2004-2005, Growcom has been developing industry support for the FMS approach through regular briefings to growers meetings and commodity committees and through regular articles in the monthly industry journal, Fruit and Vegetable News. Growcom intends to support widespread uptake of FMS in the fruit and vegetable industry through an FMS program incorporating FMS tools, information and support services. Growcom is currently developing and trialing FMS tools and expects to have its FMS program and support services available to growers in late 2005. The program will include grower access to a central FMS information service along with regionally based support staff who can assist growers to apply the Growcom FMS tools and implement an FMS in their business. Where possible, Growcom will work in partnership with regional natural resource management organisations or catchment groups in delivering FMS services. These partnerships may facilitate the provision of group training and workshops that assist growers to analyse natural resource issues in a catchment or landscape context and design appropriate management strategies. They may also help broker access to financial support to growers for the implementation of farm management actions that contribute to regional resource condition targets. While Growcom’s FMS program and tools are still being developed, we have begun seeking funding for regionally based FMS implementation support staff. Funds have been secured for an FMS project in Far North Queensland through an eco-efficiency agreement with the Australian Government Department of the Environment and Water Resources. This project is expected to be operational in July 2005. Priority areas for other regionally-based FMS support staff are Bundaberg / Inland Burnett and the Lockyer Valley. 5.2.4 Water for Profit The Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative is a Queensland Government – rural industry partnership that has been operating since 1999. The Department of Natural Resources and Mines has contracted Growcom to deliver the initiative within the fruit and vegetable industry. While the primary focus of the Water for Profit program is to achieve water savings and productivity gains targets, the program also plays an important role in helping to deliver improved natural resource management on fruit and vegetable farms, in particular, water quality management. The focus of the Water for Profit Program is to optimise water use efficiency through improved irrigation management. While horticultural industries were already characterised by the use of advanced irrigation systems, the program has supported a process of ongoing improvement, particularly in the area of irrigation system improvements and upgrades and the use of sophisticated irrigation scheduling technologies. The program has supported the uptake of precision irrigation systems such as trickle and micro- spray, which ensure that little or no irrigation water moves off site. The program also encourages and supports the uptake of fertigation systems that allow growers to exactly match water and fertiliser application to the crop’s needs, significantly reducing the risk of nutrient movement off the farm. Between 1999-2003, the program achieved: • An awareness rate within industry of over 90%, • Around 45% of horticultural growers participating in the program and implementing improvements to their irrigation system and practices, • Over 6000 attendances at Water for Profit workshops and field days, and • Over 1400 participating in the financial incentive scheme which operated until 2003. The irrigation efficiencies facilitated through stage one of the Water for Profit program generated more than $162 million in water savings and increased productivity. For every $1 invested by the Queensland Government, the industry returned $23 in efficiency gains. Stage two of the program is currently being delivered, and the program has achieved an additional $37 million in gains since 2003. The program target is $50 million. The current grower participation rate is 30%. 5.2.5 Regional Natural Resource Networks The Natural Resource Networks project, jointly funded by Growcom and Horticulture Australia, has been operating since June 2004. The project aims to significantly enhance the participation of the fruit and vegetable industry in regional natural resource management (NRM) planning processes, in particular community- driven regional plans for NRM. The objectives of the project are to: • Support fruit and vegetable industry involvement in regional NRM processes and help identify priority NRM issues for the industry, • Encourage communication and networking amongst growers regarding NRM issues, and • Enhance regional investment into initiatives that improve NRM and sustainability in the fruit and vegetable industry. The project has been successful in supporting improved grower involvement in and input to the regional NRM plans and investment strategies and raising the profile of the fruit and vegetable industry in regional NRM processes. The project is now brokering targeted funding arrangements from regional NRM groups towards initiatives that support implementation of on-farm works or management practices in the fruit and vegetable industry that deliver farm and catchment level environmental outcomes. It is anticipated that improved water quality would be an outcome of most regional investments in horticultural projects. 5.2.6 Pest Management Strategies Since 1999, Growcom has been delivering a Pest Management Strategies project with matching funds from Horticulture Australia. The project has been extremely successful in facilitating horticultural commodity groups in Queensland to take a more strategic approach to assessing and addressing pest management needs. Through the development of strategic plans for pest management for a large number of commodities, the project has: • accelerated the uptake of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approaches that help reduce the use of pesticides on farms, • facilitated growers’ access to pesticide products that are more targeted and less environmentally harmful, and • coordinated industry investment into research and development of “softer chemicals” for pest management needs. This project, along with major investments in improved pest management methods over the last 15 years by the banana, pawpaw, vegetable, tomato and citrus industries, has contributed to significantly reducing the amount of pesticides used in horticultural farms and helped minimise the risk of pesticides moving off farms. 5.2.7 Industry Development Officers The role of Industry Development Officers (IDOs) is to provide communication, facilitation, technical and extension services for horticultural commodity groups. Currently, the banana, vegetable, pawpaw, melon, strawberry, apple and table grape industries have IDOs. Many IDOs have an increasing focus on natural resource and environmental management issues. In particular, the Banana IDO has recently completed a major survey of banana growers across Queensland to document and benchmark the environmental management practices and systems currently being used in the industry. Preliminary results show that the large majority of growers are implementing practices to minimise soil erosion and run-off from their properties and retaining or re-establishing vegetation along riparian areas. The pawpaw industry has worked with their IDO to facilitate grower groups to investigate improved nutrient management strategies in pawpaw production systems. Natural resource management issues have been included as a focus area of a newly established IDO for vegetable growers in the Bowen district. 5.2.8 GrowSmart In 2004, Growcom entered into a partnership with eco-fertiliser company, NutriSmart. NutriSmart is designed to significantly reduce the amount of chemical fertilisers used in intensive cropping systems and minimise off-site movement of nutrients. Through the partnership, Growcom members receive a significant rebate on their purchase of NutriSmart fertilisers and Growcom receives a donation for its Sustainability Program for every tonne of product sold to participating Growcom members. 5.2.9 Industry Investment in Initiatives The investment by Growcom, Horticulture Australia and horticultural commodity groups in staff and projects aimed at supporting improved natural resource and environmental management in the industry is significant. At least 5 industry funded full time equivalent staff are either fully or partly focussed on activities that directly contribute to improved water quality management in horticultural industries in the reef catchments. A significant number of industry research and development projects recently completed, under way or planned also have natural resource management outcomes. 5.2.10 Current uptake and involvement The fruit and vegetable industry’s high level of commitment to and involvement in natural resource management activities is evidenced by the participation rates in the Water for Profit program, the growing participation in regional NRM initiatives and the strong industry support for the Farmcare Code. It should also be noted that a significant proportion of banana growing enterprises in Far North Queensland have implemented environmental management systems certified to the international standard, ISO14001. Feedback from growers regarding the Farm Management Systems concept has been strongly positive as well. Many growers, however, have indicated that while they support the use of efficient systems that facilitate ongoing improvements in environmental management practices, the capacity within industry to take on additional documentation, record keeping and certification requirements for NRM issues is very limited. 5.2.11 Industry Environmental Performance Evaluation While there are sound evaluation processes in place for many industry projects, Growcom has identified that there is limited capacity within the industry to assess and report on progress towards improved environmental sustainability at an industry scale. To address this issue, Growcom aims to establish a process for collecting, collating and analysing data on industry NRM activities and achievements and broader efforts to enhance industry economic and environmental sustainability. Growcom will seek support from the Queensland Government through the Environmental Protection Agency to implement an industry sustainability audit and reporting project in 20052006. The project would focus on: • Collecting and collating objective data regarding the industry’s environmental and economic performance and benchmark the level of grower involvement and industry investment in NRM activities, • Identifying opportunities to improve, and • Investigating options for on ongoing monitoring and report framework. Growcom also aims to maintain strong links to other monitoring and evaluation processes operating or being established at regional, state and national scales, for example projects funded through state investments within the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality. 5.3 Future Directions Growcom and the fruit and vegetable industries in the catchments of the Great Barrier Reef and across Queensland have demonstrated a strong commitment to natural resource and environmental management practices and processes that contribute to industry sustainability and the objectives of the Reef Water Quality Protection Plan. The key focus of future activities will be to: • Support uptake within fruit and vegetable industries of Farm Management Systems as a means for growers to document and demonstrate their management activities and to drive ongoing farm management improvements. • Maintain and enhance projects and support services through the Growcom Land & Water Program and other industry and regional structures that assist growers to address natural resource management issues. • Seek financial support through regional NRM investment and other avenues for growers who are implementing farm management improvements that deliver reef water quality outcomes and achievement of regional resource condition targets. • Implement a project to assess and report in further detail on the fruit and vegetable industry’s progress towards economic and environmental sustainability and identify options for on-going monitoring and reporting arrangements. To accelerate initiatives that drive improved natural resource and environmental management in the fruit and vegetable industry, Growcom recommends that: • Governments provide direct funding to industry organisations to enhance and expand the delivery of projects and services that help growers and industries to address priority issues. • The model of property and landscape scale monitoring of environmental indicators provided by the Integrated Area Wide Management project in the Central Highlands be extended to key reef catchments to provide growers with a more effective feedback loop between on-farm practices and catchment level responses. • The capacity for and investment in research and development targeted at supporting on- farm natural resource management should be significantly enhanced. • An overarching framework be developed that supports and coordinates industry, government and regional NRM group efforts to progress sustainability in agricultural industries. 6 Sugar Industry 6.1 Sugar Growing in the Great Barrier Reef catchments Across Australia, sugarcane is grown in 18 geographically separate regions. Production within Queensland constitutes approximately ninety–five percent of the country’s sugarcane production with the remaining within northern NSW and a small volume in WA’s Ord region. The majority of sugar is grown the Great Barrier Reef catchments on land that was lowland forest or wetlands on the coastal plain Family farms with number of farms totally approximately 4000 dominate the cane-growing sector. These farms supply cane to 30 sugar mills. Along with this consolidation of existing farms, there has been a corresponding consolidation process for sugar mills. Over the last 70 years, only two new mills have been established both in new cane growing areas in the Ord River valley and on the Atherton Tablelands. In recent years a number have closed, the last being the Nambour Mill on the sunshine Coast in 2003. Eleven sugar regions have only one mill. Australia wide the industry has over 5,000 growers who produce 30 to 40 million tonnes of sugarcane annually. From this cane 4-5 million tonnes of sugar is produced. The gross value of sugar produced in 2003 in Australia was in the order of 800 million Australian dollars down from its peak of 2 billion dollars in 1997. Tonnage has remained relatively constant during this time. The strengthening of the Australian dollar and the spectacular increase in export sugar from Brazil, one of the largest sugar producing countries in the world has reduced the price of Australian sugar by nearly 50 % during this time. Within the Great Barrier Reef catchments there exists 28 Mills, 6 major grower regions, consisting of approximately 4500 business enterprises. CANEGROWERS, the peak industry representative body for Australia’s sugarcane growing industry supports Australia’s sugarcane industry by representing and advancing the interests of the industry to governments, non-government organisations, the media and the community. In addition, BSES Ltd. and Productivity Boards provide technical assistance to farmers. The major millers are CSR, Bundabung Sugar and a number of co-operative milling companies. 6.2 Industry Environmental Initiatives CANEGROWERS in conjunction with various other sugar industry bodies as well as other stakeholders including Government continue to roll out a number of initiatives aimed improving natural resource management in the sugar industry and minimising the impacts of sugar cane growing on the environment. Replacement and fragmentation of the lowland forest and wetlands on the coastal plains in the Great Barrier Reef Catchments by agriculture including sugar cane growing as well as urban development has altered the properties of landscapes and the biophysical functioning of catchments. The industry is conscious of this modification of catchment hydrology and water quality by its activity and that this can have potentially detrimental impacts on the natural environment if adequate safeguards are not in place. With this in mind improvement in the management of water runoff and on-farm improvement of soils, pesticide, herbicides and nutrients to deliver better environmental outcomes to receiving waters, including local rivers and estuaries and the Great Barrier Reef lagoon is a priority. A number of the initiatives are briefly described below: • Accredited Nutrient Management Plans CANEGROWERS, in conjunction with BSES Ltd, has devised a two-day accredited program whereby farmers can develop nutrient management plans for their farms. These plans will be based upon soil types, water availability and trash management for individual farms. These programs will be delivered in the Wet Tropics, Mackay Whitsunday and Burdekin cane growing regions. The courses started in 2005 and grower numbers are still small. • Engagement with Regional Natural Resource Management Bodies CANEGROWERS has worked closely with Wet Tropics, Mackay Whitsunday, and Burdekin Dry Tropics; Mary Burnett and South East Queensland Natural Resource Management (NRM) bodies. CANEGROWERS, the community and the Wet Tropics NRM has worked together to agreed upon key management practices and adoption rate targets for priority best practice for cane growing. These targets are available in the NRM plans for the region, will be meet over the next three years as part of canegrowers commitment to the NRM plan. • Land and Water Management Plans Up to 60% of canegrowers who irrigate their farms have already completed or will complete Land and Water Management Plans for their farm water resource needs. These plans developed in conjunction with DNRM encourage sustainable farming practices. These plans, which will allow farmers to trade water, are based upon water conservation, water recycling and best management farm practices. • Eco - efficiency Agreement with the Australian Government This agreement has supported the roll out of COMPASS. Also the industry’s first Public Environmental Report has been completed and will be launched in July 2005. • The Code of Practice for Sustainable Cane Growing The Code of Practice for Sustainable Cane Growing was developed in 1998. It contains sections covering developing new land (including farm plans, vegetation and drainage), established farms (including farm plan, vegetation, soils, irrigation, drainage, fire, timing of operations, fuels and chemicals and waste), references, advice on fertilizer use, and advice on water use efficiencies. The code was intended to help growers meet their obligations of duty of care under the Environmental Protection Act 1994. • The Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative - Stage 1 (1999 – 2003) The sugar industry in conjunction with cotton and grains, dairy and lucerne and horticulture industries have been strongly involved in and supportive of the Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative (RWUEI). The Initiative is a partnership between the above industries and the State Government to improve the use and management of available irrigation water, thereby improving the competitiveness, profitability, and environmental sustainability of Queensland's intensive rural industries. Please see below for more detail on this program. • Combining Profitably and Sustainability in Sugar (COMPASS) COMPASS (COMbining Profitability And Sustainability in Sugar), is a program and a workbook which enables growers to identify financial, social and environmental improvements to their farming practices in a workshop setting. Please see below for more detail on this program. • The Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative - Stage 2 (2004 – 2006) In 2004 Stage 2 of the Initiative was launched with the focus of the program broadened to also include a focus on the off-farm environmental impacts of irrigation. Please see below for more detail on this program. • SUGARCANE FMS To farm more sustainably, Australia’s sugarcane industry has come together to develop a system, known as SUGARCANE FMS to assist cane growers improve their farming operations on an ongoing basis. Please see below for more detail on this program. 6.2.1 Code of Practice for Sustainable Cane Growing The Code of Practice for Sustainable Cane Growing (CAENGROWERS) was developed in 1998 in response to the GHD Audit. It was developed by CANEGROWERS with input from individual cane growers, the then Department of Environment (now Environmental Protection Agency), BSES and the Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Sugar Production. The code aims to establish management practices to enable growers to meet their General Environmental Duty of Care obligations under the Environmental Protection Act 1994. The code contains sections covering developing new land (including farm plans, vegetation and drainage), established farms (including farm plan, vegetation, soils, irrigation, drainage, fire, timing of operations, fuels and chemicals and waste), advice on fertilizer use, and advice on water use efficiencies. Together with the COMPASS initiative, which ‘values adds’ to the Code (the COMPASS workbook covers management practices in more detail and the workshops aim to stimulate grower adoption) have had some measure of success in encouraging farmers to adopt improved practices (C4ES, 2004). It is important to note that the Audit acknowledges that this improvement albeit sometimes difficult to pinpoint has not been reflected in a range of community reported environmental outcomes and/or community perceptions. This lack of community acknowledgement of industry effort to strive for improved practices is now translating into a drive by the industry to demonstrate environmental responsibility and stewardship. The Sugar FMS program represents this drive. Compared to other industries with environmental codes of practice the ability to ascertain uptake of the sugar code is a little more robust. To date a number of studies have been undertaken that have involved examining the use and uptake of the Code. In 2000, BSES conducted a study of best practice adoption in the sugar industry with particular reference to the code. (O’Grady & Christensen 2001). The study found 79% of Queensland cane growers were aware of the Code, with 62% possessing a copy, of which 75% had read it. An unpublished study commissioned by the Environmental Protection Agency and conducted by the Institute of Sustainable Futures in 2003/2004 involved a survey of 323 cane growers to review the utility of the Code of Practice. The study found that 14% of respondents used the code at least once a month, 57% use the Code one to four times a year, 14% use it at least once a year and 6% of respondents indicating they have never used the Code. The small survey sample and limited response rate (44 growers equating to 14%) suggest though statical analysis is somewhat unreliable. The Industry Audit (C4ES) also considered uptake of the Code of Practice. It found of the growers surveyed (225) that 88% were aware of the Code, but with only 61% having read it. Of those who have read the Code 97% expressed support for the Code and believe that it helped them to minimise the risk of environmental harm. 6.2.2 Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative - Stage 1 (1999 –2003) The original Rural Water Use Efficiency water use was funded by the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (NR&M) for four years with $41 million being allocated to the program. These funds were allocated to the program across four areas: • $23M to the Adoption Program (extension, development and research), and • $18M to Reducing Water Losses from Storages on Farm; Financial Incentives to achieve Best Management Practice; and Reducing Water Losses in Irrigation Water Supply and Distribution Systems. The Adoption Program and the Financial Incentive Scheme programs were managed through the respective industries in partnership with the Department. The major focus of Stage 1 was on improving the water use efficiency and productivity of the main rural irrigation industries in Queensland. The first stage of the Initiative included stocktakes of existing irrigation practices and identified cost-effective opportunities for improvements. These stocktakes were used to identify best management practices in each industry sector. The financial incetnives component provided an avenue to directly assist growers adopt more efficant practices. Along with the other industry Adoption Programs, the sugar program was found to be a great success and a pioneering partnership program between government and industry. Despite facing many barriers including record low sugar prices, disease and drought grower involvement and adoption of the program exceeded milestone targets and all expectations. Over the entire 4 years of the program around 3100 growers or 93% of possible growers were involved. Secondly, 85% of growers substantially achieved irrigation BMP compared to a target of 70% for 2003. An estimated 210,000 ML of water saved has been attributed to the program and an extra $135M in production generated by the sugar industry. The Financial Incentive Scheme program also proved to be huge success with 1898 growers, or 63% of irrigated cane growers in project areas, obtaining funding under this scheme to make significant improvements to their irrigation efficiency. Of the State Government’s investment of $3.7M in incentives to the sugar industry as a part of the initiative, cane growers have spent $16M. That is, for each dollar that the Government invested, growers invested an additional $3.30. 6.2.3 Combining Profitably and Sustainability in Sugar (COMPASS) Following the development of the Code of Practice for Sustainable Sugar Growing the industry took the next step of stimulating grower involvement in and use of the code though a self- assessment workshop process. The industry developed COMPASS (COMbining Profitability And Sustainability in Sugar), a workbook which enabled growers to identify financial, social and environmental improvements to their farming practices. Originally COMPASS was developed mainly as a tool to create awareness of best practice amongst growers, and to help them benchmark their performance against the code of practice. While inextricably linked to the Code of Practice it in itself is not a code and ideally both initiatives should be viewed together rather than in isolation. COMPASS development was led by BSES together with support from CANEGROWERS, the Queensland Government and the SRDC. The workbook was launched in 2001 and workshops commenced in 2002. The workbook and associated one day or two half day workshops involves growers ranking and assessing their on farm performance against practices contained within the workbook in ten key management areas. Practices are described from a farm management and practical perspective, e.g I do exclude stock from riparian areas - Section 6 p. 47.). COMPASS also contains a section for growers to plan any changes or improvements to their current practices in the form of an Action Plan. As at 31 May 2005, 1173 COMPASS certificates had been issued to grower participants. This represented approximately 27% of sugarcane farms in Queensland. It is expected that managers responsible for over 50% of the total sugarcane area will have participated in a COMPASS workshop by the end 2006. The industry will use COMPASS as a base for the ongoing development of the Cane Farm Management System. 6.2.4 Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative - Stage 2 (2004 –2006) Recognising that sugar regions in Queensland vary considerably simply as a result of geographical differences, the Stage 2 Adoption Program is seeking to identify and subsequently manage regional priority issues. Regional management committee have been established and have been tasked with establishing regional natural resource management priorities and targets. The overall focus of the industry’s Stage 2 is improving environmental performance of the sugar industry. This process has encouraged the committees to link production priorities with natural resource management priorities, seek the involvement of stakeholders such as regional natural resource management groups and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, link with other regional projects and set work plans which are focussed and achievable. An additional benefit of this approach has been the potential to leverage other available funds (eg. through the natural resource management groups) to ‘value add’ to the adoption program. All regions identified water-related issues as priority areas to target with management and extension activities. This includes irrigation water use efficiency, water quality leaving the farm, and water aquifer/table management. Table 3 overleaf outlines some of these activities. Table 3: - Sugar Industry RWUE - stage 2 Activities Region Activity North • Nutrient management workshops • Shed meeting tours eg lagoons, sediment ponds, minimum tillage • Bus tour to other regions and industries eg minimum tillage • Chemical accreditation workshops • Tree planting via local catchment group Burdekin • Control traffic to minimise run-off and better utilise farm inputs such as irrigation and crop nutrient requirements • Rotation cropping discussed at shed meetings • Recycle pits discussed at shed meetings • Irrigation scheduling at discussion groups • Link with regional NRM and regional planning groups • LWMP workshop development Central • Link with regional NRM and regional planning groups eg Healthy Waterways • Minimum tillage at shed meetings • LWMP workshop development • Nutrient management workshop development South • Link between farm inputs, on-farm environment and off-farm environment eg nutrient management workshops, LWMP workshops, herbicide management workshops • Link with other industry to highlight importance of environmental issues eg for food grade soybeans (Grain in Cane, bus tour to areas, Target 100) • Highlight soil-water balance principals to best use rainfall and irrigation and to minimise off-site impacts. Also issues such as deep drainage, run-off Stage 2 targets for the sugar indsurty include: • Increase irrigation water use efficiency by 2%. • 50% grower adoption of best management practice to address the regional priority issue. • 90% grower awareness of management techniques which address the regional priority issue. 6.2.5 SUGARCANE FMS The industry is developing a system known as SUGARCANE FMS to help growers build on the programs and initiatives they have already been a part of, and put in place a customised documented system to track their farm’s individual profitability and progress. SUGARCANE FMS (Farm Management Systems) is an option for growers who are searching for ways to become more productive and profitable. The FMS will incorporate Land and Water Management Plans, the Grower Positioning Program and other industry programs currently in place. Whilst the SUGARCANE FMS is still in developmental stage, and planned to be rolled out in 2006, many growers continue to develop better farm practices to become more profitable and sustainable. Many in the farming community have been at the forefront of calls for improved farm management practices, joining initiatives such as Landcare or embracing new practices such as minimum-tillage farming, legume fallow and green cane trash blanketing. 6.2.6 C4ES Sugar Industry Environmental Audit The Independent Environmental Audit, commissioned by the Sugar Industry Guidance Group in 2003, in general focused on the rate of adoption of Best Management Practice (BMP) within the sugar cane industry and downstream processing. The audit also reviewed the COMPASS program as well as the adoption and usefulness of the Code of Practice. In addition, a review of stakeholder interaction and natural resource management was undertaken. A clear message from the audit is that substantial changes in farming practices have been adopted and are leading to improved environmental outcomes. A further message from the audit is that this progress has not been enunciated clearly to the government and wider general public. Productivity on farm and environmental outcomes have been delivered by better control of water through improved irrigation practices, laser levelling and drainage works. The ongoing support of these change programs is likely to continue to deliver financial and environmental outcomes. Even so, there is a low use of higher technology in water management scheduling tools, indicating that the potential efficiency gains from utilising this kind of technology are still to be gained. Other areas of potential improvement include: • Greater uptake of soil and leaf testing, • Sub surface application of fertiliser, • Uptake of controlled traffic, minimum tillage and other advanced techniques, and • Improved harvesting. The following recommendations were made by the Audit: • That there is a whole of industry environmental policy and adoption of BMP, • That sustainable farming outcomes be driven by regional focus groups developing regional Environmental Risk Assessments and BMP Registers, and • That the sugar industry develops a framework, which builds on and incorporates the current Code of Practice and subsequent industry BMP. Many of these recommendations will be facilitated by the development and adoption of Farm Management Systems, an activity currently being undertaken in the industry. 6.3 Future Directions The ongoing development of improved farming practices based upon controlled traffic; legume fallow and minimum tillage systems complement the changes already undertaken by the sugar cane industry to improved productivity on farm. These practices are disseminated via a huge communication network in the sugar cane industry. This involves mills, BSES, government departments, CANEGROWERS and individual growers. The ongoing programs of COMPASS, FMS and RWUE2 with the NRM incentive programs are assisting farmers in the improvement and documentation of their practices. This documentation will assist farmers in continuous improvement of on-farm performance in addition to benchmarking industry against best management practice. 7 Cross Industry Activity 7.1 Farm Management Systems In mid 2003 the major members of QFF, CANEGROWERS, Cotton Australia, Growcom and Queensland Dairyfarmers’ Organisation together with the Queensland Chicken Growers Association and Nursery & Garden Industry Qld commenced work on the Farm Management Systems initiative. This work centres on value adding to the existing and developing programs of these industries namely: • The Cotton Industry’s BMP Program • The Sugar Industry’s FMS Program • Growcom’s FMS program • Dairy Industry’s Dairying Better N Better Program • Meat Chicken Industry’s National Environmental Management System, and • Nursery Industry’s Accreditation Scheme (NIASA) It should be noted that the term Farm Management Systems is used mainly as a collective reference the above programs. Because these programs have developed or are developing to suit and match industry priorities, needs and circumstances they have their own individual identities. A number of drivers prompted these industries under QFF to work together including recognition of shared design and delivery features, shared policy and implementation obstacles, the need to minimise potential duplication between programs when implemented on multi commodity farms, and the prospect of achieving efficiencies and savings through collaboration. 7.1.1 Work to Date Work to date by QFF and member organisations on the Farm Management Systems initiative has been significant. A range of strategic and applied policy negotiations has commenced with the State Government to support the development and implementation in Queensland by industries of these programs. The signing in March 2005 of a Memorandum of Understanding between QFF and the Queensland Government relating to Farm Management Systems sets out a strategic policy framework for action. This agreement comprises of commitments from the State Government, QFF and the major member organisations to the support the initiative. In addition to this policy work under the banner of QFF, member organisations are progressing the development and implementation of their FMS programs as outlined in their relevant sections. A draft Farm Management Systems Framework and draft Guide to the Common Elements of FMS Programs have been developed and are now out for consultation with stakeholders. Consultation on these documents will be wrapped up in June 2005 and it is expected that the final versions will be ready by the end of August 2005. The FMS Framework sets out a number of guiding principles and objectives with the intent of providing a common framework for joint activity by industries. Activity under the framework is both policy and program implementation orientated and the framework also serves as an interface between key stakeholders and government. The draft guide details the common design and delivery elements between the industry programs, namely: • Recommended management process, • Use of and focus of recommended management practice, • On-farm performance verification, • Delivery, review and evaluation mechanisms, and • Support by industry. Working with non-government stakeholders is equally important and QFF has also established a key partnership with Regional Natural Resource Management (NRM bodies, through the Queensland Regional NRM Groups Collective (the Collective), to help in the delivery of programs and explore and develop links between farm and regional orientated activity. The Farm Management Systems initiative is a significant area of focus under a Memorandum of Understanding signed in June 2004 between QFF and the Collective. 8 Conclusions Within the cotton, dairy, grain, grazing, horticulture and sugar industries a number of initiatives aimed at improving industry natural resource management and minimising the impacts arising from farming on the environment are progressing. These initiatives are being pursued individually by industry, in partnership with fellow industries, and in partnership with government, regional NRM bodies and other industry stakeholders. This work and activity represents significant investment by industries on behalf of their constituents, and demonstrates a strong commitment by industry to be proactive contributors to an environmentally responsible Queensland. The Great Barrier Reef is recognised as one of the greatest natural wonders of the world and rural industry, who make up the predominant land use in the reef catchments, are committed to minimising impacts that may arise from farming activity on the health and resilience of the icon. Many of the initiatives mentioned are in their early stages of development and implementation and time is needed for efforts to mature and improve. The breadth and depth of initiatives and associated activity is unprecedented. Partnerships, mutual support, trust and confidence are highly regarded by industries as motivators to continue progressing these and perhaps more initiatives into the future. As development of initiatives progresses, a stronger focus on facilitating uptake by farmers and improvement in farm practices will result. Direct investment by government in industry initiatives is essential if accelerated delivery is desired. 9 References C4ES Pty Ltd, 2004, Independent Environmental Audit of the Sugar Industry in Queensland, New South Wales and Western Australia Report - Volume 2, C4ES Pty Ltd, Adelaide. CANEGROWERS, Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations, Sugar Research & Development Corporation, 1998, The Code of Practice for Sustainable Cane Growing, CANEGROWERS, Brisbane. CDI Pinnacle Management & Street Ryan & Associates, 2004, Economic Contribution of Horticulture to the Queensland Economy, Growcom & Horticulture Australia Ltd. (HAL), Sydney. Goyne, P.J., (ed) 2003, Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative: Cotton and Grains Adoption Program Final Report, Cotton Cooperative Research Centre. Institute of Sustainable Futures, 2004, Review of Environmental Codes of Practice under the Environmental Protection Act (1994), (unpublished report). Macarthur Agribusiness, 2004, Evaluation of the Australian Cotton Industry Best Management Practices Program, Macarthur Agribusiness. Brisbane. Queensland Dairyfarmers’ Organisation & Dept of Primary Industries, 2001, The Queensland Dairy Farming Environmental Code of Practice, Queensland Dairyfarmers’ Organisation & Dept of Primary Industries, Brisbane. Queensland Fruit and Vegetable Growers & Horticulture Australia, 1998, Farm Care, Cultivating a Better Future: Code of Practice for Sustainable Fruit and Vegetable Production in Queensland, Queensland Fruit and Vegetable Growers & Horticulture Australia, Brisbane. 10 Appendix 1 Growcom Natural Resource Management Policy Statement The issues Environmental protection and natural resource management are important issues for growers. Much of Queensland’s fruit and vegetable industry is located close to sensitive environments such as the Great Barrier Reef. The community, industry and government recognise the importance of maintaining a healthy environment. Across Australia there is a high level of concern about major environmental problems such as salinity, declining river health and the loss of natural ecosystems. Issues such as resource security in water and vegetation are the subjects of hot debate. Fruit and vegetable growers in Queensland aim to be responsible custodians of natural resources and rural environments, however, highly complex regulatory, policy and planning systems make natural resource management a major challenge for growers. Our position Growcom supports the sustainable development of the horticulture industry in Queensland. This requires horticultural enterprises to be profitable, socially viable and environmentally safe. Growcom and its members aim to work in partnership with government, research organisations, regional and catchment management bodies, the community and other stakeholders to address natural resource and environmental management issues. Growcom believes an overarching framework is needed to encourage and coordinate sustainable natural resource management at local, regional, state and national levels. Through a cooperative and holistic approach, we aim to deliver workable and balanced outcomes for the industry that also benefit the broader community. Our commitment The industry has made a commitment to the Farmcare Code of Practice for Sustainable Fruit and Vegetable Production in Queensland1, which outlines good environmental management practices such as: . Efficient and careful use of natural resources, particularly water and soils. . Minimising environmental impacts caused by horticultural land use, particularly run-off of sediments, fertilisers and pesticides into waterways. . Minimising waste and pollution from horticultural land use. . Careful use of pesticides. . Minimising impacts on biodiversity. Growcom maintains an environment program designed to assist its members to continually improve their environmental performance and achieve 1 The Farmcare Code has been endorsed by the Queensland Government as an approved Code of Practice under Section 219 of the Environmental Protection Act 1994. It constitutes an industry standard giving guidance to growers in meeting their 'General Environmental Duty' under the Act. ecological sustainability. We believe a ‘triple bottom line’ approach would be an appropriate measure of the industry’s performance. Our expectations Growcom seeks recognition and commitment from government and the community that the industry requires support to achieve its goal of ecological sustainability. In particular, the industry requires: . The opportunity to apply self-regulation wherever possible to address environmental issues. . Planning and management of natural resources to be based on sound science. . If necessary, negotiated transition phases of an appropriate, planned, and agreed timeframe that allow industry members time to adapt or restructure to legislative or policy changes, implement changes to practices or develop solutions to problems. . Financial and other support for growers when the public benefits of environmental management outweigh private benefits, and when the community’s expectations of environmental management or biodiversity conservation restrict growers’ farm management beyond current recommended practices. . A range of financial and market-based incentives be explored and used as much as possible to encourage the adoption of improved environmental management practices. . Institutional, economic and other barriers to the adoption of sustainable management practices be identified and addressed. Our agenda items Issues to be considered within this policy area include: . A 10-year plan for natural resource management in Queensland and on-farm delivery programs. . Regional and catchment planning and management within an overarching framework. . Natural resource access, allocation and trading (eg water, carbon credits). . Great Barrier Reef. . Vegetation management and tree clearing. . Water quality. . Salinity. . Greenhouse and climate change. . Acid-sulphate soils. . Biodiversity and wildlife management. . Pest and weed management and chemical use. . Biotechnology and genetically modified organisms. . Organic food production. . Competing land use eg urban development in rural areas. . Local government land use planning. . Property management planning. . Farm Management Systems in agriculture. End of Document