Casey and Cardinia Regional Agricultural Audit and Action … · 2012. 12. 12. · Casey and $173,091,457 for Cardinia giving an annual value of $282,660,140 for the region (refer

Casey and Cardinia Regional AgriculturalAudit and Action Framework.

Final Report – February 2004

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................1

METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................4

ECONOMIC OUTPUT OF AGRICULTURE IN THE REGION.........................6

FINDINGS, THEMES AND ISSUES EMERGING FROM THE PROJECT. ...10

The Survey ............................................................................................................................................10

The Focus Groups.................................................................................................................................18

DISCUSSION OF MAJOR ISSUES...............................................................31

Rural: Urban Interface ........................................................................................................................31

The Escalating Cost of Land in the Region ........................................................................................39

Sustainability and Land Management................................................................................................42

Water .....................................................................................................................................................43

Roads and Transport ...........................................................................................................................46

Costs versus Returns Price Squeeze....................................................................................................47

The Profile / Perception of Farming ...................................................................................................49

Business Administration and Legislative Issues ................................................................................51

Planning Issues Relevant to Agriculture ............................................................................................52

REPORTS OF ONE ON ONE INTERVIEWS.................................................55

LIST OF PRIORITY ACTIONS ......................................................................60

COMMENTS FROM THE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE................................62

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

There are a large number of people without whose input this project would not have beencompleted. The Project Officer, Barrie Pickersgill, would like to thank the followingorganisations and people who have been so willing to give their time, experience andknowledge during the course of the project.

The program was funded under the Regional Assistance Program by the Department ofTransport and Regional Services. Thanks to Michael Cummins and Renee Crossley fromthe Melbourne office for their assistance.

Steering CommitteeChairman - Halvard Dalheim, Manager Strategic Development, City of CaseyDes Wynne, Manager Economic Development, Cardinia ShireIan Anderson, President, Cardinia Branch VFFRichard Percy, Executive Officer, South East DevelopmentDavid Young, Dairy Representative, Cardinia Branch VFFMiranda Cox, Equine Project Manager, South East DevelopmentChas Harding, Hardings Orchards, PakenhamKim McFarland, Strategic Development, City of CaseyLyn Link, Beef Farmer & Women on Farms RepresentativeJoanna Redmond, Business Development Officer, Cardinia ShireLuis Gazzola, Chairman, South East Vegetable GrowersArthur Giaccotto, Australian Asparagus CouncilJason Keating, Regional Marketing Officer, Dept of Primary IndustryColin McQuillan, Licensing Supervisor, Southern Rural WaterFrank Crameri, Southern Rural WaterJenni Ireland, Manager Applied Science & Horticulture, Chisholm InstituteTom Schreurs, South East Vegetable Growers

Other ContributorsPeter Schreurs, Devon MeadowsIan Ada, Sustainable Agribusiness Officer, Shire of Yarra RangesMax Coster, Department of Primary IndustryGeoff Kirton, Economic Development Project Officer, Shire of South GippslandIbrahim Malas, Sales and Marketing General Manager, Lemnos FoodsPenny Taramides, Export Adviser, TradestartAnne Langworthy, Director, Centre for Regional Development, Swinburn University ofTechnologyMarie Harding, Hardings Orchards, PakenhamJoanne Butterworth-Gray, Drouin West Fruit and Berry FarmJenny Pullar, President, Cardinia Ranges Vignerons AssociationJohn Osmelak, CEO, Flowers VictoriaTheo Van Roy, Dairy and Poultry Farmer, PakenhamKevin Crehan, Poultry Farmer, LongwarryCampbell Chapman, Dairy Farmer, CaldermeadeJohn Clarke, President, VFF Chicken Meat GroupBarry Jones, Manager Regulatory Services, Cardinia ShireAllan and Glenda Williams, Allanglen Lodge, CranbourneDr Danielle Auldist, Executive Officer, GippsDairySophie O’Neil, Cardinia Food and Wine Development

Sincere thanks to those farmers who donated their valuable time to attend the Focus Groupsessions and whose input proved invaluable.

Thanks to the enthusiastic group of farmers and other stakeholders who attended the ‘Focuson Farming’ Agribusiness Workshop which added enormous value to the work previouslydone during the course of the project.

Many thanks to the members of the City of Casey Strategic Development and CityDevelopment teams, with special thanks to Halvard Dalheim, Kim McFarland, Jocelyn Blair,Angela Smyth, Trevor Wakefield, Anna Kijowska, Leanne Terrington and Lorna Benoitonalong with Joanna Redmond, Cardinia Development Project Officer for their invaluableassistance, input, advice and support.

To Allison Jones, previously with the City of Casey and Carla Boord previously withCardinia Shire, thank you for your support early in the project and for your ongoing interest.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This audit of agriculture in Casey and Cardinia was brought about by the recognition withinthe two municipalities that there was a lack of knowledge in the region about the farmingsector. A successful funding application was made to the Commonwealth GovernmentsDepartment of Transport and Regional Services and additional funding was provided by theCity of Casey as the lead proponent with additional funds from Cardinia Shire. AnAgribusiness Officer was appointed in January 2003 to conduct the audit.

The process used to collect the data required was as follows:

• A steering committee was established to provide direction and local community inputto the project.

• Desktop research was conducted into other similar research projects and studies.• Statistical financial data was sourced from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS)

and supplemented by industry data where this was available.• A survey was undertaken of all landholdings outside the urban area. The response rate

was 22.1% which can be considered to provide statistically valid data.• An SPSS statistical software package was used to assist in the analysis of the returned

questionnaires.• Respondents to the survey were given the opportunity to indicate whether or not they

would like their names to be included in a register of people who are interested informing some type of agribusiness organisation for the region. Over 130 farmersindicated that they would like to be registered.

• Focus groups were conducted with the major industry sectors in the region.• A one day regional agribusiness workshop, Focus on Farming, was held to discuss

and refine the issues raised throughout the remainder of the project.• A number of one-on-one interviews were conducted with individuals across the

agribusiness sector including farmers, executive officers of agribusinessorganisations, authors of other relevant reports and appropriate officers of other LocalAuthorities.

The Estimated Value of Agricultural Operations as recorded by the ABS is $109,568,683 forCasey and $173,091,457 for Cardinia giving an annual value of $282,660,140 for the region(refer to comments regarding these values under ‘Economic Output of the Region’ later in thisreport).

The survey indicated that 42% of the land holdings outside the urban area in Casey wereincome earning and the same figure for Cardinia was 73%. The largest percentage of farms inthe region are beef properties. These comprise 55.6% of the farms in the two municipalitiesfollowed by dairy farms at 12.6%. Dairy farms tend to be the largest farms by size in the

region with an average size over 110 hectares followed by vegetable farms averaging almost60 hectares. Beef properties average just over 50 hectares.

69% of the regions farmers estimate that all or most of their farm inputs are sourced fromwithin the region indicating that there is a significant economic flow on effect from the farmsector.

Business confidence tends towards the positive for both the short term twelve month periodand for the longer five year outlook. This result does however need to be interpreted with theunderstanding that the region is hopefully coming out of a long period of drought.

The region employs a large workforce and the survey captured 1503 full time and permanentpart time employees. This number includes property owners and their employed familymembers. It is not clear whether there is respondent bias in the employee numbers in thesurvey but the data suggests that there is a large permanent and part time employment base inthe agricultural sector in the region. The region also employs a large seasonal workforce withthe asparagus industry being the largest seasonal employer and orchard fruit and the vegetableindustry also contributing seasonal jobs.

Around 10% of the regions farmers engage in some form of value adding and 7.6% exportoverseas directly from the farm. Of the businesses which do not currently export,16.1% have an interest in becoming involved in exporting products.

Water is an important topic to the regions farmers and the availability of ongoing supplies ofquality water is the main concern. The provision of re cycled water from the EasternIrrigation Scheme, due to be operational by summer 2004, will aid in maintaining many of theregions aquifers and therefore water quality.

Key advantages of the region are seen to be the proximity of Melbourne, the climate, qualityof the soils, ready access to labour, the Victorian Livestock Exchange at Pakenham, theCranbourne horse complex, good farm supply stores, being close to major infrastructure andareas of great natural beauty.

The eight major challenges for primary producers in the region were identified throughout theaudit process as the price of land, the ‘right to farm’, availability of water, sustainability andland management, roads and transport, costs versus returns price squeeze, theprofile/perception of farming and business administration and legislative issues. These eightchallenges are discussed in detail later in the report.

The report outlines a number of actions that need to be undertaken to begin the process ofaddressing the issues raised during the project. There is also a list prioritising these projectslater in the report.

Casey and Cardinia Regional Agricultural Audit and Action Framework February 2004

1

INTRODUCTION

Background

In 2002, the City of Casey and Cardinia Shire submitted a joint proposal to the Department ofTransport and Regional Services (DOTARS) to fund a project to investigate the farming sectorwithin the region covered by the two municipalities. The primary objectives as written in theproject submission were as follows:

”Provide information pertaining to the regional agricultural production capabilities. This willenable both Casey and Cardinia to better respond to State and Federal Government, the educationsector and industry requests for information, particularly in respect to export opportunities.

To identify and develop an understanding of the challenges faced by primary producers in aregion subjected to conflicting pressures from non-agricultural land uses and develop strategies tomanage these issues; through extensive industry consultation via surveys, sectoral workshops, keystakeholder interviews and a regional Search Conference.

Ensure the agricultural sector is resourced appropriately, by developing communication andnetworking frameworks amongst all stakeholders. This will facilitate co-ordinated regionalresponses to development issues and opportunities, for example export and supply chaindevelopment, delivery of training workshops, information provision and dissemination (such asthe implications of the Metropolitan Strategy, upon its release in September). To retain andsustain current employment levels and develop future employment opportunities in the sector andtherefore related sectors such as food processing and machinery manufacturing througheffectively communicating and raising awareness of land use planning controls and theirimplications and future infrastructure. As well as improving networks with regional skills andemployment initiatives targeting the industry and the future joint development of industrystrategies which may include; development of succession plans and identifying new productioninnovations, emerging crops and export opportunities.

To create a prioritised list of future projects for both municipalities to undertake to ensurebusiness and employment growth through the identification of barriers to development and farmproductivity, based on the business development needs identified through the industry audit andSearch Conference, thus ensuring sustainable and ongoing outcomes for the regional agriculturalindustry. These may include market research into demand and supply factors, successionplanning, waste water re-use and infrastructure constraints. The information collected will enablethe development and delivery of well-targeted programs by education and private sectors andsupported by local government, to meet the needs of producers”.

Approval and funding was received in late 2002 and an Agribusiness Officer appointed in midJanuary 2003 on a twelve month contract.

The implementation of this project was timely considering the enormous changes that have takenplace in the south-eastern metropolitan growth corridor in recent years. It seems that the pace ofdevelopment in the region is ever increasing with ongoing and strong demand for land to developboth housing and industrial estates along with the infrastructure needed to support this rapidexpansion.


2

The City of Casey

The City, covering an area of 395 square kilometres, has a population of more than 209,000 whichmeans that the city is now demographically larger than Geelong. The population is expected toeventually reach 320,000. As an indication of the rapid growth of the City, 46% of Melbourne's totalgrowth in the 5 years to 1996 occurred in Casey. On average, around 65 families move into Casey eachweek. This is equivalent to about 10,000 new residents each year.

The City of Casey includes part of Melbourne's south-eastern growth corridor and has five distinctgeographic regions:

The foothills are mainly used for lifestyle living with activities including grazing, horse agistmentand regional open space. The population in this rural/residential zone is centred on thecommunity villages of Harkaway and Narre Warren North.

The main residential and commercial sector is around the Princes Highway and the SouthGippsland Highway corridors. There are two regional shopping centres, at Narre Warren-Fountain Gate and Cranbourne, as well as sub-regional centres at Endeavour Hills, Hampton Park,Casey Central and Berwick Village.

The urban growth area covers the areas surrounding Cranbourne. This is part of Melbourne'svibrant south-eastern growth corridor, characterised by strong building activity and rapidpopulation growth.

The farming areas around Clyde, Five Ways, Devon Meadows, Pearcedale and Tooradin aremainly used for growing vegetables, flower growing, poultry farming, plant nurseries and grazingbeef cattle.

The environs of Western Port, on the southern border, are home to the picturesque coastal hamletsof Tooradin, Cannons Creek, Warneet and Blind Bight, contain extensive coastal reserves andform a link between the popular tourist destinations of Mornington Peninsula and Phillip Islandvia the Baxter – Tooradin Road and the South Gippsland Highway.

One of Casey's best-known activities is horse training and racing. Cranbourne is one of the largesttraining centres in Australia, with around 6000 Cranbourne-trained horses starting in meetingsaround Australia annually. The Cranbourne Racing Complex is host to three racing codes, turf,harness and greyhounds. Each has its own track and training facilities.

Running parallel with Casey's population growth has been an expansion of the City's retailservices, ranging from small convenience stores to the regional shopping centres of CranbourneTown Centre and Fountain Gate at Narre Warren CBD.

Cardinia Shire

The Shire of Cardinia is located on the interface of metropolitan Melbourne, approximately 55kilometres from the Central Business District and 45 minutes of freeway travel from the City ofMelbourne, its ports and freight terminals.

It is a large municipality of 1280 square kilometres with a unique natural environment rangingfrom fern filled mountain ash gullies in the northern hills, to drier woodlands in the foothills to thesaltmarsh and mangrove fringed Western Port. It has a population of 47,000 residing in 30 small


3

CardiniaCasey

Port PhillipBay

Western PortBay

Melbourne

and medium sized rural townships of which Pakenham is the largest. Pakenham is also the maincentre for retail and industrial services having increased its’ retailing services dramatically in thelast five years. The Shire population is expected to reach 55,000 by 2006.

The shire includes the southern foothills of the Dandenong Ranges and the townships of Emerald,Cockatoo and Gembrook. Also included are the rapidly growing towns which are part of thesouth-eastern growth corridor of Beaconsfield, Officer and Pakenham, and townships further eastalong the Princes Highway from Nar Nar Goon to Bunyip. The southern part of the Shire is richagricultural land centred around the townships of Koo Wee Rup and Lang Lang.

Farming activities are diverse and include the dairy industry, wineries, poultry farms, orchards,beef, soft fruits, potatoes, flowers, nurseries and a large asparagus industry. The Koo Wee Rupswamp area grows 70% of Australia’s asparagus.

Location map of Casey/Cardinia


4

METHODOLOGY

The funding submission submitted to DOTARS laid out a program of events thought necessary tocomplete the project and achieve the required outcomes. The majority of the methodology listedin the submission has been followed. There were some minor exceptions where it becameobvious as the project progressed that there was a better alternative or that the proposed actionwas superfluous to the required outcome of the project.

The proposed survey mechanism was one such example. It was originally proposed to conducttwo surveys, i.e. a scoping survey followed by an industry audit. It was decided however in theprocess of survey design that a better result could be achieved by sending out just one industrycensus to all landholdings outside the urban boundary. Lessening respondent burden was animportant consideration in this decision

With the aid of the rates data bases from the two Councils the following methodology wasimplemented to collect the information necessary to produce the final report;

• A steering committee was established to provide direction and local community input to theproject. A list of those people who generously donated their time to serve on the steeringcommittee is shown under Acknowledgements in this report. Their time and intellectual inputto the project have been greatly appreciated.

• Desktop research was conducted into other similar research projects and studies. Thisresulted in the Agribusiness Officer conducting various discussions predominantly withsimilar officers of adjoining Councils and officers within the Victorian Department of PrimaryIndustries (DPI) who had worked on similar issues or projects.

• A survey of all landholdings outside the urban area. The rates data bases were edited down to1451 for Casey and 2433 for Cardinia leaving a reduced total of 3884 surveys from theoriginal 4695 shown on the rates listings. The reduction was predominantly due to editing outall duplicate holdings, i.e. those landowners who have more than one rateable property listedunder the same name and also where the mailing address was the same for differentproperties. Also edited out were parcels of land which had already been designated andapproved for housing or industrial use. This editing process and rationale was explained inthe questionnaire and these landowners are asked to combine all their properties and activitiesonto the one form. This process was aimed at reducing respondent burden as well as a costsaving and efficiency measure. A copy of the survey questionnaire is attached in theAppendices.

• An SPSS statistical software package was used to assist in the analysis of the returnedquestionnaires. All of the comments recorded by respondents in the qualitative sections of thequestionnaire were entered into an Excel spreadsheet which also includes details of the farmtype, land size and municipality of each respondent. To protect confidentiality, names oraddresses of respondents were not asked for and have not therefore been recorded.

• Respondents to the survey were given the opportunity to indicate whether or not they wouldlike their names to be included in a register of people who are interested in forming some typeof agribusiness organisation for the region. Over 130 farmers indicated that they would like tobe registered and a contact data base has therefore been established.


5

• Focus groups were conducted with the major industry sectors in the region to both add valueto and act as a test for the qualitative data and information already collected in the survey.

• A one day regional agribusiness workshop, Focus on Farming, was held to discuss and refinethe issues outlined throughout the remainder of the project. (Flier advertising the workshopand the notes produced following the workshop are attached in the Appendices).Over 70 people registered for the workshop. The outcomes of the workshop were collated andmailed to all of the people on the agricultural data base, irrespective of whether they attendedthe workshop or not.

• In addition to the above processes a number of one-on-one interviews were conducted withindividuals across the agribusiness sector. These included individual farmers, ExecutiveOfficers of various industry representative bodies, leaders of agribusiness groups within theregion, Victorian DPI officers and officers of other municipal Councils outside the region andvarious input suppliers to the farming sector. Those people with whom the AgribusinessOfficer discussed various parts of the program are included in the list of Other Contributors inthe Acknowledgements section of this report. Their input has been greatly appreciated.


6

ECONOMIC OUTPUT OF AGRICULTURE IN THE REGION

It was hoped that the survey conducted as part of the project would provide at least some reliabledata relating to the level of economic activity generated by agriculture in the region. However, thereluctance of primary producers to report their annual outputs resulted in no reliable statisticaldata being obtained. It is also unfortunate that there are no reliable locally produced dollar figuresavailable for many of the major industries in the region.

This report therefore relies on Australian Bureau of Statistics data supplemented by data collectedfrom various industry sources where possible. It is interesting to note that many industries do nothave economic or production data broken down into either statistical or geographic regions. Thebest that most industry associations have is an estimate of production on a State and/or nationalbasis.

The project officer has discussed with many of the larger farming sector associations in the regionthe need to have not only production statistics but economic activity and employment statisticsrelating to their industries. Without reliable numbers, no industry can adequately represent itself togovernment agencies, input suppliers or potential investors and this factor is seen as having apotentially negative impact on the progress of various industries in the region. Some sectors willfind it difficult to impress on the wider community and the Australian agribusiness sector theimportance and value of their industries in this region. Industry associations are thereforeencouraged to address this issue and provide themselves with reliable data which they can use fortheir own benefit. The gathering of such information could be incorporated into a communicationproject within the region.

The following table indicates the level of economic activity in both of the municipalities asreported by the ABS for the Financial Year ending June 2001.

Table 1. Gross Value of Agricultural Commodities Produced. Source ABS. 2000-01

Product Casey Cardinia TotalPasture Hay & Pasture SeedCereals for GrainCultivated TurfNurseriesCut FlowersPotatoesAsparagusVegetablesOrchard Fruit (peaches, apricots, plums, etc)Apples & Pears (incl. Nashi)Berries & Small FruitsMilkLivestock Slaughtering (excluding poultry)Poultry MeatEggs for human consumption

781,998424,284

8,357,5853,942,2203,865,5121,196,7442,915,448

46,266,8543,657,451

3,449,0913,617,558

26,055,4336,146,430

6,036,926361,660

2,806,1472,920,9206,671,078

18,566,16129,427,24224,656,1606,708,8596,416,1582,937,349

33,840,34720,091,65333,958,0961,171,648

6,818,924785,944

11,163,7326,863,140

10,536,59019,762,90532,342,69070,923,01410,366,3106,416,1582,937,349

37,289,43823,709,21160,013,5297,318,078

NB. It needs to be noted that analysis of the ABS data highlighted an anomaly in the recorded outputs for Apples andPears in the Statistical Local Area (SLA) of Berwick in the City of Casey. There is a recorded annual output over $2million and a farm area over 100 hectares. There is no such grower within that SLA. The most likely explanation is thatan orchard within the Shire of Yarra Ranges has been included in error in the Casey statistics. The ABS is unable toconfirm that this is the case. This value of Apples and Pears has not however been shown in the above table and needsto be deducted from the Casey statistics shown later in this report.


7

Interpretation of Statistical Data

The figures in the above table are reproduced from the Australian Bureau of Statistics reportsentitled ‘Value of Agricultural Commodities Produced by SLA, 2000-01’ for Casey and forCardinia. These reports are reproduced in full in the Appendices of this report and show the TotalValue of Agriculture for Casey as $109,568,683 and Cardinia as $173,091,457.

The calculation of the dollar values in these reports is as stated by the ABS as follows; “The ABSdefines Gross Value of Agricultural Commodities Produced (VACP) as the value placed onrecorded production at the wholesale prices realised in the market place. The Gross VACP is thevalue of a commodity at the point(s) of sale”.

Whilst this data gives a good insight into the value of primary products coming out of the region itdoes not give the true dollar value of returns to the farmer. To arrive at that figure, the ABS statethat “Local (or farm gate) VACP is the value placed on recorded production at the point ofproduction (the farm). It is derived by subtracting prescribed marketing costs from gross VACP.These marketing costs are defined as the costs incurred by the farmer in moving agriculturalproduction from the farm to markets. They include freight, cost of containers, commission,insurance, storage, handling and other charges necessarily incurred by the producer in deliveringcommodities to the market place”.

As an example, the value of the Chicken Meat industry in the region can be estimated based onthe number of birds produced and the contract price paid per bird to contract growers. Victoriaproduces approximately 108 million birds per year and the Casey/Cardinia region accounts for25% of this figure. The region therefore grows 27 million birds/year. Multiply this output by theaverage price per bird paid to Victorian growers for the last 12 months of 50 cents per bird and a‘Farm Gate’ value of $13,500,000 is derived. This figure contrasts markedly to the $60,013,529shown in the above table. This anomaly is due to the fact that the ABS uses data from their surveyof chicken meat processors and therefore uses the average price per bird of $3.12 supplied by theprocessing industry. In this example it should be noted that the majority of chicken meat isproduced by contracted farmer growers but the farmers do not own the birds. They are owned andfed by the processors so the marketing costs of chicken meat are not the responsibility of thefarmer.

Converse to this example is the dairy industry. The ABS figure of $37,289,438 shown in theabove table is very similar to the GippsDairy estimate of the farm gate value of milk produced forthe region of $33.6 million. This is because the ABS have used the average milk price per litrepaid to the primary producer supplied to them by the Australian Dairy Corporation for theFinancial Year ending 30 June 2001, multiplied that figure by the Victorian average output percow and the number of cows in the region and deduct no other costs from that figure.

It is apparent therefore that the ABS data needs to be interpreted with the individual industry andproduct in mind. The degree of costs incurred by the primary producer beyond the farm gate andthe point at which the ABS collect the base data on any particular product will affect the recordeddollar figure.

ABS Cut Off Value

The ABS data also needs to be interpreted with the knowledge that the 2000-2001 data used a cutoff point of $5000. Primary production businesses which showed a Value of AgriculturalCommodities Produced (VACP) below $5000 were not included in the recorded data.


8

Some of the recorded dollar values for various industry sectors will be correct, i.e. it is veryunlikely that there would be any dairy or chicken meat farms with a recorded VACP below $5000.There would however be operations in many of the other industry sectors eg. vegetables, berriesand small fruits, cut flowers, that would have recorded a VACP below $5000. The main categoryhowever that would be in this under $5000 group would be the beef sector recorded in the abovetable under ‘Livestock Slaughtering”.

This means that the total ABS figures in the majority of the farming sectors for the region for boththe farm numbers and financial outputs are in effect an underestimation.

Top 12 Outputs

Table 2 below shows the top twelve agricultural outputs for both Casey and Cardinia. Individualvegetable and market garden crops have been broken down within categories to give an indicationof the main economic drivers within the region. These figures are on the same basis as Table 1,i.e. they are the ABS Gross Value of Agricultural Commodities Produced. The figures provide aninteresting pen picture of the differences in farming within the two municipalities but also providean insight into the agricultural strengths of the region as a whole.

Table 2.

Ranking of the Top 12 Industry Sectors for Casey and Cardinia - ABS stats 2000-2001

CASEY CARDINIAIndustry Sector $ Value Industry Sector $ value

1 Chicken Meat 26,055,433 1 Chicken Meat 33,958,0962 Celery 14,378,355 2 Milk 33,840,3473 Cultivated Turf 8,357,585 3 Asparagus 29,427,2424 Parsnips 6,517,590 4 Beef (cattle 19,861,051

& calves slaughtered)5 Nurseries 3,942,220 5 Potatoes 18,566,1616 Cut Flowers 3,865,512 6 Cut Flowers 6,671,0787 Beef (cattle 3,522,857 7 Apples 6,265,392

& calves slaughtered)8 Lettuce 3,493,716 8 Pasture cut for 5,772,504

hay (other than Lucern)9 Milk 3,449,091 9 Small & Berry & Tropical Fruit 2,937,349

(strawberries, kiwi fruitblueberries, raspberries, etc)

10 Leeks 3,441,477 10 Nurseries 2,920,92011 Asparagus 2,915,448 11 Cultivated Turf 2,806,14712 Brussel Sprouts 1,287,166 12 Egg Industry 1,171,648


9

Additional Statistical Data.

Additional ABS 2000-2001 statistics for Casey and Cardinia can be found in the Appendices ofthis report. The data included in the Appendices is;

Number of Establishments by Area of Holding and IndustryNumber of Establishments by EVAO and IndustryValue of Agricultural Commodities Produced by SLAAgricultural Census: Agricultural Commodities, SLA Estimates, Year Ending 30 June 2001 (thisgives area of crops and recorded outputs).


10

FINDINGS, THEMES AND ISSUES EMERGING FROM THEPROJECT.

The survey conducted as part of this project captured the majority of the themes and issuesrelating to farming in the region. With the information gained from the focus groups and from theRegional Agribusiness Workshop being added into the mix, there has emerged a comprehensivepicture of farming in the two municipalities.

References to the PowerPoint Presentation

Throughout this report there are references to the PowerPoint presentation used for the Focus onFarming Regional Agribusiness Workshop on 15 October 2003 and to individual slides within thatpresentation. The slides provide a summary of some of the topics discussed. The completePowerPoint presentation is attached within the notes produced from the Workshop in theAppendices and references to individual slides are shown as SLIDE 4, SLIDE 5, etc.

The Survey

The Project Plan provided for a Scoping Survey followed by a comprehensive Industry AuditSurvey. The objective of the scoping survey was to enable the differentiation between primaryproducers and hobby farms. In discussing this methodology with the agribusiness community inthe region and in researching agricultural surveys from other regions, (eg. Farming Real Estate,Yarra Ranges) it became apparent that this approach was potentially not the best way to proceed.The main reasons for this were:

• The farming community expressed real concern with the concept of receiving two separatesurveys within a short space of time, even though they both would be aimed at the samecommon output of benefiting the agribusiness community in the region and the first onewould only be a short two page document. The repeated comment was that farmers alreadyhave too much paper work to do. One survey would be greeted with sufficient indifference toensure a low return rate and if this first survey was then followed closely by a second one, thereturn rate for the second survey would be lower than for the first survey.

• The scoping survey design process was completed but it became apparent during this processthat the questions asked in this short survey would have to be re-phrased, repeated orexpanded upon in the main survey. There was inevitably going to be some duplication ofquestions in doing two separate surveys. Respondent burden and its potential outcomes (asreferred to above) became an obvious issue.

In an attempt to reduce respondent burden, keep project costs to a minimum and reduce projectlabour hours, the rates listings from both Casey and Cardinia were extensively researched,particularly in relation to size of holding. Casey had a total listing of 1751 holdings outside theurban area and Cardinia had 2898. This equalled 4649 holdings for the region. If all land parcelsbelow 20 hectares were excluded from the lists, Casey would have 1244 and Cardinia 1436holdings above the 20 hectare size. This would leave 2680 holdings greater than 20 hectares tosurvey.


11

There were however a couple of practical problems with this approach.

Firstly, the rates listings for both municipalities did not indicate land use or farm type for the vastmajority of the listings. When this approach of excluding holdings below 20ha was suggested atthe first Steering Committee meeting, members of the committee explained that a large number ofsmall but intensively farmed holdings would be excluded from the survey by this approach. Theseholdings included wineries, flower growers, vegetable and herb growers, poultry farms, rubusgrowers, orchardists, etc. and their contribution to the region would be lost from the surveyresults.

Secondly, deleting holdings less than 20ha would exclude over 42% of all holdings in the region.One of the comments that came out of the “Farming Real Estate” survey in the Yarra Valley in theyear 2000 was that they had not captured the agricultural activity from “hobby farms”. There is nospecific size or agricultural activity level to categorise a hobby farm but it is generally acceptedthat the overall economic contribution, including downstream economic activity generated bysuch properties, is far greater than most industry observers would believe. This survey aimed tocapture that activity.

The survey questionnaire was therefore designed as a once only survey incorporating theobjectives of both the originally planned scoping survey and the main industry audit. A copy ofthe questionnaire is attached in the Appendices.

Editing reduced the survey numbers to 1451 for Casey and 2433 for Cardinia leaving a reducedtotal of 3884 surveys (see SLIDE 4). The reduction was predominantly due to editing out allduplicate holdings, i.e. those landowners who had more than one rateable property listed under thesame name and where the mailing address was also the same for different properties. Landclassified as “Development Land” and therefore due for subdivision or commercial developmentwas also deleted from the listings.

The response rate to the survey was reasonable at 22.1% and although it would have beenpreferable to receive a far greater number of completed questionnaires, the responses received setthe basis for the main findings of the whole audit and have provided a statistically reliable sample.The subsequent work with Focus Groups and the Regional Agribusiness Workshop confirmed thefindings from and added value to the survey.

Comments on the Results of the Survey

Table 3 (SLIDE 5).

Respondents by Municipality

ByCasey Number % extrapolation

Income earning 138 42.2 612No income 189 57.8 839

327 100 1451

Cardinia

Income earning 387 73 1776No income 143 27 656

530 100 2432


12

The total percentage responses from each municipality were virtually identical. The responseswere split into income earning and non income earning. The Casey returns indicated that 42.2% ofland holdings outside the urban area were income earning and the Cardinia percentage on thesame basis was 73%. It needs to be noted that the decision as to whether a property was “incomeearning” or not was left to the discretion of the survey respondent in answering question 1 of thesurvey. The recorded figures of income versus non income properties are plausible considering thecurrent land use and subdivision structure of the region.

Whilst there is the potential for response bias in the extrapolation of these figures into a totalnumber of farm income earning properties in the region, the calculation does give an indication ofthe structure of rural land holdings in numbers (not area) across the two municipalities.

SLIDE 6 and SLIDE 7 give more detail of the breakdown in the sizes of holdings. Thedomination in numerical terms of farms under 25 ha indicates the impact of the demand overrecent years for small easily managed properties, close to Melbourne and generally purchased forlifestyle reasons rather than solely for commercial agricultural pursuits.

Casey has a larger proportion of land holdings fewer than 5 ha as against Cardinia and this isunderstandable considering the large number of small sub divisions in Casey in the areas ofDevon Meadows, Pearcedale and Cranbourne South. Cardinia has the larger number of landholdings in all other size categories under 25 ha.

The indication of the large number of farms under 25 ha does not detract from the economicimportance of these properties to the region. It needs to be remembered that all the recordedholdings being discussed in this paper are ones which the property owners themselves regard asproviding at least some contribution to their income. Many of these smaller properties are indeedvery profitable businesses and provide their owners with all of their income. These includechicken meat growers, egg farmers, specialist vegetable growers, cut flower growers, nativeflower growers, horse trainers, vineyards, orchardists, soft fruit growers, plant nurseries, variousvalue adding activities, etc. In addition there are many farmers who have diversified into operatingmore than one farming activity on the same property (see SLIDE 9) and many of these diversifiedbusinesses are on landholdings under 25 ha. This diversity of primary production activity has to beregarded as one of the strengths of the region and many of these varied activities have thepotential to be further developed in the future.

The average size of holdings by activity is shown in SLIDE 10. The average land size ofvegetable farms is influenced by the fact that the category includes potato and asparagus farmersas well as responses from some of the largest of the vegetable growers in Casey.

Respondents Major Commercial Agricultural Activities

The dominance of the number of beef farming properties in the region is demonstrated by SLIDE8. Of the total number of survey questionnaires analysed, the main activity of beef farmingrepresents 55.6%. Whilst there is potential for some response bias and this data needs to be readwith that fact in mind, the percentage responses by major activity are shown in the table below.


13

Table 4.

Activity Number % CommentsBeef 292 55.6 Inc. all beef farms eg. stud, breeding, stores, vealers, etcDairy 66 12.6Horses 37 7.0 Inc. all types, eg. studs, racing, riding schools, pleasure

horses, etc.Vegetables 29 5.5Chicken Meat 15 2.8Asparagus 14 2.7Potatoes 13 2.5Nurseries 13 2.5Sheep 10 1.9Cut Flowers 8 1.5Orchard Fruit 5 1.0 Inc. apples, pears, nashi, citrus, stonefruit, etc.Wineries 3 0.6Turf Farms 3 0.6Poultry Eggs 2 0.4Other 15 2.8 See note 2 below

525 100.0

Notes for the above table.1. Percentages are all rounded off to one decimal place2. The ‘Other’ category includes alpacas, goats, lavender, berries, chestnuts, deer, apiarists,

llama, olives, mohair, hay, commercial timber and native food production.

Respondents Secondary Commercial Agricultural Activities are as varied as their majoractivities and the ‘Other’ category shown in SLIDE 9 includes most of the activities listed in note2 of Table 4 above.

Key Inputs for farmers in the region are shown at SLIDE 11 and in general this data does notpresent any surprises. The ‘Feed’ category represents the cost of bought in livestock feed to farmsin the region plus the cost of contractors to harvest fodder if appropriate. The intensive livestockindustries, eg. poultry layer farms, have a reasonably predictable demand for bought in feed,varying predominantly only due to weather conditions, i.e. temperature. However, the grazingindustries in the region (predominantly beef and dairy farming), rely on both conserved fodderand grain concentrate feeds to maintain herd health and production outputs in the periods wherepasture feed is in short supply.

The key inputs data shows feed coming in as a close second to fertiliser as the major farm input.The survey was conducted in July and August 2003 and this time was at the end of almost sevenyears of dry weather. The level of feed, both fodder and concentrates, bought onto the farm in thesurvey period, i.e. July 2002 to July 2003 would therefore be greater than would otherwise havebeen the case if weather patterns and rainfall had been nearer to normal. It is not however possibleto predict where the level of feed inputs would have been under normal conditions.

Under the ‘Other’ category were a range of inputs including bank finance, interest on borrowedmoney, drainage, depreciation, advertising and promotion, artificial insemination and competitionentry fees.


14

It is however interesting to note that the majority of farm inputs are sourced locally (SLIDE 12).Respondents indicated that 69% of inputs were either all or mostly sourced from within theregion. This has enormous ongoing economic benefits for the region and its continuation needs tobe encouraged.

The Time Spent on Farming Activities by survey respondents (SLIDE 13) shows that a largenumber of the regions farmers do not work full time on their properties and this correlates well tothe number of small holdings in the region.

Employment is covered in SLIDES 14 to 17. It was unfortunate that it was not clear from thenumber of survey responses received whether or not the data gathered was representative of thetotal survey population. The vegetable growing industry employs the largest number of people perfarm and these large numbers may have produced some response bias. The data which wascollected is however in the PowerPoint presentation for reference. The single largest farmemployer captured by the survey is a vegetable grower with a total of 104 full time, part time andcasual employees.

The whole of the data used to produce SLIDE 14 ispresented to the right. The numbers in the slide wereabbreviated to aid presentation. These employment numbersrepresent full time, regular part time and casual employees.

These numbers indicate that the agricultural industries inthe region are responsible for employing large numbers ofpeople. The numbers are gathered from the 467 respondentswho answered the employment question in the survey.These respondents account for 1503 employees in total butrepresent only 19.5% of the estimated 2388 income earningproperties in the region. It is not clear whether or not thereis response bias in these numbers.

The region also employs a large number of seasonalworkers. The majority of these people work during theasparagus harvesting season from August through toDecember and the graph at SLIDE 16 highlights the peakin casual employment at this time. Other casuals are alsoemployed in the fruit and orchard industries and the peak inthe graph in the autumn period represents the apple andpears industry. The vegetable industry also employs lowernumbers of seasonal employees at various times of the year.

The vast majority of the casual employment in theasparagus industry is provided by employees of Asiandecent and most of these people are first generationAustralians. This point is only mentioned because the vastmajority of these people employed to harvest asparagushave to be transported daily into the asparagus farms fromthe south eastern suburbs of Melbourne. The wages paid tothis large seasonal employment pool are therefore mostlyexported into other urban economies of Melbourne ratherthan being injected into the local regional economy. It is

Number ofemployees

Number ofRespondents

0 4

1 218

2 108

3 51

4 33

5 9

6 9

7 6

8 5

9 3

1 1

11 3

15 1

17 1

18 2

20 1

25 1

26 1

29 1

30 1

32 1

52 1

85 1

104 1


15

also almost impossible to attract seasonal employees from areas closer to the asparagus farms.

Employment agencies have now been established to source seasonal and casual employees for theasparagus and other seasonal harvesting industries.

Training Requirements

The questionnaire asked the owner/operator/manager of the individual businesses surveyedwhether there were any business or agricultural skills which they would like to improve throughfurther training or education. The largest response to this question was ‘none’ followed by theneed for training in ‘livestock/farm management’ (SLIDE 18). There was a definite trend in theseresponses with full time commercial farmers tending to provide the ‘none’ response with the nonefull time farmers on smaller blocks of land requesting livestock and farm management training.

There is therefore an opportunity to establish training courses aimed at the non commercial parttime farm operator in basic farm management practices, livestock husbandry and crop husbandry.Such courses would need a small amount of further research before being implemented but shouldinclude a strong element of sustainability in their content. There are some existing coursescurrently being delivered through various channels which may be suitable for the target market.

Business Confidence

There was a slight bias towards a positive business attitude over the short term 12 month period(SLIDE 19) with an even stronger positive attitude demonstrated in the five year forecast (SLIDE20). For those respondents anticipating their businesses to ‘increase a little’ or ‘increase a lot’ overboth time frames, production and income were forecast to increase by virtually the same amountwhere as forecast employment increase was at a lower level.

The impacts of the drought do however need to be taken into account when assessing theseresponses. During the time that many people were completing the survey questionnaires in Julyand August 2003, some good rains had been received across the region which gave people areason to be more optimistic about the breaking of the drought.

This optimism however, did not extend to all of the survey respondents. There were manycomments written over the top of question 28 of the questionnaire where the phrase ‘assumingthat the drought is now easing’ was used to solicit a response on how long it would take for farmsto recover from the drought. Some people were convinced that the drought was not ‘easing’ andmade this opinion clear in this section.

There was however a split opinion as to whether or not the drought had any influence on theresponses to the business confidence issue. Whilst the region has not been as badly affected by therecent (current?) drought as many other areas of Australia there certainly has been a markedreduction in annual rainfall over the last seven or so years and there have been some flow oneffects to local farmers, particularly with the increase in costs of many farm inputs. Despite thisfact, 43.8% of respondents indicated that their responses to the business confidence question werenot influenced by the drought and 52.2% said that there responses were influenced by the drought(SLIDE 26).


16

Type of Business Plan (SLIDE 21)

The inclusion of this question in the survey was regarded by some commentators as provocativebut it was included with the intention of raising awareness of the whole issue of businessplanning, strategic planning and succession planning. The response to the question was not asurprise and it mirrors the lack of business planning (in its widest context) in other small businesssectors in Australia outside agribusiness.

The responses to the question indicate that 36.8% of people who earn all or some of their incomefrom the land do not have any plan for their businesses. A further 44.2% have a plan but it is notwritten down. A further 2.8% of businesses only have a one year plan.

Those businesses in the region that do not have a written plan for the future of their businesses areencouraged to take the time to prepare a business plan which should also incorporate a successionplan if this is appropriate.

Value Adding was included in the questionnaire to gauge the level of activity in this areathroughout the region and capture some of the processes used (SLIDE 22). It is considered one ofthe areas where further work can be done beyond the conclusion of this project.

Whilst 89.5% of respondents are not involved in any form of value adding, the range of activitiesin this area is quite diverse. Vegetable, asparagus, potato growers and orchardists grade and packproduce for both the domestic and export markets, asparagus is processed and packaged into dips,lavender is value added into a wide range of products, wineries are bottling their own wines,orchardists are producing fruit drinks, a beef farmer is selling beef freezer packs, commercialtimber is being cut and dried, soft fruits are being made into jams, cut flowers are being treated tomaximise their shelf life, nurseries are propagating and potting their own grown plants, a newlyestablished olive grower has plans to bottle oil and preserve olives by pickling and one localbusinesses is purchasing local boutique wines and marketing them Australia wide. There are stillnumerous opportunities for the regions primary producers to explore to value add. There is alsothe opportunity to create synergies between this agricultural project and the recently instigatedCardinia Food and Wine Network and this should be another of the projects to extend beyond theinitial scope of this project.

Quality Assurance (SLIDE 23) is playing an ever increasingly important part in the wholehuman food chain and has extended in some forms back along the food chain to the primaryproducer level. It has been driven by consumer demand for clean, safe and healthy food products.Primary producers have an important role to play in this regard both for foods supplied to thedomestic market and for the export market. It is interesting to note that 66% of respondents do nothave any involvement with on farm quality assurance at this point in time.

Dairy farmers comprise a large proportion of the 25% who have a documented system in placebecause Murray Goulburn and Bonlac both have compulsory QA processes which have to befollowed by their suppliers. Many of the regions vegetable growers and asparagus growers alsohave documented systems in place which are externally certified and therefore audited on aregular basis.

The growth in the demand for On Farm Quality Assurance will continue and it is predicted that allprimary producers will eventually be involved to some degree or other in a QA program.


17

It was of interest to note that 9.2% of respondents considered that they were practicing OrganicFarming yet they were not accredited or certified as organic (SLIDE 24). Whilst there were onlya small 0.8% of respondents accredited as organic, 18.4% expressed an interest in becomingorganic. There is a national and world wide under supply of organic produce to meet currentconsumer demand. In the December 2003 issue of ‘Food Partnerships in Asia’, a newsletterpublished by the Agribusiness Group of the Victorian Department of Primary Industries, there isthe following comment;

“World exports of organic foods are currently worth about $40 billion and demand isgrowing at 20 to 30 per cent a year. Australia accounts for just $50 million of worldexports of organic foods but its organic production and marketing systems are rapidlydeveloping”.

The article goes on to say;

“Many consumers in Asia, Europe, the US and Australia are interested in buying organiclivestock products. However, limited organic supply and processing capabilities havemeant that Victoria has been unable to satisfy demand even in domestic markets”.

The opportunities are obvious and there is no reason why this region should not be able tocapitalise on these opportunities and develop a strong organics industry across all farming sectors.

Exporting (SLIDE 25). It is encouraging that 7.6% of respondents currently export overseasdirect from the farm. The asparagus and vegetable industries are the main exporters but inaddition flowers, dairy heifer replacements, beef livestock, horses and some nursery products arealso exported from the region. The majority of these businesses are also considering increasingtheir export activities.

It is also encouraging to see that 16.1% of those people who are not currently exporting have someinterest in becoming exporters.

The locality of the region with the good main roads infrastructure and access to TullamarineAirport and the Melbourne docks is a major advantage for the region, allowing easy access toexport transport.

Water

Water is one of the key issues for agriculture and the future of many of the farming sectors in theregion. Their ability to increase production in future years is dependant on adequate supplies ofwater being available. By far the largest response to the open question of water issues in thesurvey was that of ‘availability’ of water (SLIDE 28). The fact that there has been a six to sevenyear drought across most of Victoria has highlighted the availability of water issue so it was nosurprise that this topic received this level of response. The topic of water is discussed later in thisreport.

In SLIDE 27, Sources of Water, under the ‘Other’ category are included filtering and re-usesystems, re-use of vegetable washing water, storage in turkey-nest dam filled from creek, roofcatchment water and water purchased in tankers. The large representation of ‘Town Supply’ waterreflects the proximity of many of the regions farms to the urban area and their access to mainswater.


18

The ‘Other’ category in SLIDE 28 includes farm dam legislation, water rights issues, surfacewater flooding, restrictions on usage and pollution of surface water from septic tank run off.

Slides 29, 30, and 31 highlight the Key Advantages of the region as expressed by surveyrespondents and members of focus groups. SLIDES 32 to 40 indicate the challenges faced byfarmers in the region and SLIDE 41 is a summary of those challenges.

The Focus Groups

The reports of the focus group meetings held during the project are recorded here in full.

Attendees for the focus groups were drawn primarily from survey respondents who indicated thatthey had some interest in further discussing agribusiness issues in the region. The input of allthose people who attended the focus groups is greatly appreciated and the discussions which thefocus groups generated has added value to the overall project.

It is important to understand that the comments in all of the focus group reports which follow arethose of the farmers in those groups. In conducting these groups, the Agribusiness Officer wasassisted by Angela Smyth, Business Development Officer, City of Casey and the issues raised bythe group members have been recorded and transcribed as accurately as possible.

All the focus groups followed the same format. They were given a brief overview of the Caseyand Cardinia Regional Agricultural Audit and told that this was an informal process to getfeedback and analysis of their industry in the region. It was explained that the survey of theagricultural sector had raised a number of issues and the aim of the focus group was to provide abackground to and further develop the issues that were raised. The focus groups were not given alist of these issues but allowed to raise their own topics under the general headings which wereprovided for them. In this way, the focus groups validated the issues coming out of the survey.

Asparagus Growers Focus Group

Strengths/positives of farming asparagus in the region

• Soil types in the region are the best in the world and unique to the region. Eighteen inches offriable top soil over peat with clay subsoil. The deep clay retains moisture and irrigation isnot therefore needed. The deep saturated clay means that the asparagus roots stay moist andhave access to water thus avoiding stress to the plant.

• Excellent climate. Cooler at night with very few frosts and warmer days. Ideal for growingasparagus. Growing areas further inland get more frosts and often they are more severe.

• Product quality. The quality of the soil provides the best tasting asparagus. Some Japanesecustomers have commented on the excellent taste that the region produces.

• Proximity to a large labour force from the urban area. The industry is very labour intensive.

• Proximity to the airport, Footscray market and the major highways to Sydney and Brisbane.

• Lifestyle. Asparagus growing demands six months intensive work followed by six months oflittle cropping activity. Mixed vegetable cropping tends to be year round work.


19

• No heavy industry in the region causing pollution. Buyers, particularly in export markets,often want to know if there is any heavy manufacturing industry close to the growing area.

• The land is flat and therefore easier to work.

Weaknesses of farming asparagus in the region

• The main connector roads, currently gravel, need sealing. There is not a huge distance thatneeds sealing but trucks picking up boxed asparagus from the major growers have to usegravel roads.

(NB. The issue of which are the priority roads needing sealing for this industry needs further investigation).

• Some local bridges have a 20 tonnes limit. There is a freight and labour cost imposed ongrowers due to these limits because smaller loads of product have to be taken to a centralcollection point prior to loading onto the larger over 20 tonne trucks.

• The City of Casey appears not to want to seal any roads on the eastern side of theirmunicipality, ie adjacent to Cardinia Shire.

• The rough surface conditions of the gravel road have caused lost loads from trucks, forexample by tipping when hitting a poorly graded corner.

• The economic loss due to poor road surfaces is hard to quantify but it does contribute todegrading of the product in transit. Asparagus is packed with the heads together in the middleof the box and a rough road can ruin the product due to the heads becoming entangled. Theasparagus is then downgraded and has to be used for soup with a consequential loss of incometo the farmer. The product needs to be in perfect condition to be exported to Japan.

• The world market for asparagus appears to be saturated. Exports to Japan are decreasing asthe Japanese are finding new suppliers from Indonesia and Thailand as well as growing moreof their own asparagus. The industry needs to find new markets, both export and domestic.

• Severe weather is not generally a problem apart from hail which can damage the crop.

Other comments

• Shopkeepers need to present the product better. The region produces the best quality productbut it is often not presented well and can sit on the shelf and dry up.

• Growers are cautious about approaching the supermarkets that have too much power in themarketing chain. Supermarkets have a huge influence on the market. The growers have noinfluence over price with the supermarket shelf price being at least double the farm gate price.The supermarkets demand their own packaging and labelling denying the individual growersand packers of branding opportunities. Due predominantly to the power of the supermarkets,profit margins for asparagus growers are small and half what they were a few years ago.

• Various Australian asparagus growing regions have different climates and therefore canharvest collectively for a longer period of time than the local industry can do on its own.Asparagus is now on the shelves for 12 months of the year whereas it was previously only


20

available in the spring. Australia can produce asparagus from July to April. It is importedfrom North America when it is out of season locally.

• The asparagus industry in the region did carry out a stemophelia research project even thoughit had previously been researched in other parts of the world.

Export issues

• The level of international tourism into Australia impacts on the export of asparagus. When thenumbers of flights are cut back it is difficult to get export airfreight space on the reducednumber of flights.

• If freight space has been booked on flights it has to be paid for. Because asparagus can growsporadically it is sometimes difficult to fill the allocated space.

• Japan has strict quarantine protocols and there is a big cost involved in fumigation. As analternative to fumigation there is a hot water hygiene process that has potential but this needsmoney invested into research. The hot water process is used in New Zealand and somequarantine authorities will accept this in place of fumigation. The hot water equipment isavailable from New Zealand but it is very expensive and had not been tried in Australia. It hasbeen suggested that the Victorian DPI could do the scientific work and that this could be afunded project paid for by the asparagus levy.

The Organic Market

• Organic asparagus exporting is becoming difficult. Japan is the only viable market.

• The AAC (Australian Asparagus Council) have investigated a possible market in the UK butit is difficult to compete with South African organic asparagus growers.

• The demand for organic asparagus is only 2% to 3% of the domestic market but the additionalcosts involved in its production can be recouped from the market place.

Future of the Asparagus Industry

• Labour costs were $6 per crate six to seven years ago. Current labour cost is $11 per crate. Allother input costs eg. fertiliser, power and fuel, R and M, rates and taxes, etc are moreexpensive. The farm gate price of asparagus has not increased and profit margins are thereforedecreasing.

• Processors would like to increase the domestic market per capita consumption and the priceper kg. but have to compete with import suppliers from Peru and Canada.

• There is the opportunity to increase the market for canning asparagus in Australia. SPC didoperate a canning plant locally but no longer do so. Other canned brands such as John Westare imported. Campbells make some asparagus soup and soup blends from their Sheppartoncanning factory. The only other canning factory is in Cowra, NSW. The Australian AsparagusCouncil and Cardinia Shire have looked into the idea of a processing plant in Pakenham but itdid not materialise. Asparagus is only harvested for 3 months of the year and a canningfactory would therefore need other products to utilise the plant and equipment for the rest ofthe year.


21

• Mechanical harvesting was tried in Mildura approximately six years ago but it wasn’tsuccessful. Selecting the correct shoots to cut, cutting at the right length and the slowness ofthe machine were the main problems that could not be overcome. Some research intomechanical harvesting has been undertaken at the University of Wollongong.

• Insufficient money is going into research generally.

• A survey is needed into how much asparagus is consumed per capita in Australia, as theindustry has no current data on this topic. The most recent study carried out 8 years agoindicated a consumption of 200gms per capita. The domestic market is growing but there isroom for more growth. It is estimated that a domestic consumption of 400gms per capitawould account for the total product grown in Australia.

• Promotion in the region is low key eg. recipes, newspapers. Current promotion andadvertising spending is around $30,000 per annum and it is considered to be successful.

• The AAC have a voluntary levy plus an acreage levy and they decide how this is spent. Theyare looking at changing the levy from an acreage to a per kilo basis. The Mildura asparagusindustry has a similar per kilo levy structure.

• The AAC would like to link up with the Mildura based industry but this idea faces someopposition from within both camps. It would however provide a larger pool of levy moneyinto the Victorian industry and therefore would enable more research to be done.

Beef Focus Group

Strengths/Positive for Beef Farming in the Region

• The vast majority of the Casey/Cardinia region is good country for carrying beef cattle(compared with for example some areas in East Gippsland where the land is in a bad situationin terms of salinity). Soils in the region are generally excellent and can grow grass for most ofthe year with the area receiving what is generally a reliable annual rainfall.One of the group qualified the suitability of the area for beef cattle by saying that in order toget the best out of cattle they had to be calved at the right times of the year to maximise theuse of peak pasture growth periods. This applied to having good green feed for both therecently calved cow and also to put a good finish on the calves. The principal was that cowsand calves prosper if you keep to the rules that are best suited to the region.

• Land is easy to farm being soft country with few extremes of climate or weather. Even if thereare bad or extreme conditions they only tend to last for 3-4 months.

• The area offers a great lifestyle. One participant suggested that beef farming is 80% lifestyleand 20% business. Another gave a personal example of the fulfilment a farmer achieves fromexperiencing the life of newly born calves and their subsequent growth. The area is close tothe sea and coastal villages. It is safe for children and for bringing up a family.

• The close proximity to Melbourne is a real plus for the area. The main road infrastructure isexcellent and with the recent completion of the Hallam Bypass, most regional residents cannow get to Tullamarine airport in less than an hour (outside peak traffic periods).


22

• There is an excellent network of suppliers close by. Personal household requirements and themajority of farm supplies are available in the local vicinity, for example in Berwick,Pakenham or Cranbourne.

• Because people who also work off the farm, often in professional positions, operate many ofthe beef farm enterprises in the region, there is a higher general level of education and trainingamong beef farmers. This leads to a greater demand from this industry sector for increasedknowledge of farming systems and animal husbandry as well as a greater input into local andindustry issues. For example they know how to talk to councils and government agencies,how to prepare submissions, etc.

• The comment was made that Casey and Cardinia are located on the right side of Melbournefor avoiding driving to and from work in the city or eastern suburbs with sunlight in your eyesin the morning or the afternoon. This was considered to be an important issue in the decisionmaking process when looking for a rural block of land for those who currently live in the city.

• The Shire of Cardinia exercises some control over motorbikes in rural areas. If they are toonoisy and a complaint is received they will intervene.

Weaknesses of farming beef in the region.

• It is becoming increasingly difficult to make a living out of a small property. Many beef farmsin the region are hobby or lifestyle farms. Many of the people operating these farms do nothave a family background in agriculture, which leads them into difficulties because they donot understand even the basic principals of farming. Even on a small hobby farm, the ownersneed to know what they are doing. They need to take advice from experienced farmers.

• It is becoming more and more difficult to buy a reasonably sized farm in the area due to thecost. In addition to the capital cost of the land there is a real threat that council rates on farmswill eventually make farming in this region prohibitive. Even allowing for economies of scaleon larger farms, council rates increase in line with the value of the property and this factor iseroding the right to farm.

• The group suggested that the solution was to implement a system whereby rates do notincrease if the property is only used for farming. They expressed the opinion that councilshould leave rates as they are if the use of the land does not change.

• With the recent introduction of the State Government Urban Growth Boundary the value ofland inside the line will increase and value of land outside the line will decrease.

• The beef farmers are caught in a cost: price squeeze. The price received for cattle sales staysthe same but costs are continually increasing. For example, vealers are the same price perkilogram that they were fifteen years ago. The cost of land, fodder, harvesting, concentratefeed, fertiliser, rates, drainage charges, insurance, etc. have all increased. Beef farmers areprice takers and the major supermarkets set the prices. There is a huge disparity between theprice per kilo received by the farmer and the retail price of beef in the supermarket, which isnot explained by the dressing out percentage.

• Theft from farms in the region is increasing, for example farm bikes stolen from locked sheds.Youth programs such as work for the dole were criticised because they allow people to seewhat items of value there are on farms.


23

• Dumping of rubbish along roadsides is becoming an epidemic. Some types of rubbish will killcattle, for example plastic bags which cattle will swallow. They will block the digestive tract.One of the participants farming close to the urban fringe has lost numerous animals due to theingestion of plastic shopping bags. It was suggested that the two councils need to implement aregular program to remove all types of dumped material from roadsides and roadside reserves.

• Dog attacks on cattle are frequent. The worst case scenario is that cattle, particularly calves,are killed. Other dog related incidents panic cattle and can cause injuries. Suburban residentswho do not control their pets do not realise what their dogs can get up to at night or how farthey can travel in one night and still return home prior to dawn.

• There is a serious problem with the speed that some vehicles travel on gravel roads. Groupmembers were able to cite many cases of dangerous driving due to speed alone. There is aneed to put speed limits on gravel roads. It was suggested that farmers lobby Vic Roadsthrough Councillors and Members of Parliament to support the implementation of anautomatic default of 80kph on unmade roads.

• Stolen cars are another issue. They are often left burnt out on the edge of farmland. Joy ridersin stolen cars use farm paddocks to perform “doughnuts”, often crashing into and ruiningfences. One of the group participants has had wire perimeter fences cut in order that stolencars can be driven through to be driven wildly around the paddock.

• There is a need for more stock removers in the region to cart away dead stock. There is onlyone such business based in Tooradin and during busy times of the year he tends to concentrateon fresh dairy cows rather than the beef industry.

• Poultry farms can cause terrible smells. The consensus of the group was that broiler farmstake up valuable land and they do not want any more in the region. The need for an adequatebuffer zone was emphasised.

• If a land tax is put on farmland in the region beef farmers will have to leave as the returnsfrom the industry will not support any further tax burden.

Other comments:

• It was suggested that all beef farmers attend Meat Standards of Australia information days asthey provide an excellent forum for farmers to learn more about their industry.

• Farmers need to plan for the future of their business and learn as much as they can throughfurther training. Increased skills, knowledge and information will allow for bettermanagement of the variables that are within their control.

• The group did not believe that the two councils understand farming or farmers issues. Onlyone Casey Councillor and two Cardinia Councillors are from the land. The Councils need tobe aware of the impacts their policies can have on the rural sector and more realistic in settinga “farm rate” as opposed to a suburban rating system imposed on commercial farm properties.

• There is a need to raise awareness that farms have huge financial turnovers and support otherdownstream businesses. This provides a significant input to the local economy, for exampleassociated businesses such as veterinary surgeons, fencing suppliers, farm hardware supplies,animal feed businesses, stock and station agents, livestock markets, fertiliser agents, etc.


24

Farmers don’t get the small business rate for water.

• There is a fox problem in many parts of the region. Bunyip State Park run a biannual programto get rid of foxes and this works very well but it needs to be properly organised. This type ofcontrol program could be extended to other parts of the region.

• There is a Tree Grants Program run by Cardinia Shire. Costs for tree planting are shared on a50/50 basis with the landowner.

• Farmers are moving out of the industry because of the poor returns to the primary producer.Demand will eventually outstrip supply and there will be an increase in profitability.

The group thanked the Regional Assistance Program and the two Councils for providing theopportunity to get together and hold this discussion.

Vegetable Growers Focus Group

Strengths/positives of growing vegetables in the region

• Excellent quality of soil that can be cropped all year round.

• Climate – good for growing. Rainfall has historically been reliable. The last seven years hashowever been extremely dry weather leading into the recent drought. Climate change may bean issue in this context.

• Casey and Cardinia have different climates and soil types that determine the vegetables thatcan be grown. In Casey most soils can be cropped all year round whereas some Cardinia soilscan be heavy and only cropped in the summer.

• Close proximity to distribution networks, wholesale markets, retailers, Tullamarine airport.

• Good access to skilled employees. Labour (predominantly mature workers of Asian decent) istransported from suburban areas to work in the region. Local employees of European decentdo not want fieldwork in this industry.

• Vegetable growing is more intensified than citrus or apple growing with the ability to producemultiple crops per annum. The industry can therefore provide its workforce with employmentyear round and can maintain employees.

Weaknesses of farming vegetables in the region.

• Lack of water. This has particularly been a problem over the last few years and the majority offarms already recycle water out of necessity. The lack of water restricts farm expansion. Landmay be available for expansion but vegetables can not be farmed if the land does not haveadequate access to water.The vegetable growing areas are often at the lower end of water catchments and the amount ofavailable water in times of low rainfall can depend on usages higher up in the catchmentareas.

• Whilst many farms have increased in size in recent years, water allocations have not, resultingin less water per hectare to irrigate crops. This factor restricts the productivity capacity of the


25

land. Water usage is measured historically. Owners of an existing dam or water entitlementcan only use that amount of water.

• The use of grey or recycled water has the capacity to generate expansion within the industry.This is why the proposed irrigation pipeline from the Melbourne Water Eastern TreatmentPlant at Carrum Downs is so important to the industry. The group asked for help from the Cityof Casey in lobbying for this pipeline to be constructed.

• The high cost of land in the region also restricts farm expansion i.e., it may be ideally locatedor even adjoining existing farms but the cost of the land can be a deterrent to expansion if thegrower can not make a realistic return from the capital invested.

• Any newly acquired land has to be suitable for vegetable growing. There is a limited amountof land suitable for specific vegetables within the Casey/Cardinia region.

• To remain viable, vegetable farms like many other farms, are getting larger. Broad acreproduction requires larger machinery to cope with the land size and to keep down unit costs.Restrictions to farm expansion reduce the opportunity to lower unit costs.

• As a result of the large urban expansion in the region, roads are becoming busier. Urbandwellers do not appreciate how slow and difficult it can be to move heavy farm plant andequipment and do not make allowances for this factor in their driving attitudes. It is thereforedifficult and often very dangerous moving heavy machinery from farm to farm.

• Weight limits on roads can result in having to take a much longer route. Some farmers in theregion with more than one parcel of land have to travel an additional seven kilometres eachway between their own farms.

• The residents of Clyde township do not want heavy machinery or trucks on the local roads.The feeling of the focus group is that the City of Casey Council tends to support the townshipresidents and not the farmers. It is however the farmers who are running businesses andemploying people in the area.

• Green Wedges and the Urban Growth Boundary do not help any of the vegetable farmers tobe competitive. Councils need to be able to make provision for the land to be for somethingother than for vegetable growing.

• The group expressed the opinion that they need to be able to exit their current farms withsufficient financial assets to enable them to re-establish further away from the urban sprawl.The logic of this opinion is that they need to be operating larger, more efficient businesses andthe lack of suitable additional land close to existing operations restricts the growth of theircurrent operations. In addition, the current urban area is now too close to their land and iscausing too many problems for their farming activities to survive.They are therefore strongly opposed to the Urban Growth Boundary that effectively stopsthem achieving this objective because the price that they will now receive for their land willnot be adequate to buy new land and install the required infrastructure.They cited the current situation in the Keysborough area as providing a good example of howGreen Wedges do not work. Growers there are restricted onto inadequate parcels of land andhave no where to expand. They are unable to increase the size of their businesses and aretherefore becoming unviable. The feeling is that the Victorian Minister for Planning is notlistening.


26

• The group believed that the current issues of conflict relating to the Rural/Urban interfaceresult from a lack of forward planning. Housing and commercial agriculture do not “mix”,farming creates smells and noise. As an example they suggested a buffer zone betweencommercial agriculture and urban housing provided by small farmlets for those who want arural lifestyle. The development of golf courses or linear parklands would be other options.These farmers believe that planners at both the State and Local Council level are not lookingat the Rural/Urban interface from both sides, only from the aspect of urban development.They strongly believe that it would be better to have linear parks, golf courses or fewerneighbours on bigger blocks. Planners need to consider that land that is used for vegetablegrowing today may not have the same usage in thirty years time.It has been suggested by various government agencies that any buffer zone should be thefarmer’s responsibility. Farm incomes are already under pressure without farmers having tocarry a non productive capital asset.

• With the increasing urbanisation of the region, vandalism is on the increase. There have beenrecent examples of farm tractors being stolen and damaged, being driven across paddocks anddamaging irrigation systems, etc. Trespass onto agricultural property is now commonthroughout the region.

• These vegetable farmers believe that one of the main problems they have is that governmentat all levels is not listening to them. They believe that bureaucracy and political agendas divertattention from the real issues in their industry.

Other comments:

• Growers are using commercial transportation more and more rather that their own because inthe long run it proves cheaper. Freight companies however complain about the condition ofsome of the unsealed roads in the region.

• Whilst export markets themselves have proved to be reliable, there is a significant and provenrisk in the logistics of exporting vegetables. The September 11th disaster in New York and theAsian SARS outbreak have caused real issues in the industry due to the reduction in flightsand therefore airfreight capacity in being able to get products overseas. When this happens,product scheduled for export has to be sold into the local market. The impact thereforeextends beyond the exporter onto the whole of the industry through oversupply of product andthe subsequent depression of prices in the local market.

• The growers recognise that the urban sprawl is good for land values and many of them look tothe prospect of becoming urban, i.e. selling out their properties for housing/industrial/retaildevelopments.

Future of the Vegetable Growing Industry

• Farm sizes need to increase in order that farms can remain viable. Sophisticated farmmachinery can cost up to $250,000 each and as the cost of these machines increases, the landsize needed to support such capital costs must also increase in order that the capital inputs areadequately utilised. Some vegetable farms in the region are now over 200 hectares in size. Theowners of these farms would like to increase up to 400 plus hectares. There is no capacity oropportunity however to achieve this farm size in the current vegetable growing region eitherdue to land availability or the high price of land. These farmers therefore need to move.Succession planning would be easier if they could plan well ahead and had support from the


27

council. If the farmers know that their land will become residential within a certain periodthen they could find an alternative parcel of 400 hectares to buy and slowly set up and makethe transition.

• The Vegetation Act and other conservation issues are increasingly impacting on commercialfarming. One participant quoted a case on the western side of Port Phillip Bay where avegetable grower was not allowed to plough his land which was growing self seeded protectednative vegetation because it had not been cultivated for ten years. In order to protect outlyingpasture land from native grasses conservation orders, some landowners now deliberatelycultivate every ten years whether or not the land needs cultivating. Commercial farmers nowfeel helpless when conservation issues arise on their properties. Legislation seems toinevitably favour the conservation sector of the community leaving those earning a livingfrom the land to carry the financial burden of conservation.

• Because the vegetable farming sector is feeling disenfranchised and alienated, particularly inthe rural: urban interface regions, one of the focus group members raised the potential for themajority of Australia’s vegetables to be imported from China and other SE Asian countries.

• The group recognised that there is a perception problem of both vegetable farming andagriculture in general. There is an urgent need to publicise the positive issues of farming andraise the farmer’s image as carers of the land and providers of clean healthy foods forAustralia and the world. It is not for example well publicised that vegetable farmers are beingpro active in their adoption of the ‘Enviroveg’ program. Any publicity material which may beassociated with this issue needs to be a living document that allows for change and flexibility.

• The younger generation of workers do not want to work on farms and suitable employees maybecome harder to find in future years. The industry may have to change to mechanicalharvesting techniques.

Dairy Focus Group

Positive Issues for Dairy Farming in the Region

• A good region to live in with a good range of schools and tertiary institutions for youngfamilies. Close proximity to general services such as doctors, hospitals, tax office, CES, etc.because it’s a densely populated area. It is also a uniquely central location being close toMelbourne, Dandenong, Pakenham, Warragul, Leongatha, etc. and this gives good choice ofservices both for the farm business and for the family.

• The proximity to the urban growth area of the south east suburbs provides more jobopportunities for family members who want to work off the farm.

• The area is unique for a dairy farming region being so close to a suburban rail network. Theproximity to excellent main road networks including the proposed bypass around Pakenham isalso a major advantage of the region.

• The location of the region allows for more options for milk suppliers. There are up to fivefactories to choose from. Further east or south into Gippsland they do not have this degree ofchoice.


28

• The region has a history of being able to supply milk all year round and this stems from thearea being so close to metropolitan Melbourne and having been a traditional “milk contract”region. The reputation of the area to be able to supply milk year round is due to the excellentsoil types found throughout the region. It has long been regarded as traditional winter milkingcountry.

• The region is well serviced with power and telecommunications infrastructure because of itsproximity to the urban growth corridor.

• The increasing land prices in the area are only an advantage if the farmer sells the property.

Negative Issues

• Increasing land prices makes it difficult to expand dairy farming operations because the priceof land does not enable an adequate financial return on the capital investment. As a businessproposition (rather than a lifestyle proposition) the return is not as good as it used to be duesolely to the capital price of the land. From a commercial point of view it is a better businesscase to sell up and go further south or east.

• Due to the implementation of the Urban Growth Boundary there has been a spike in landprices immediately outside the boundary in the last 12 months. In some cases land of 40 acresor less used to be worth $3,000-4,000 per acre. It is now worth $7,000-8,000 per acre. Landprices tend to be stable where the land is zoned agricultural.

• Land prices in general are now also subject to the allocation of water to any particular parcelof land. The value drops if there is no irrigation water available.

• The trend for dairy farming in the region is a decrease in the number of farms, an increase inland size and the number of cows, upgrading of capital infrastructure (eg. in milk harvestingequipment), an increase in efficiency and therefore an increase in production. Whilst this trendof farm restructuring is not unique to this region, it tends to be accelerating faster than in otherregions. It is driven by the high cost of the land, an ageing dairy farm demographic andattractive alternative lifestyle choices meaning that an above average number of dairy farmersare leaving the industry in the area. As dairy farms are sold beef farmers are tending to replacethem because beef farmers can and often do have another job off the farm. The dairy farms aretending to contract to the eastern and southern extremes of Cardinia Shire (or even further outinto Gippsland), away from the immediate impact of the urban growth areas and where landprices tend to be more stable.

• Many dairy farmers who do not wish to move away from their homes convert from dairyfarming to beef farming. There are a number of reasons for making this decision, eg. thefarmers children do not want to continue in dairying, the workload of the dairy farm becomestoo much for an ageing farming couple, land prices do not allow business expansion, etc.These factors have driven the progressive decline of the dairy industry in this region,particularly in the western and northern areas.

• Due to the above factors and particularly the fact that many children do not want to take on adairy farm, succession planning has become a major issue within the industry and lack ofadequate succession planning has led to the breaking up of many good dairy farm businesses.


29

• Dairy farmers are price takers and can only influence the price they receive by changing dairyfactory. There is however generally very little difference in overall prices paid between themain dairy factories.

Urban: Rural Interface

• Proximity to urbanisation is becoming a major issue with complaints being received fromneighbours including noise and headlights from driving tractors at night, noises from pumpsand other machinery, smell of silage, smell of manure, mowing hay at 6.00am, etc. Thefarmers feel that their right to farm is threatened.

• People moving in to the urban fringe areas, properties on the outskirts of small ruralsettlements and into individual smallholdings in rural areas are more than likely not from afarming background and are not accommodating in accepting farming practices. They do notunderstand that both seasons and weather conditions govern farming and that work must becarried when it can be done, not only between 9am and 5pm. There is a general lack ofunderstanding of agriculture and farming practices throughout the urban population and thislack extends to politicians of all parties at all levels of politics.

• More traffic, more children on the roads, more rubbish and an increase in number of carsstolen and set on fire on the roadside.

• Hobby/lifestyle farmers do not understand the need for constant weed control. This results inincreased weed infestation across commercial farmer’s properties which causes contaminatedpasture and therefore a decline in productivity and conserved fodder quality.

• Road infrastructure is becoming an issue because the capacity of the roads has not kept up todate with the increase in traffic volume. This applies to both dirt roads and some of the majorroads in the region. More people are travelling in and out of the area to go to work in otherregions making many roads very busy at commuter peak times.

Other Issues

• Cardinia Shire is considered a “metropolitan” municipality by the Federal Government andtherefore not eligible for funding for rural roads. This is a ridiculous ruling because by far themajority of the Shire is rural. The State Government refused a recent application for a cowunderpass under a road because Cardinia is classified as an urban shire. The Government didnot see the long term viability of dairy farming in the Shire.

• Services to the dairy industry such as discussion groups, programs to increase education, etc.are now all held out of the area due to the decline in the number of dairy farms in the region.

• There are rafts of government regulations imposing restrictions on farmers coming from manydifferent government departments who do not understand farming. Neither does there seem tobe any coordination of regulatory procedures between the various State Governmentdepartments imposing these regulations. The resultant paper work needed to comply with allthe legislation keeps multiplying.

• Government agencies seem to publish Discussion Papers at regular intervals and call forcomments or submissions from farmers. These take a long time to read and respond to,


30

particularly from those farmers who hold office in organisations such as the Victorian FarmersFederation (VFF) or the United Dairy Farmers of Victoria (UDV).

Future of the Dairy Industry in the Region

• There are still a significant number of dairy farms in the region but there is acceptance thatthis number will decrease at a faster rate that the rest of Victoria.

• A continuing tendency for farms to be divided and sold as smaller lots. Dairy farms needmodern milking sheds, equipment and infrastructure to make the farm viable. The dairyindustry will contract to the eastern and southern areas of the region.

• Melbourne 2030. The eastern part of the Cardinia Shire should not be included in this scheme.

• There is a lack of understanding that there is a substantial farming industry so close toMelbourne that needs services and assistance when required.

• To change from dairying to a different type of farming is a big cultural change. Twenty yearsago mixed farming was typical but in order to be competitive farms now need to bespecialised. There is more out-sourcing of skills into the industry than before and this trendwill continue.


31

DISCUSSION OF MAJOR ISSUES

Rural: Urban Interface

The best way to assess the impact of this issue within the region was to check with eachmunicipality about the recorded level of complaints received. This proved difficult in Casey butmore reliable figures were available from Cardinia. The issues were discussed with theappropriate officers in each municipality.

In reading the discussion below it also needs to be remembered that many complaints aboutfarming practices do not reach the local authority or any other government agency. Thesecomplaints are made directly to the farmer by a neighbour and many of them are caused by a lackof understanding of farming and current farm management practices. There is no way ofquantifying the frequency of such complaints but many farmers operating on the urban fringe oreven well away from intensive housing but with non farming neighbours, have related instances ofsuch complaints throughout the course of this project.

City of Casey

The customer call centre at Narre Warren receives approximately 1200 calls from rate payers eachweek. Of these calls around 900 could be classified as complaints or calls requesting action orassistance from the Council by rate payers. Unfortunately there is no classification in the systemof logging contacts with the Council that could identify if any of the contacts relate to agricultureor farming.

The City Community Safety Officers are also unable to assist in this issue as they do not keepstatistics in a form that they could identify as farm related. All they can offer is anecdotalinformation that there are occasional instances of stock wandering on roads, dog attacks onagricultural livestock and occasional complaints from urban dwellers when there may beinappropriate burning off being undertaken on farms adjacent to an urban area. The only way togain the frequency of such instances is to work through the computer log from the customer callcentre and try to determine if complaints were in fact farm related. This process would howeverbe unreliable as the association of many of these recorded complaints to agriculture would beopen to interpretation.

Cardinia Shire

Cardinia is obviously a far more rural municipality than Casey and therefore would be expected tohave more issues in the rural: urban interface area. Over the last three or four years, Cardinia havedeveloped a more pro active role in managing complaints received relating to farm properties andthis has resulted in a dramatic reduction in the level of complaints received.

Chicken Meat Farming.

For many years, this sector has been the main generator of complaints relating to farming in theShire. These complaints have predominantly been related to odour but have also included noise(mainly from heavy vehicle movements and activities), air born dust and adverse visual impact.However, the instigation of the “Chickencare” program has significantly reduced the level ofcomplaints. This program is based around a Code of Practice for the industry.


32

This program is supported by all the sectors which are involved in the chicken meat industry i.e.farmers, pick up crews, input suppliers, freight companies and the processors. It is also ofenormous significance that the program is also supported by and to some extent driven by, thelocal municipalities who have large numbers of broiler farms within their boundaries. This iscertainly true of Cardinia where Barry Jones, Manager Regulatory Services, is a member of thecommittee of Chickencare.

In addition, Cardinia Shire have tightened up on the application of planning permits both for newand existing poultry farms in the last few years. Existing planning permits, which in some caseshad not been rigidly enforced in the past, have been followed up and landowners made to complywith the conditions of the permits. Conditions written into planning permits for new farms are alsofollowed up. The fact that Barry Jones works with the Chickencare committee means that he canvisit poultry farms and talk with some authority and intimate knowledge of what is expected andnot be compromised by any lack of understanding of the issues. As a result the standards ofdesign, construction and hygiene of these farms have improved.

The impact of this Code of Practice and the strict application and policing of planning permits bythe Shire can be seen in the following figures of complaints (all categories) against poultry farmsin Cardinia. There are 44 poultry farms in the Shire.

Financial Year Number of Complaints

2001 >1002002 262003 15

The recent rationalisation of the chicken meat industry in the past two years has also assisted inthe lessening of complaints against farms in this sector. As the industry has matured over the lastfew years, many of the older and inefficient growing sheds have been abandoned by the industryand more birds are now housed in modern, efficient sheds that have greater control over theenvironment in which the birds are housed. This has effectively reduced the odour issue within theindustry.

In addition to issues on poultry farms as discussed above, there are around five complaints a yearcaused by farms other than poultry units where poultry manure is being stored prior to it beingspread. This can be on dairy farms, market gardens, etc.

Wandering Livestock

From a regulatory compliance viewpoint, this is the issue that currently causes the greatestnumber of complaints and the greatest demand on the time of Council officers. This is solely dueto livestock wandering loose on roads on the Shire, predominantly beef animals. It is not purely aRural: Urban interface issue as all rural Shires experience this problem to some extent or other butit is recorded here due to the fact that it does impact on urban dwellers on the rural fringe.The problem is caused by old and/or poorly maintained fences allowing stock to escape. Ratherthan decreasing, this problem is increasing. In the financial year 2002 there were 170 occasionswhen Shire Officers had to attend to control stock on roads. In the financial year 2003 there were350 such occasions. The reasons for the increase are not apparent but it may be related to thedrought i.e. livestock grazing drought affected pastures pushing at boundary fences to reachroadside green feed. Reduced farm incomes not meeting the needs of replacing or repairingfencing may also have had an impact as may the impact of hobby farmers moving into the region


33

and not understanding the need to maintain fences in good condition. There are also many cases offarmers finding that trespassers have left farm gates open allowing livestock to wander.

Surprisingly, around ten percent of livestock found wandering on roads are never claimed or theowners found. The Shire sells such animals through the Pakenham Livestock Exchange. Therecently introduced Livestock Identification Scheme may help to reduce the incidence ofunclaimed animals.

Dairy Industry

In the last four years the Shire has received ten complaints from rate payers relating to dairy cows(or replacement stock) walking to and from the milking shed to grazing paddocks via public roads.It appears that some motorists do not appreciate having to drive through manure left on the roadby cows.

Deer

There have been a few occasions in the past four years where council officers have been called outto catch deer that have escaped from deer farms in the Shire. It also needs to be recognised thatthere is now a substantial population of feral deer in many areas of Gippsland.

Other Farming Sectors

There are no recorded complaints against any other type of farms eg. asparagus, vegetables,olives, potatoes, alpacas, goats, etc. apart from one recent complaint against a vineyard wheretruck movements at all times of the night and day were disturbing neighbours. The Shire isdeveloping a new permit to be issued to this one property which imposes reasonable restrictionson such movements.

The Right to Farm

This concept has been developed over recent years as a reaction to the increasing numbers of nonrural residents leaving the urban and city areas to live in rural surroundings, often with unrealisticexpectations of the rural environment into which they are moving.

Farming is an Industry

Within the non farming communities in Australia there is a general lack of recognition thatfarming, in all its aspects, is an industry. Many industries can have “offensive” aspects to them asan essential part of their operations and agriculture is no exception. Noise (from agriculturalmachinery, heavy truck movements, irrigation and water pumps, recently weaned cattle andcalves), smells from fertilisers and manures, manure on roads when cattle are moved betweenpaddocks, dust created during cultivation, machinery lights during night time operations, spraydrift from farm chemicals, etc. are all common aspects of modern agriculture. These operationsare carried out at all times of day and night and also at weekends because farming is not a fivedays a week business that starts at 8.00am and finishes at 5.00pm.

The fact that farming is conducted in rural environments that are often areas of natural beauty andsometimes considered idyllic, tends to divert the non farming mind from some of the realities ofthe industry. Add to this the fact that the vast majority of urban dwellers worldwide have totally


34

lost touch with agriculture and it is easy to understand why conflicts arise when urban and ruralare on either side of a fence.

Long held farming practices are being challenged by non farmers and the established agriculturalcommunity regard this challenge as a threat to their “right to farm”.

In a recent Dairy Succession Planning Workshop organised by the Victorian Department ofPrimary Industry and Melbourne University at Leongatha in July 2003, the need to raise theprofile of the agricultural sector throughout Australia was recognised. Fewer and fewer people inAustralia now have any link to agriculture and those with any linkage at all are estimated to be 1in 50. In the USA this figure is quoted at 1 in 100. The indications are that as the population ofAustralia rises, the urban community’s linkages and therefore their understanding of agriculturewill decrease.

Whilst urban dwellers, newly arrived in rural areas, have issues with many of the farmingpractices they become exposed to, the farming community needs to exercise a degree ofresponsibility in the way they conduct their business. This is understandably difficult to acceptwhere the primary producer has not sold any of their land, wants to continue the existing businessin the way that it has been managed over many preceding years but suddenly finds that land soldon the boundary of their property has domestic dwellings occupied by people who have nounderstanding of agriculture.

There is also a belief amongst many primary producers, expressed on a number of occasionsthroughout this project, that the wider community expect them to maintain a picturesque ruralenvironment that can be accessed by everyone whilst operating a farming business that is at bestmarginally profitable and at times losing money.

However, for harmony to prevail in such situations there needs to be understanding from bothsides of the fence. Irrespective of the siting of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) these issueswill remain. It is important to understand the causes of tension between urban and rural residentswhich is fundamentally brought about by the demand for residential and industrial development.The following models are reproduced from work undertaken on this issue by the Future FamilyFarms Project of the Victorian Department of Agriculture led by Max Coster.

The first model shows how farming operations have developed over recent years where there islow or no demand for agricultural land from the housing/industrial sector. It shows the capabilityof farming to respond to the need to increase efficiency in a competitive environment.


35

MODEL 1

The second model demonstrates the adverse impact of the demand for development land adjacentto farming activities.

IntensifyOperations

Larger - economiesof scale

New products

Farmers haveflexibility to

respond

CompetitiveAgriculture

Low non-ag demandfor land

Low expectationfor increased prices

No landspeculation

Appropriatecommunityexpectations

Appropriateregulatorystandards

Community benefitsfrom Ag

Positiveenvironmental

outcomes


36

MODEL 2

2 Impose inappropriate

standards

Agriculture

less competitive

Farmers

Leave

3

Intensify

operations

Farmers

cannot expand

Expectations of

high land values

Increase of

land value

Speculation

Demand for residential

development

1

New residents

- reduced knowledge

of Ag / land management

Reduced land

management outcomes

Residents

expectations

not met

Disputes

Complaints

Controlled to

achieve community

objective

Land holders

bear costsLess viable

agricultural

business

Other income or 5

government support?

Managed

Landscape

Community

benefits

Development 4

42 Impose inappropriate

standards

Agriculture

less competitive

Farmers

Leave

3

Intensify

operations

Farmers

cannot expand

Expectations of

high land values

Increase of

land value

Speculation


development

1

New residents

- reduced knowledge


Reduced land

management outcomes

Residents

expectations

not met

Disputes

Complaints

Controlled to

achieve community

objective

Land holders


agricultural

business

Other income or 5

government support?

Managed

Landscape

Community

benefits

Development 4

4

Agriculture

less competitive

Farmers

Leave

3

Intensify

operations

Farmers

cannot expand

Expectations of

high land values

Increase of

land value

Speculation


development

1

New residents

- reduced knowledge


Reduced land

management outcomes

Residents

expectations

not met

Disputes

Complaints

Controlled to

achieve community

objective

Land holders


agricultural

business

Other income or 5

government support?

Managed

Landscape

Community

benefits

Development 4

4

ACTION:

1 Community education

2 Regulatory standards

3 New technology

4 Planning

5 Community benefits support


37

The immediate action required where the rural: urban interface has not been managed from theoutset is an education campaign directed at the urban community, particularly those re-locating toproperties close to farm land and an awareness campaign to primary producers about the actionsthey can take to lessen the potential for conflict.

The Department of Primary Industries and the Municipal Association of Victoria have published acomprehensive range of information sheets under the heading “Living Together in RuralVictoria”. The individual information sheets are entitled:

• What to Expect• Tips for Purchasing Rural land• Good Neighbours• Agricultural Industries and their Impacts• Legitimate Rural Land Management Activities• Managing Weeds and Animal Pests• Roads, Animals and Vehicles• Planning and Subdivision Rules• Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures• Who to Contact About a Range of Issues

These information sheets comprehensively cover all of the issues likely to arise in relation to theurban: rural interface and are therefore very useful to use should problems occur in theCasey/Cardinia region. However, it would be useful to have a local brochure produced to take intoaccount the predominant Casey/Cardinia issues.

Considering the comment above about the decline in the number of people with any link toagriculture, it is suggested that a program be commenced with schools in the region to begin theprocess of creating an understanding of the urban: rural interface issues. Whilst it may be someyears before school children have the opportunity to directly influence this issue themselves, theymay well be able to influence their siblings and parents and begin the process of greaterunderstanding. Some of the topics which could be covered in this education process would be:

• The value of agriculture• Why we need farmers• Basic farming practices• Improving the perception of farming• Emphasise the need to

- Control dogs- Supervise children- Control dumping of rubbish

• Driving carefully on minor roads (livestock on roads, slow moving machinery, etc)

The program should be complemented with visits to both livestock and cropping farms.

In addition there should also be a program of farm walks initiated to cater to adult members of theurban community who would like to learn more about their rural neighbours and farmmanagement practices.


38

The whole scheme can be modelled on a similar project currently being undertaken by the Centrefor Agriculture and Business in the Shire of Yarra Ranges but will need tailoring to meet theneeds of different farming systems in the Casey/Cardinia region.

The main objectives of such a program would be to increase the knowledge of new and currenturban: rural interface landowners and other urban dwellers of acceptable farming practices andincrease the instances of self resolution of conflicts between neighbours. This will reduce theincidence of complaints to Councils and other agencies.

It is recommended that this topic becomes one of the projects to be undertaken at the conclusionof the DOTARS funded project.

Looking to the Future

Farmers in the region have expressed various views throughout this project on how future housingdevelopments in the region can be managed and planned to improve the rural: urban interfaceissues. In the main these ideas revolve around the provision of buffer zones between agricultureand urban development. Various buffer zone concepts have been suggested such as golf courses,linear parklands, commercial timber operations (i.e. grow trees) and large subdivisions for hobbyfarms. It has been suggested that with the implementation of the Urban Growth Boundary theseoptions are now more feasible to implement along that boundary. It also needs to be recognisedthat a roadway, whether it be a main road or a rural road, does not provide an adequate bufferbetween urban housing and farming activities.

Whilst the above ideas are attractive, there are some difficulties in the implementation of suchproposals. These range from who is to pay for the provision of linear parklands, how many golfcourses does an expanding urban population need and how can potential timber operations beattracted to purchase land adjacent to urban development where the land price may besignificantly higher than in other more suitable rural areas? Is the wider community prepared topay to protect the farming industries right to farm?

Whilst there are a range of issues associated with future development proposals in the region thereis no doubt that the planning process does need to assess the rural: urban interface and right tofarm issues in all future development applications (further discussion of this issue can be found atpage 52 of this report under ‘Planning Issues Relevant to Agriculture’). If this is not done it willonly act to compound the current situation and continue to influence the current trend wherefarmers are being driven away from productive land. This results in neglected land on the fringeof urban development, a loss of economic activity to the region and pressure on both localCouncils and the State Government to allow further development on that neglected land.

Recommendations

1. Liaise with officers in the Shire of Yarra Ranges to assess the effectiveness of theireducation program to the urban community.

2. Investigate the potential for an agricultural education campaign to promote greaterunderstanding of agriculture within the urban community.

3. Investigate the need for a training program for primary producers to enable them tobe more proactive in reducing complaints from neighbours. This training couldinclude negotiation skills.

4. Prepare an advisory leaflet on rural: urban interface issues specific to theCasey/Cardinia region.


39

5. Communicate with the farming community to ensure that they understand the fullimplications of the State Governments Urban Growth Boundary (UGB).

The Escalating Cost of Land in the Region

In the broad context of discussing the impact on the farming sector from the continuing expansionof urban housing, the escalating price of agricultural land has by far the biggest impact. Thissection outlines the issues involved in this area but this report does not attempt tocomprehensively cover the topic. It is a complex and difficult subject beyond the immediate scopeof this project. Agricultural industries throughout Australia are now recognising the seriousness ofthe issue and beginning to look for strategies to overcome the problems.

The issue of the high cost of productive agricultural land is not confined to rural: urban interfaceregions. It is however compounded in these interface regions and the Casey/Cardinia region is oneof the most severely affected areas in Australia. The reasons that the region is in this severelyaffected high land price category are not hard to understand.

• The rural areas of Casey and Cardinia are amongst the most visually attractive of countryareas in Victoria.

• Main roads infrastructure is now excellent and constantly being improved (eg. the recentlycompleted Hallam Bypass, the proposed Pakenham and Cranbourne Bypasses).

• All of Casey and Cardinia is within relatively easy commuting distance of the MelbourneCBD and all of the inner city suburbs.

• Tullamarine Airport can be reached from Cardinia by divided road and freeway and fromcentral Casey by freeway alone.

• The region provides easy access to the whole of Gippsland with its wide range of touristdestinations including the Victorian High Country and also to beaches and coastal recreationareas on the Mornington Peninsula and Philip Island.

• Casey and Cardinia offer an excellent lifestyle with a wide range of housing options and easyaccess to all services and facilities.

• There is no heavy industry in the region that causes pollution problems. It is a healthyenvironment.

• There is easy access to full time or part time paid employment for people who do not wish towork full time on the land. This applies equally to an individual, one partner of a two personfarm household or both partners of a farm operation.

People want to live in the region and this inevitably increases both the demand for land and theprice of land.

The impact of the high cost of land is seen in the following ways:

• It has the effect of lowering the Return on Funds Employed (ROFE) of commercial farmers inthe region. One of the best managed dairy farms in the region reported a 4% ROFE for the2003 financial year. Whilst the cost of inputs and the price received for milk also impact onthe earnings of such businesses, the reported ROFE is not an unusual return for this farm overthe last few years. When the cash market is offering a 5.25% interest rate at call there is littleincentive to reinvest in the farm or to expand the operation by increasing the land holding toincrease production. The high cost of land therefore has the effect of restricting businessgrowth in the farm sector.


40

A comment from the survey adds to this opinion.

“Property too small with no room to expand and too costly to operate. Farmers unable toborrow money to buy next door land because of:1. Price2. Unprofitable3. Drought4. Outlook dim for world prices

Viable farms and land broken up and sold in small lots.”

• The high cost of land becomes a barrier to new entrants into the commercial farmingindustries in the region, particularly by younger farmers who do not have the capacity toborrow the large amounts of money required to buy land, equipment and/or livestock. Addedto this issue is the demise of some of the specialist rural banks and change of policy of others,eg. Primary Industries Bank of Australia (PIBA), Commonwealth Development Bank (CDB),who previously provided funding especially for entry level farmers. The Rural FinanceCorporation are however writing loans to young farmers under forty years of age and offeringa 2% discount on base lending rates for a minimum number of years. It is not however acompetitive lending environment.

• Restrictive lending policies do not provide suitable products for new entrants eg. low lending:valuation ratios where 50% is common. New Zealand agriculture has adopted someinnovative ways of assisting young farmers into commercial units and due to these initiativesthe average age of dairy farmers in New Zealand is approximately 20 years less than inAustralia (ref. Geoff Kirton in a paper presented to the Dairy Farm Succession PlanningWorkshop, Leongatha, July 2003).

• Due partly to the cost barriers to young potential farmers, the average age of commercialfarmers in Australia is steadily rising. This factor will inevitably influence the structure ofagriculture in the region as farmers will look for less physically and mentally demandingfarming enterprises. It will for example, have a severe effect on the local dairy farmingindustry where older aged farmers may opt to transfer to a beef enterprise. The same structuraladjustments could also be seen in future years to the orchard and vegetable industries. Anadditional negative factor in this trend will be a decline in on farm employment in the regionand a reduction in the need for the farm services sector, another factor tending to lessenemployment opportunities.

• For young people living on the urban fringe, agriculture is gradually becoming a lessattractive way of life. They have easy access to a range of alternative employment in theeastern and south east suburbs and Melbourne CBD. These alternatives can offer betterearnings potential than farming, provide career promotional opportunities and greater securityof earnings without having the responsibility of earning a return from a large capital assetsubject to the dynamics of world agricultural commodity prices and the variances of theclimate.

• The high rateable value of land is adding to the cost burden of farming in the region. Even fora relatively small part time beef farming operation the cost can become prohibitive asevidenced by the following comment taken directly from one of the Casey and CardiniaAgricultural Audit questionnaire returns from a 26 hectare property.


41

“Our total rates are $6897.20. Allow $1800 for the two houses on the property and thisequates to approximately $125 for each of the mature livestock on the property. The land istherefore too costly for an economic farm operation based on traditional beef production. Ourcurrent operation is our lifestyle choice.”

There is a critical issue of farm succession planning developing in many agricultural industriesthroughout Australia. The issue has the potential to cause a negative impact on both the familiesand the business. The downstream effects impact on the regional economy and the social fabric ofthe local community. The issues revolve around the inter-generation transfer of farming assets forfamily farms, particularly where there are more siblings than the family farm can support.Commercial farms in Casey and Cardinia are predominantly family farms. The issue iscompounded where land prices are highest and where the sibling wishing to remain on the familyfarm and operate the business has to effectively pay out the other siblings.

It is an important issue for Casey and Cardinia because it has the potential to generate arestructuring of the farming mix within the region when family farms are divided and sold to noncommercial land holders in smaller blocks. The new land owners will be making lifestyle choicesand will predominantly opt for the easier systems of farming, eg. beef, horses, agistment, etc. andwill have off farm income. In general terms, lifestyle farmers do not manage the land and farminginfrastructure as well as full time commercial farmers. Problems of land degradation, weedinfestation and lack of repairs and maintenance to infrastructure (buildings, fences, waterways,water storages, etc) can then develop. This scenario has the potential to permanently and adverselychange the agricultural landscape of Casey and Cardinia.

It is also easy to understand how farms close to the urban fringe, where there is greateropportunity for alternative employment, may opt for the simple solution of selling out, breakingup the farm and dividing up the money.

The Victorian Department of Agriculture has recognised this succession issue, particularly in thedairy industry and has instigated a program known as Future Family Farms. The Project Officerattended a workshop in July relating to this issue in South Gippsland. Although the program istargeted initially at dairy farms the issues raised and the majority of the proposed strategies areapplicable to all types of farming enterprises. The notes produced from that workshop are attachedto this report in the Appendices.

Section 10 of that report outlines options, strategies and the next steps to be taken to try andovercome some of the issues discussed above. Section 8 outlines potential strategies for makingconnections with new investors into agriculture. What is obvious following that workshop is theneed for more creative thinking about farm succession issues and the problems associated withyoung farmers having access to finance to begin a career in agriculture, especially in areas ofhigher than normal land values.

One of the problems recognised following the workshop was the question of how the multitude offollow up activities identified during the workshop can be implemented. This is a humanresources issue that has not as yet been resolved.

Recommendations

1. Continue to monitor and support the work of the Future Family Farms projectbeing run by the Victorian Department of Primary Industry.


42

2. Investigate processes to promote farm business planning and in particular,Succession Planning for farmers throughout the region.

3. Instigate a dialogue with local financial institutions and financial advisors to createan awareness of the situation and work towards innovative solutions.

Sustainability and Land Management

It has been encouraging to note the number of farmers in the region who have commented on theissue of sustainability during conversations with the Project Officer. Many of them are committedto the concept of them being custodians of the land for future generations of farmers andconsumers and they manage the land with that responsibility in mind. The main areas of concernwithin the region relating to sustainability (although the term does mean different things todifferent people) are the use of farm chemicals, fertiliser use and run off, degradation of soilstructures, loss of native vegetation and fauna and the conservation and availability of water.Water is discussed as a separate topic elsewhere in this report.

Some people have suggested that organic farming is the best way to sustain agriculturalproduction in the long term but organic farming does encompass a wide range of views as to whatis ‘organic’.

Some farmers have included the issue of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s) in theirdiscussions on sustainability. This is a divisive issue across agribusiness nationally and beyond thescope of this report. There are conflicting views throughout the region.

Many farmers are concerned at the apparent continual loss of valuable agricultural land to eitherhousing estates or larger hobby farm sub divisions recognising that land has been permanentlytaken out of mainstream agriculture. Whilst nothing can be done to reclaim the areas already lost,there is a desire on the part of many farmers to see this trend reduced in future years.

There is also an interest in the region in reclaiming various proportions of different farmproperties to grow more trees across the region. Trees provide a significant contribution to controlof the water table and provide habitat for native flora and fauna. Many farmers andconservationists believe that a significant proportion of trees across a farm property will actuallyincrease the cropping potential of a farm. Cardinia have a tree grant in operation where the Shirewill refund around 50% of the cost of planting farm trees. This scheme could be extended intoCasey.

There is an active Landcare group in the region and their activities should be supported andencouraged.

During the period of this project, many farmers in Casey and Cardinia have expressed theirconcern that “lifestyle” farmers do not have the necessary skills to look after the land properly.Many of them feel that poor land management practices have a negative impact on their owncommercial farms particularly in the areas of weed control and pest control. Weeds includethistles, blackberries, bindweed, Patterson’s Curse etc. and animal pests refers mainly to rabbitsand foxes.

It was however encouraging to see the responses to the survey question on Training Requirementswhere many owners of the smaller farm properties indicated that they would like to learn moreabout farm management. The owners of larger properties generally responded that they did notneed such training. There is therefore the opportunity to promote some animal and crop husbandry


43

short courses targeted at the small land owner and these courses should include a strong elementof sustainability. This should be one of the projects to continue beyond the RAP program.

Recommendations

1. Audit the issues of sustainability in the region.2. Investigate the delivery of appropriate training courses which include sustainability,

to the target audience identified in the survey.3. Promote the Cardinia Shire Tree Grants Program within the Shire and investigate

the potential extension of the program into the City of Casey.4. It is recommended that the two Councils maintain their support for local Landcare

programs.5. Create links with lead organisations in the organics industries so that potential

organic growers have ready access to relevant information.

Water

Because there has been a prolonged drought across the majority of Australia over the last six toseven years, the issue of water, or more specifically the availability of water, is at the forefront ofrural peoples thinking at the present time. Added to the drought is the recently created legislationrelating to the registration and licensing of farm dams, the topic of water rights and the tradabilityof those rights. There is also the not insignificant issue of the rapidly expanding urban populationin the region creating a huge additional demand for potable water and these factors combine tocause the regions farmers concern for their future water supplies. It should not need to be said butit bears repeating that without adequate water of suitable quality, there will be no agriculture.

The regions farmers are perhaps more fortunate than many of their counterparts in many otherareas of Australia in that the Casey/Cardinia region does have a normally reliable annual rainfall.The recent drought has however demonstrated to many of the regions farmers that they aredefinitely not immune from the potential of recurring droughts.

The region however has the opportunity to take advantage of enormous volumes of re cycledpurified water from the Melbourne Water owned Eastern Treatment Plant at Carrum Downs. Thisplant is the main sewage treatment facility to the east of Melbourne and has the potential to supplyrecycled water to the majority of the higher quality agricultural land in the region, includingextending to the eastern boundary of Cardinia Shire south of the Princes’ Highway.

In addition, the ability to use re cycled water on sports fields, golf courses, nurseries, gardens, etchas the potential to save many hundreds of megalitres of Melbourne’s potable water each year.

Some of the treated effluent from this plant is already being used on the Melbourne Waterproperty at Carrum Downs for washing of equipment and grounds maintenance as well as someoff site use in businesses such as nurseries, vineyards, golf courses and sports grounds. This useonly amounts to approximately 6% of the current plant output of recycled water.

It is also worth noting that there are already a number of smaller recycled sewage schemessupplying water to businesses in the region. These are from Sewage Treatment Plants operated bySouth East Water which produce Class C treated water. These include the Pakenham, Cranbourne,Koo Wee Rup, Blind Bight and Longwarry sewage treatment plants which supply water to golfcourses, turf farms, fodder producers, dairy farms and timber plantations. The volume of treatedrecycled water from these smaller sewage treatment plants is however very limited. It is the


44

enormous volume of recycled water which will be available from the Carrum Downs plant whichmakes the Eastern Irrigation Scheme such an exciting project.

During the writing of this report (January 2004), the upgrade of treated water from the EasternTreatment Plant to Class A has not commenced. This is despite a promise by the VictorianGovernment and Melbourne Water to have the Class A water delivered to vegetable farmers in theregion by December 2003. However, the State Government press release announcing that theClass A upgrade had finally been approved was published on 8th January 2004.

Over forty vegetable growers in the region have agreed to purchase Class A re-claimed waterfrom the Eastern Irrigation Scheme (see plan in the Appendices but note that the schemesdevelopers reserve the right to change the pipeline route depending on the demand for watersupply into different localities). The water delivered by this scheme, on a per megalitre basis, willcost $170 in the winter period (June to August), $220 in the shoulder periods and $265 in thesummer period (December to February). In addition there will be a variable connection fee basedon estimated annual usage and an ongoing annual service fee of around $3000 per customer.

Although the cost of Class A water delivered by this scheme is relatively expensive againstcurrent sources of farm water, the vegetable growers in the Cranbourne/Clyde/Devon Meadowsarea have agreed to a 15 year commitment to purchase the water. They have done this as aninsurance against any potential for the existing drought to continue, against future droughtsituations and to enable them to expand their businesses with confidence in the supply of water.Over 50 businesses including some golf courses paid an advance fee of $1000 to MelbourneWater in February 2003 on the understanding that the pipe line would be built and deliveringClass A water to them by December 2003, in time for the dry summer season.

Following the vegetable growers signing up for the scheme in February, the start of works forupgrading water to Class A has been repeatedly delayed. The last date that they were given byMelbourne Water for the supply of Class A water from this irrigation scheme was June 2004 andthe recent press release states that the “scheme will be operational during next summer”,indicating that the farmers will have the water by November/December 2004.

This is an important issue for the agriculture in the region. If the current drought continues and adry summer is experienced in either 2004 or 2005 then many of the vegetable growers will haveno option but to reduce plantings and conserve water for fewer crops if the irrigation scheme isnot operating. This will mean both reduced economic activity by those businesses and asubsequent reduction in the number of ongoing jobs those businesses are able to maintain. It willalso result in a reduction in the volume of export products by the industry and the loss of overseasearnings coming into the region. Due to the current drought conditions, some farmers have alreadylaid off employees and stopped exports to Asia as well as reducing products sold interstate.

As an example, one grower in the Clyde area who currently has 28 full time and over 40 part timeemployees estimates that over the last five years of dry conditions his business has reduced byover $1.0 million per annum in gross turnover. In addition he has reduced employee numbers byaround 25 people. He no longer exports to Asia or domestically interstate. This reduction inbusiness activity is due solely to the lack of available water. Class A water from the EasternIrrigation Scheme will enable this business to gradually rebuild in dollar turnover and employeenumbers and further more have the confidence to expand beyond that point because they wouldhave security of water supplies.


45

There would be around ten other farms of this size in the region in a similar situation. (The largestfarm employer in the region is another vegetable grower who employs 79 full time and 25 casualemployees). In addition there are numerous smaller growers, all of whom have the potential toexpand their businesses and employment opportunities if they have security of water supply.

Clive Wright, a consultant engineer working for TopAq, the company contracted to build thescheme, has received numerous inquiries from people with an interest in establishing nurseries,turf farms, flower farms and vegetable growing operations in the rural area in the south of the Cityof Casey and the south west area of Cardinia Shire. Clive does not wish to attach actual numbersto these inquiries but believes that the attraction of a guaranteed water supply will bring many newagricultural businesses into the region.

Nurseries, flower farms and vegetable growing are all high employment businesses and shouldtherefore be given every encouragement to establish in the Casey / Cardinia region. Clive Wrightbelieves that the proposed irrigation scheme will be equally as successful as the Virginia schemein South Australia which has injected millions of dollars into the local economy. Since thecommissioning of this re-cycled water scheme in 1998, potato crops have grown from an annual$60 million industry to $140 million in 2003. Three new vegetable packaging companies haveestablished in the area, there are now six transport businesses in operation when there wasoriginally only one and three irrigation companies have set up business in the area. The beneficialdownstream economic impact on the local community has been enormous.

Recommendations

1. Liaise with Frankston and Mornington Peninsula Councils to ensure a ‘Regional’approach to water issues.

2. Maintain existing contacts with Southern Rural Water, South East Water andMelbourne water to promote the ongoing supplies of adequate water for the regionsfarmers.

3. In relation to the Eastern Irrigation Scheme:-• Identify the prime farming zones which will accommodate expansion due to

the Eastern Irrigation Scheme recycled water and protect them fromdevelopment or inappropriate uses.

• Protect existing farming zones to give security of tenure to potentialagricultural investors.

• Identify potential extension routes to the currently proposed irrigationsupply pipe line.

• Identify and communicate with potential new agricultural investors to theregion.

• Plan for future infrastructure needs brought about by increased farmingactivity

- Potential sites for new businesses, eg. aquaculture, hydroponics- Roads for larger vehicles and increased traffic flows

~ Major non arterial linking roads~ Review weight limits~ Assess bridge weight limits

.4. Continue to promote water recycling, conservation and efficiency on farms.


46

Roads and Transport

There is general consensus across the farming communities in the region that the major andarterial road network is very good and being further improved. There were a few exceptions suchas the Clyde to Five Ways road but VicRoads have now allocated funding and this road is due tobe upgraded.

The planned route of the proposed Pakenham by pass has received some adverse criticism for theway it has split some farm properties and devalued adjacent land.

Over one hundred respondents to the survey made mention of the condition of unsealed roads andthe continually increasing volumes of traffic using some of these roads. Traffic volumes on allroads in the region will continue to increase as the population of the region rises. This is creatingconcern for many rural residents who fear that the structure of many of the minor roads will notaccommodate any further increases in traffic flow without becoming dangerous.

In addition, many people believe that there should be a reduced speed limit on many rural roadsand in particular on unsealed roads. Excessive speed on unsealed gravel roads leads to thedevelopment of premature corrugation, surface break up and creates pot holes. Numerouscomments have been received that all unsealed roads should have an 80 Km/hour speed limitapplied. Warrnambool City Council has made representations to the State Government that thereshould be an automatic default to 80Km/hour on all unsealed roads throughout Victoria. VicRoadsare currently assessing this proposal.

The vegetable growing industry is worth over $49 million annually to the City of Casey and thevast majority of this production is in the Cranbourne South, Devon Meadows, Clyde and Fiveways areas. The asparagus industry, predominantly in Cardinia is worth over $32 million annuallyand the potato industry is valued at $18.5 million.

In order to remain price competitive with other regions of Australia and in export markets, theseand other agricultural industries based in this southern zone of the City of Casey and CardiniaShire must have access to efficient road transport infrastructure. This issue also applies to all theother primary products coming out of the region but it is imperative to the ongoing viability ofhigh quality fresh products moving quickly and efficiently into the Melbourne metropolitan area,the Footscray wholesale markets, to the Tullamarine airport for airfreight exports and onto theinter state highway system for delivery into Adelaide, Sydney and Brisbane. The region hasenormous export opportunities and can capitalise on the Victorian “fresh, green, healthy image” ofits primary production.

The logical and direct route for this produce to be moved to these markets is via the FiveWays/Berwick Road leading north onto the Monash Freeway thus avoiding Cranbourne townshipand the growing traffic congestion of the South Gippsland Highway. It is therefore vital that thisroad can carry B-double vehicles as a minimum. (The potential to move much of this producewith B-triple vehicles has also been raised during the course of this project). The only alternativeat this stage is to move these trucks through Cranbourne on the South Gippsland Highway.

Some of the feeder roads across the whole region also need investigating in relation to theirimportance in moving produce to the main road system. Dalmore Road is an example of animportant route for the asparagus crop. Manks Road and North Road are other examples of roadswhich need investigation. The issue demands a regional approach and this should be one of theprojects to follow on from this report.


47

The value of the Eastern Irrigation Scheme water infrastructure facilities transporting treatedwaste water from the Carrum Downs treatment plant into the intensive vegetable growing area isin danger of under utilisation if increased outputs, resulting from increased availability of water,can not be cost effectively and efficiently transported to market outlets.

In addition, if there is inadequate access for large and cost efficient road transport to move thisproduce, there will be no incentive for farmers in this area to diversify production into new andinnovative crops. Nor will there be the attraction for new farmers to move into the area and usethe high quality land and reliable water supply for intensive cropping. The initiative will be lostand as a result employment opportunities will be lost.

Downstream value adding opportunities will also be compromised. A revitalised intensivecropping/market garden industry in this area should process and value add its produce within theregion. The guaranteed availability of the treated water and therefore the guarantee of continuoussupplies of products could provide sufficient critical mass of product to entice processingcompanies to construct facilities in the area. It is costly to freight bulky non value added farmproducts long distances to be processed or packaged. It should be done close to the source ofprimary production with as little loss of product moisture and quality as possible. Inefficient andexpensive logistics would however deter processors from setting up business in the region,compounding the loss of employment opportunities.

Recommendations

1. Investigate the possibility of implementing an 80Km/hour speed limit on selected ruralroads throughout the region.

2. Map the major access routes for the transport of goods in and out of the intensivefarming areas of the region.

3. Map the minor feeder roads which are used to move produce off farms.4. Assess the suitability of current roads and bridges to meet the needs of modern

transport.

Costs versus Returns Price Squeeze

One of the major negative impacts on primary producers across Australia for many years has beenthe lack of control that primary producers have had on the price that they receive for theirproducts. They are price takers and not price makers. This has a negative impact on theirbusinesses in a number of ways.

Whilst costs of inputs such as fuel, fertiliser, fencing, power, repairs and maintenance, etc.continue to rise, farmers do not generally have the capacity to control prices to off set suchincreases. There were also many comments from the survey relating to the cost of rates. Whilstmany people do not believe that calculating rates on agricultural land values is equitable, themajor criticism relating to rates was that Casey does not have a farm rate in operation whereasCardinia do have a two tier rural property rating system.

There are a few exceptions to the ‘price takers not makers’ rule where innovative farmers havetaken an entrepreneurial position and created a highly value added product or products from theiroperations. The main examples of this are dairy farmers producing cheeses, yoghurts, dairy dips,etc. fruit farmers producing juices, some even extending soft fruit value adding into ice creamsand liqueurs, lavender growers producing a wide range of products, beef farmers in closecooperation with butchers producing prepacked meat trays, etc.


48

However, the control of marketing channels for Australian primary produce still remainspredominantly in the hands of the major supermarket chains. It is not good news for the regionsfarmers that competition in the food retailing sector appears to be intensifying, thus reducing themargin at the retail level and forcing pressure back down the supply chain to the primaryproducer. Woolworth’s and Coles will continue to aggressively compete and the strategically sitedAldi stores in capital cities will maintain the margin pressure. The smaller retail food stores suchas Foodland and IGA will continue to fight for their market share.

Looking at innovative ways to add value beyond the farm gate in an attempt to differentiateproducts and increase the dollar return does not and will never appeal to all primary producers.There are however some options by which primary businesses can look to add value and takemore control of their business destiny. The whole topic of marketing channels and market poweris a large and complex issue which is beyond the scope of this report. However, one of the moreobvious options is the creation of industry sector collaboration, alternatively referred to asstrategic business alliances, business clusters or other such titles indicating the same form ofcooperative strategy.

It is not inconceivable that groups of farmers in the region could collaborate and form a businesscluster to generate critical mass of product which can lead to alternative marketing strategies otherthan simply using existing supply channels to supply the supermarket trade. (This does not meanthat the business cluster could not or should not supply to supermarkets if that retail outlet suitsthe needs of the group and a suitable deal can be negotiated). These types of businessarrangements, initiated by groups of farmers, can also expand beyond the primary productionsector and involve packaging companies, food processors, distribution businesses, retail outlets,etc. Each business, both at the farm level and in the remainder of the chain, would continue to runas its own independent operation but be financially and philosophically committed to the aims andstandards of the group.

Needless to say, there does need to be a set of written guidelines that each business would beobliged to adhere to and there is inevitably some loss of autonomy in belonging to such a group orcluster. Members of the cluster need to be of like mind about the outcomes they are attempting toachieve and in agreement about the business and management processes needed to achieve thosegoals. However, the benefits that can be returned to each of the businesses involved can besubstantial. Apart from the financial gains which are the primary focus of such clusters,participating businesses can share processes, technology and management techniques with the aimof continuous improvement of individuals and therefore of the cluster, for the benefit of all itsmembers.

Successful clusters have the opportunity to further add value to their products through brandingand marketing their products to specific target markets.

The most important phase of this type of business arrangement is the set up process. Poorlyconstructed, badly managed or inadequately researched clusters (including detailed marketinganalysis) in the early phases of development are almost certainly doomed to fail.

An alterative form of direct marketing of primary products is gaining popularity in Australiathrough the formation of Farmers Markets. Cardinia now has a successful farmers market which isheld on a monthly basis. There are a number of real benefits for the primary producers who areinvolved in these markets and for their customers who shop at them. The opportunity for urbandwellers to buy fresh or other produce direct from the grower is a very powerful process and isundoubtedly helping to break down the urban: rural divide. Customers can ask questions about the


49

farming process and farmers can receive direct feed back on the quality of the produce they aregrowing.

The only negative from the producer’s point of view is that at this stage the markets are only heldonce a month which creates a limitation on the volume of product that can be sold this way.However, the farmers markets are a great initiative from the primary producer’s point of view andneed to be supported and encouraged.

The recently commenced Cardinia Food and Wine Network has now extended into the City ofCasey and Baw Baw Shire and is being supported by the Business Development departments ineach of the three municipalities. At the time of writing this report, discussions are being heldabout the processes needed to market more of the regions primary produce into the regionsrestaurants, cafes, food retailers and tourism venues. It is planned to involve the regions primaryproducers in this process and this initiative could eventually provide significant retail outletopportunities either direct from the farm or with minimal stages in the supply chain.

Recommendations

1. Research alternative paddock to plate channels which can maximise the return to theprimary producer.

2. Continue to search for innovative ways to ‘value add’ to the regions primary production.3. Canvas the possibility of forming business clusters within the region.4. Explore the potential to increase overseas exports direct from the farm.5. Continue to support the growth of Cardinia Farmers Market and explore the potential

for other such markets in the region.6. Continue to liaise with the regional Food and Wine Network and involve interested

primary producers in the process.7. Assess the possibility of introducing an agricultural rating system for the City of Casey.

The Profile / Perception of Farming

There is general recognition amongst farmers in the region that many of the urban population donot have a positive opinion of primary producers. This comment arose many times duringconversations throughout the project. The farmer’s perception is that the remainder of thepopulation regard them as rich people because they own large areas of land. Because of this,farmers should not complain about their situation. There is also however a recognition that thefundamental cause of the misunderstanding is the lack of information provided to the urbancommunity about agriculture and rural issues. This lack of understanding manifests itself in thetypes of complaints farmers receive from their urban neighbours.

There was also discussion at various stages of the project about the farming community’sperception of themselves, which is often negative. Part of this negativity can be attributed to thepoor (or negative) financial returns that farmers are often exposed to. As indicated elsewhere inthis report, many farmers feel powerless to control their own financial destiny, no matter howefficient their operations are or what level of debt they are carrying. This factor can lead to afeeling of being disenfranchised and of having little social value. Many farmers believe that theyreceive no support from governments at any level and that the food industry supply chains whichthey supply take advantage of current agricultural industry structures and their hard work,engineering farm gate prices to the absolute minimum to improve profits and competitiveadvantage along the supply chain.


50

Emanating from the above two factors is the belief within farming circles that the profile of theindustry needs to be improved both for the benefit of individual farmers and for the perception offarmers in the wider community.

Part of this improvement in the perception of farming should focus around the value of localagricultural industries to the local economy. For the majority of the industries in the region thisdata is not available and it is recommended that all industry sectors begin to address this issue. Aspreviously stated at page 6, ‘Economic Output of Agriculture in the Region’, this is also animportant issue in the ability of farming sectors to be able to represent themselves to all levels ofgovernment and other agencies, domestically and overseas.

In the Focus on Farming Regional Agribusiness Workshop there were a number of initiativessuggested to try and correct the misunderstandings that are prevalent amongst the urbanpopulation. There was also recognition that the Farmers Markets are an excellent way for farmersto interact with the urban population and reinforce a positive picture of primary industry. Thesecomments were coming from farmers who do attend Farmers Markets to sell their produce. Therewas also a need expressed for more occasions where farmers from all of the agricultural industrysectors could meet, network and understand each others businesses.

Other initiatives included:• Permanent displays with varying themes (i.e. farm industry sectors) at appropriate sites

throughout the region, eg. shopping centres, council offices.• Farming expos with an educational theme targeted to the urban community.• Explore ways to create more interaction between farmers and the urban population.• Engage the media to be supportive of campaigns to create an improved urban: rural dialogue.• Create opportunities for the urban population to have more interaction and hands on

experience of agriculture, eg. farm visits.• Urban and rural community interaction at farmers markets, agricultural displays, field days,

agricultural shows, etc.

An individual communication during the course of the project suggested that the Casey/ Cardiniaregion could support a “Hobby Farmers” field day on an annual basis. This could be along thelines of the Seymour Field Days which are basically an opportunity for the supply industries intoagriculture to market their products to the target market of smallholdings operators in the region.It is a commercially driven event as opposed to an Agricultural Show. Such field days do howevercreate the opportunity to attract the urban population and provide education to them on a wholerange of farming issues. They also create the opportunity to educate “Hobby Farmers” in a rangeof areas including responsible land management, animal husbandry, sustainability issues, etc. Theidea merits further investigation.

Recommendations

1. Consider the formation of a Casey and Cardinia farm forum network.2. Investigate the potential for a “Hobby Farmers” field day in the region.3. Explore ways to educate the urban population about farms and farming.4. Encourage the compilation of sectoral industry data on economic outputs, production

statistics and employment numbers.


51

Business Administration and Legislative Issues

This topic has been discussed repeatedly throughout the period of this project. The first discussionthat the Project Officer had with an individual farmer during the course of this project broughtforth the comment that a written questionnaire as part of a survey would not be well received byprimary producers due to the amount of paperwork farmers already had to process in the runningof their businesses.

The impact of various governmental legislations for primary producers is not too different to theeffects felt by small business in general. There are however some additional legislative issuesimposed on rural landowners and farmers ranging from native vegetation, licensing of farm damsand water rights issues through to child labour permits for family members. To the man on theland it appears that individual government departments at both the State and Federal level areimplementing legislation without any knowledge of, nor any regard for, existing levels oflegislation implemented by their counterparts or by other agencies. The result is an ever increasingburden on primary producers to both comply with the administrative requirements of more andmore legislation and often to pay for additional licences and permits.

The frustration felt by many primary producers is expressed by the following comment quoteddirectly from a respondent to the survey who is a herb grower.

“We are besieged by the issues of cost of labour, insurance, rates and government charges,bank charges and regulations in general and due to these issues our days are numbered inbusiness. It has been a case of get big or get out and we are very small and not in a position toexpand. We are a niche business struggling to survive for many years. Paperwork has becomeexcessive for the proprietor and continues to grow”.

This topic was introduced into the ‘Focus on Farming’ workshop held as part of the AgriculturalAudit. It was interesting to note that there was discussion in the workshop relating to the GST andthis system is still causing concern and difficulties for small business owners.

Whilst the problems were easily identified, the potential solutions to the problems are not so easyto find. Agribusiness leaders and organisations therefore need to continually lobby governments atall levels to make the legislators aware of the administrative burden which is now beginning toimpact on the farm sector.

Recommendations

1. Assess level of support for the provision of GST short courses aimed specifically at theprimary producer.2. Work towards making local government aware of the administrative burden now imposedon primary producers.3. Support attempts by agribusiness organisations to reduce/simplify the administrative andlegislative burden now impacting on the farm sector.


52

Planning Issues Relevant to Agriculture

This agricultural audit has highlighted the size and importance of farming in the region andindicated that the primary production sector makes a significant economic contribution to both theCity of Casey and Cardinia Shire.

It is imperative therefore that the existing farming industries are retained. It is also strategicallyimportant that new primary production businesses are attracted to the region. However, thepriority is to ensure that farming and other primary production industries are viable and the twoCouncils should therefore take all the actions available to them to support the ongoing viability ofagriculture in the region.

There needs to be a recognition that farming on the fringe of urban development can carryadditional costs which when imposed on industries which are often under a severe costs versusreturns price squeeze (see page 47) can tip the balance of viability of a business. Examples ofsome of these additional costs are damage to property (fences, machinery, buildings, irrigationequipment, etc), stress to livestock from uncontrolled dogs which can cause loss of production andin severe cases livestock death, additional veterinary costs, weed infestation from poorly managedadjacent properties, weight limits on roads due to increased traffic flows which can involvefarmers in travelling additional kilometres between farms, theft of and damage to crops, etc.

One of the main influences that local government can have is to ensure that appropriate planningcontrols are in place. The objectives should be to protect the landholders ‘right to farm’ which aspreviously reported on pages 33 and 34, is under threat from the lack of understanding broughtinto rural areas by urban dwellers in addition to the issues mentioned in the paragraph above. Theoverall objective of revising planning permits would be to allow the full utilisation of existing orpotential future agricultural uses.

Although there are ‘right to farm’ issues in most localities throughout the region the heaviestburden is on those farmers operating in the close rural: urban interface areas otherwise referred toas the urban fringe.

Under the section ‘Rural: Urban Interface – Looking to the Future’ at page 38 of this report thereis brief discussion on the need for a greater level of forward planning in relation to the interactionof the rural: urban interface.

One of the issues in this area is the confusion within the rural sector caused by the recentimplementation of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and the adoption of the Green Wedgelegislation. Both are initiatives of the Victorian State Government and both include a coreobjective of protecting good farming land from urban encroachment. However, there remains abelief in the minds of many farmers that the UGB is only a temporary line intended to be in placefor an undetermined period of time, even though it forms an integral part of the Melbourne 2030plan. This still leaves the option of selling land adjacent to the UGB as a realistic opportunity inthe minds of many such landholders.

Local Councils can therefore make a significant contribution to reinforcing the objectives of theUGB and in the process provide certainty to both the regions farmers and land developers. Thelimits of development need to be clearly established through local planning schemes. If theselimits are further reinforced through the provision of buffer zones then the potential for conflictingmessages received by any sector of the community will be minimised.


53

Buffer Zones

There have been various suggestions as to the size of buffer zone that is needed in order for it tobe effective. Some commentators have said that a minimum of 500 metres is required whilstothers have suggested that 100 metres would be adequate. The reality of the situation is that eachsite for a buffer zone would need to be assessed individually. Current vegetation andtopographical contours would be two of the variables to consider as would the siting of roadwaysand railways. For example, a buffer zone where there is an existing four lane highway with a widecentral reservation and expansive side verges may only need a minimal 50 metre wide strip ofvegetation on the farm land side of the highway to provide an adequate buffer zone. On flat ormarginally undulating land where there is no existing boundary other than a fence, a vegetation orother strip of 300 to 400 metres may be required.

The creation of effective physical buffer zones between urban development and commercialfarming activities would have a number of positive effects for the Casey / Cardinia region. Thesewould include:

The establishment of a visual topographical boundary at the perimeter of urban developmentwhich would clearly identify the farming areas from the urban areas. Such a boundary would havea greater impact than a line on a map in the minds of both the farming and the urban community inestablishing the UGB.

It would increase farmers and landholders security of tenure over the land that they own. Thiswould create an improved environment for capital expenditure and commitment to the land.

The incidence of complaints from urban dwellers against farmers would be dramatically reduced.

The negative impacts of farms having immediate urban neighbours would also be significantlyreduced.

Types of Buffer Zones.

Forests

There are many benefits of this type of boundary which include the fact that a forest is anenvironmentally friendly boundary. It can be used for passive recreation pursuits or form part of alinear park. It also provides a wildlife corridor as well as contributing to the control of the watertable in the area thereby reducing salinity. Forests contribute to the carbon sink and are a visuallyattractive asset for both rural and semi urban areas. If the right tree species are planted it can alsobe an income earning resource, eg. Blue Gums or selected softwoods. If this income earningoption is selected it needs to be managed in such a way that the harvesting process does notcompletely destroy the buffer effect of the forest and consideration would also need to be given toa perimeter strip of permanent vegetation on the urban side of the area to minimise the negativevisual effects of recently harvested trees. Good access for harvesting and transport equipment isalso required. However, all these aspects are manageable with adequate forward planning.

Golf Courses

These are perhaps an obvious choice for a buffer zone but the limiting factor is the number ofcourses that any region can support. However, depending on the locality, a golf course is a


54

practical choice for a buffer zone, especially if the planning permit requires a minimum strip ofsuitable vegetation adjacent to the commercial farm land.

Other Open Spaces

If the location is appropriate, the provision of other open space could be considered, eg playingfields or wetlands for providing biodiversity of flora and fauna.

Large Subdivisions for Hobby Farms

This option is also a practical solution to the issue of buffer zones, particularly in a region wherethere is demand for large lifestyle blocks of land. If this option was to be implemented for anyparticular area it is recommended that there should be some planning restrictions placed on thesubdivision. These restrictions would include a minimum size of block, the shape of the blocks toensure a minimum distance of commercial farms from high or medium density housing,restrictions on the siting of the dwelling which would have to be a minimum distance from theadjacent farming boundary and an understanding by the residents of the hobby farms that they areadjoining commercial farm land. These restrictions could be written into the title deeds as acovenant.

Industrial Estates

High Quality Garden Style Industrial Estates could also be an option with appropriate securityfencing and a band of vegetation on the boundaries adjoining farm land.

Recommendations

1. Ensure planning controls provide certainty as to the right to farm, certainty as tolong term use and opportunity for value adding rural products.

2. All future planning applications for planning permission on the urban fringe shouldinclude an assessment of the need for a buffer zone.

3. Undertake a study of existing commercial farming / urban dwelling interfaces toassess the need or potential for the establishment of a buffer zone.


55

REPORTS OF ONE ON ONE INTERVIEWS.

The following reports are the result of individual conversations that the Project Officer held withindividual stakeholders during the course of the Audit. The opinions expressed in this section arethose of the individuals being interviewed.

Jenny Pullar, President, Cardinia Ranges Vignerons Association.

The first vineyard was established in the Cardinia region in 1986. There are now fourteenVineyards in the region. The Cardinia Ranges Vignerons Association represents 90% of thesegrowers.

The region is generally cooler than the Yarra Valley and can therefore grow premium cool climategrape varieties with the largest acreage being Pinot Noir followed by Sauvignon Blanc,Chardonnay and smaller plantings of other varieties.

The vineyards tend to be smaller in acreage than in many other regions. There are only fourproperties farming over 5 hectares of grapes and the price of land in the area is an influencingfactor in the size of the properties. Many of the vineyards have been established as lifestylechoices. Approximately 50% of the owners of the vineyards would however be employed fulltime in their businesses. They produce small quantities of high quality boutique wines and themajority of the operations bottle their own produce and have cellar door sales. A small amount offruit is sold to other wineries to crush and blend with other grapes.

Australia is divided into regions by the Australian Wine and Brandy Association and Cardinia isin the Port Phillip Region. There is the opportunity to develop regional brands but this has not yetoccurred. Victoria could be marketed as the prime producer of Pinot style wines with the climategiving the State a real advantage over other areas of Australia.

Future of the Wine Industry

There is a need to firmly establish the region as a producer of quality boutique wines.

The large volume producers of Australian wines tend to have sales and marketing arrangements inplace with both the supermarkets and the bulk retailers, eg. Dan Murphys. The local Cardiniaindustry is therefore concentrating its sales and marketing efforts into the restaurant and hoteltrade in both Melbourne and locally in the outer South Eastern suburbs and the boutique exportmarkets.

They are also focussing on wine tourism. A brochure is being produced identifying the winerieswith cellar door sales and these will be distributed through local tourism offices, municipaloffices, bed and breakfast operations, motels, etc. The region is within easy reach of the whole ofmetropolitan Melbourne and can therefore be promoted as ideal for day trips.

There is some concern that the proposed Pakenham by-pass will encourage day trippers to travelfurther into central Gippsland and therefore avoid tourism opportunities in Cardinia. The winetourism area needs to establish a strong awareness of its presence and attractiveness before the by-pass is built. The annual dollar value of cellar door sales in Victoria is over $400 million and theCardinia region needs to gain its share of that market.


56

Beef Farmer

• A beef farm operation on approximately 70 hectares of land. One of the partners in thisoperation earns off farm income.

• Small farm beef operations in West Gippsland tend on average to be a break even financialproposition and can loose money for prolonged periods. Many of these farms are run aslifestyle choice operations because beef is one of the less time consuming farming choices,particularly if only a fattening operation rather than a breeding herd. However, with theirweekend work included, the partners estimate that their combined commitment per weekamounts to at least 34 hours.

• The majority of beef farmers do not have the ability or opportunity to set prices for theirfinished product. They are therefore “price takers”, as are dairy farmers but with differentmarket forces influencing the prices. The main influencer in the beef industry is the marketingchannel dominance of the large supermarket food retailers. This market dominance results in alack of aggressive competition amongst buyers for the livestock in the region which has theeffect of lowering prices for beef animals.

• Even with the input of 34 labour hours per week this farm still has to employ outsidecontractors to complete much of the work for them, eg. for pasture renovation, fencing, etc.The payment of those contractors is one of their main cost inputs to the business.

• There is no formal organisation representing the beef industry in the region. There was at onestage a “Beefcheque ” group organised for the local area. This is a Victorian Department ofPrimary Industry initiative aimed at educating beef farmers to produce more beef from grassbut as far as this farmer was aware the group folded due to lack of interest.

It is increasingly difficult to get beef farmers (or any other type of farmer) to join groups orassociations because they do not see any benefits coming from such association. They are pricetakers and receive payment at market prices relevant to the day the cattle are sold.

Dairy Farmer.

• An excellent farm business with this family operating one of the best dairy farms in theregion.

• The current attitude is that the dairy industry is not an attractive proposition for anyone toinvest into. The farm is currently only earning around 4% Return on Funds Employed(ROFE).

• A dairy farmer has no bargaining power in the price received for milk. In addition, becauseprices paid for liquid milk fluctuate as the dairy season progresses, farmers begin the annualcycle of milk pricing not knowing what overall price they will receive for the comingfinancial year. It is a business which starts every financial year with farmers not knowingwhether they will return a profit from their endeavours at the end of the financial year.

• This farm supplies Bonlac and they tend to set their prices around those indicated by MurrayGoulburn, the largest milk processor in Victoria. In addition to having no influence in theprice received for milk, dairy farmers have very little influence on the prices they have to payfor inputs, eg. fertiliser, concentrate feed, replacement machinery, etc. These inputs arepredominantly supplied by large agribusiness organisations which have the ability andcapacity to adjust prices to protect financial margins.


57

• Because of these dairy industry structural issues, many dairy farmers feel disenfranchised andpowerless to control their own financial and business destiny. The areas that they caninfluence are farm management, production outputs and efficiency factors. The leadingVictorian dairy farms are now amongst the most productive and cost efficient in the world yetthese innovative farmers currently struggle to make a reasonable return on the funds they haveemployed in their businesses.

• The farm owners are encouraged to see Council employing an Agribusiness Officer but aresceptical of the benefits of such a program. This is mainly because of previous programswhich have had no follow up activities.

• One of the issues that constantly annoys this farmer is the lack of understanding demonstratedby local government of the agricultural sector. Local government does not appreciate theeconomic value generated by the farming sector and the downstream effects that this has inthe region. They also seem to have an expectation that farmers will continue to farm and lookafter the land in the urban rural interface areas regardless of the costs imposed on themthrough rates and taxes and regardless of the earnings that they are able to achieve throughtheir farming activities. If costs continue to rise and earnings continue to fall as they are atpresent then there will be no commercial dairy farmers left in the region within a decade.

• Surveys are badly regarded in the farming sector, especially if they attempt to gaininformation about farm earnings. The principal of this business believes that if a financialsurvey showed farmers to be making a healthy profit that the Council would immediatelyincrease the rates levied on farms across the municipality.

• This farmer would like to undertake further training in a range of issues and he would alsolike his son to do some further training. The main barrier to attending courses is the timeconstraint that dairy farmers experience and the associated mental and physical tirednessthrough long hours of work is a further compounding issue. Managing a large dairy farm is atime consuming business and this farmer estimates that both he and his son work a 70 hourweek in order to cover the work required. They would employ an additional person but thereturns from the industry at present do not allow them to do this.

Dairy Farmer.

• A farmer with an Agricultural Science Degree who returned to run the family farm havingpreviously worked in an executive position for a large corporate agribusiness.

• Dairy farmers are price takers with no influence on prices paid for production and very littleinfluence on prices that have to be paid for inputs. Costs on the business eg. Council rates,industry levies, taxes, etc increase with no regard to the level of earnings of dairy farmers andtherefore their capacity to financially meet such increases. In addition, farmer’s returns areextremely volatile because they are influenced by a range of factors outside the control of theindividual farmer. Apart from the local issues of weather conditions and the cost of inputs, theAustralian dairy industry is a price taker on the world market for dairy commodities (i.e. lowvalue added, eg dried milk powders) and high value added food products eg. cheeses,yoghurts, etc.

• Farmers in general therefore feel disenfranchised and powerless to control their own financialdestiny.

• He has a general mistrust of government at all levels including Council. He virtually repeatedthe words used by the dairy farmer quoted above in stating that “if farmers were able togenerate increased income the Council would immediately increase rates”.

• Because dairy farmers feel disenfranchised and alienated they are not willing to attendmeetings or join farming groups because they do not believe that any positive outcomes willbe achieved.


58

This farm supplies a cheese company located in Melbourne. They pay approximately thebenchmark cents per litre of milk as set by Murray Goulburn and their price fluctuatesaccordingly, normally being one cent /litre above the benchmark rate. The directors of thecheese company are finding it increasingly difficult to get their suppliers together to discusssupply and pricing and any other issues.

• Young people do not want to enter the dairy industry because of the long and anti-social hoursrequired, the unpredictable financial returns and right to farm issues. This farmer does nothave any children. His next door neighbour who is also a dairy farmer, has told his teenagechildren that he does not want them to take over the farm. He is encouraging them to findalternative work with better pay in the urban area and also to live in the urban area because hedoes not see a viable future for dairy farming in this region.

• This farm is in an area almost entirely comprised of farm land. There are however someindividual non farm dwellings scattered throughout the area. The farmer being interviewedrelated a case he experienced a few weeks ago. He was working in the dark in the lateevening over sowing a grass paddock. This entails the use of a farm tractor towing a seeddrill. A non farm dwelling occupier living on the boundary of the farm came out to the farmerand complained about the tractor headlights shining through their windows and disturbingtheir privacy as the tractor turned on the headland of the paddock.

A non farm dwelling in this area was advertised for sale earlier this year. The farmer occupyingthe property adjoining this dwelling (not the farmer being interviewed) was afraid of the dwellingselling to a non rural occupier who would not understand farming practices. He erected a sign inhis paddock which was adjacent to the house for sale advising that the land was part of acommercial dairy farm and as such was subject to manure being spread (smells), being grazed bycattle (noise), sprays and machinery being used.

Thoroughbred Racing Trainer

The horse racing industry is very well organised and run by a professional body, Racing Victoria.It generates enormous economic activity in the region, particularly to the Cranbourne area. Inorder to better understand the industry and its current status, the project officer visited a trainerwho has been in the industry in the region for many years and held a discussion on his currentsituation and the situation within the industry in general. The comments recorded are those of thisone trainer who is running a fairly average sized stable in the Cranbourne area.

• This trainer currently has sixteen racehorses under training which are stabled on thisCranbourne property. He also has a further ten horses which he has contracted out to anothertrainer for pre-training prior to coming back to the home property to be worked with the otherhorses.

• The business employs five people in addition to the owner, his wife and their son. Thebusiness finds it difficult to get good employees who are willing to work the hours required,have some knowledge of handling and working with horses and who are prepared to do someof the hard physical and dirty work.

• This is a full time business for the owner and his wife and their son. Some of the smallertrainers only have as few as six horses under training but due to the financial returns availablefrom this type of enterprise, these smaller trainers are tending to leave the industry unless theyhave the land and facilities to get bigger and train more horses. The top trainers in the areahave up to 50 horses being worked in their stables.

• It is a very price competitive industry. The recommended fee per day for a thoroughbredracing horse under training is set by Racing Victoria Limited at $82.80. This trainer reportshowever that this rate is impossible to achieve due to the competitive nature of the industry.


59

Some of the very top trainers with a high ratio of winners: runners may be achieving close tothis fee but the majority of trainers are not.

• The price: cost squeeze operates in this industry as well as in any other industry. Costs areconstantly rising and this trainer cited Workcover as one of his major costs and one that iscausing some concern in the industry. In addition to the increasing costs of Workcover, thistrainer (and reportedly many others within the industry) is very critical of the Workcoverinspectors. They do not have any experience or knowledge of the racing industry andtherefore do not understand that working with thoroughbred horses is very different toworking with machinery. This trainer would like to see a Workcover inspector allocated to theracing industry who has some knowledge of working with horses.

• The drought has also had a severe impact, predominantly through increases in feed costswhich have almost tripled in the last three years.

• To the best of his knowledge, the Cranbourne Racing Club is in a sound financial situation asopposed to many country racing clubs which have been subsidised by Racing Victoria forsome time. Some of the country tracks however are looking to close in the not too distantfuture as they are finding it impossible to attract sufficient cash flow to remain financial, eventhough they are subsidised by Racing Victoria.

• This trainer acknowledges that Cranbourne is now one of the best places in Victoria andpotentially within Australia, to train race horses because of the excellent facilities provided bythe Cranbourne Training Track. The area continues to attract more trainers and horses due tothis facility.


60

LIST OF PRIORITY ACTIONS

The recommendations following each of the individual topics under ‘DISCUSSION OF MAJORISSUES’ in this report forms the complete list of actions which it is suggested should be instigatedin order to begin the process of addressing the issues raised in the report.

It will not be possible however to address all the issues immediately and therefore the followingactions are recommended as those which should be addressed first.

Rural/ Urban Interface

• Liaise with officers in the Shire of Yarra Ranges to assess the effectiveness of their educationprogram to the urban community.

• Prepare an advisory leaflet on rural: urban interface issues specific to the Casey/Cardiniaregion.

• Communicate with the farming community to ensure that they understand the fullimplications of the State Governments Urban Growth Boundary (UGB).

The Escalating Cost of Land in the Region

• Continue to monitor and support the work of the Future Family Farms project being run bythe Victorian Department of Primary Industry.

Sustainability and Land Management

• Investigate the delivery of appropriate training courses, which include sustainability, to thetarget audience identified in the survey.

• Create links with lead organisations in the organics industries so that potential organicgrowers have ready access to relevant information.

Water

• Liaise with Frankston and Mornington Peninsula Councils to ensure a ‘Regional’ approach tofarm water issues.

• Maintain existing contacts with Southern Rural Water, South East Water and MelbourneWater to promote the ongoing supplies of adequate water for the regions farmers.

• In relation to the Eastern Irrigation Scheme:-- Identify the prime farming zones which will accommodate expansion due to the

Eastern Irrigation Scheme recycled water and protect them from development orinappropriate uses.

- Protect existing farming zones to give security of tenure to potential agriculturalinvestors.

- Identify potential extension routes to the currently proposed irrigation supply pipeline.

- Identify and communicate with potential new agricultural investors to the region.- Plan for future infrastructure needs brought about by increased farming activity

Potential sites for new businesses, eg. aquaculture, hydroponics Roads for larger vehicles and increased traffic flows


61

- Major non arterial linking roads- Review weight limits- Assess bridge weight limits

Roads and Transport

• Investigate the possibility of implementing an 80Km/hour speed limit on selected rural roadsthroughout the region.

• Map the major access routes for the transport of goods in and out of the intensive farmingareas of the region.

Costs versus Returns Price Squeeze

• Canvas the possibility of forming business clusters within the region.• Continue to support the growth of Cardinia Farmers Market and explore the potential for other

such markets in the region.• Continue to liaise with the regional Food and Wine Network and involve interested primary

producers in the process.• Explore the potential to increase overseas exports direct from the farm.

The Profile Perception of Farming

• Establish a Casey and Cardinia farm forum network.• Encourage and assist industry associations to gather accurate statistical data relating to their

industry in the region.

Business Administration and Legislative Issues

• Assess level of support for the provision of GST short courses aimed specifically at theprimary producer.

• Work towards making government at all levels aware of the administrative burden nowimposed on primary producers.

• Support attempts by agribusiness organisations to reduce/simplify the administrative andlegislative burden now impacting on the farm sector.


62

COMMENTS FROM THE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

The following is a selection of comments to the open questions in the survey questionnaire. Theyare reproduced as a sample of the comments that were received and included exactly as they werewritten (any clarifications needed to be added to aid understanding have been placed in brackets).The comments indicate the many issues, both positive and negative, which are currently relevantto the farming community in the region. There is no ranking or importance placed on theseresponses which have been extracted in the order in which the questionnaires were returned to theCity of Casey offices.

Q. 35 Do you think that there are any advantages to operating your business in theCasey/Cardinia Region?

“Proximity to wide range of education choices for family. High land values when we want torealise the asset”

“If the EIS (Eastern Irrigation Scheme) gets up and running it will give us water security, andenable us to plan into the future with a degree of confidence”

“close proximity to major markets, easy access to goods & services, Cardinia shire promotionsthat include agricultural products”

“close to major towns, rail, education facilities”

“reliable climate eg rainfall in Gippsland, availability of supplies and contractors, closeness tolivestock exchange”

“availability of 3 phase power and Melbourne price gas, high rainfall area to provide water forchooks”

“close to Melbourne, schools and facilities for children”

“close to (horse) training tracks”

“close to sale yards for cattle sales, close to factory for potato processing, good fertile soil”

“proximity to Melbourne, fastest growing in Australia, ability to engage in off farm employment”

“close proximity of property for district markets and roads, clay sub soil allows good result up tolate autumn, good results from raised land in paddocks in winter with water logged paddocks”

“very horsey area with huge equestrian interest”

“good agricultural land, usually reliable rainfall, close to amenities and supplies”

“Cardinia support Landcare very well”

“close proximity to excellent livestock market facilities, vet services, stock and station agents, feedsupplies eg Pakenham Produce”


63

“close to market, the interest in agribusiness by the council i.e. as evidenced by the issue of thequestionnaire, a relatively peaceful area, politically and environmentally”“plenty of space, cheaper land at Koo Wee Rup area, number of small markets to sell freshproduce”

“we can produce a product during drought where other areas struggle in drought, Safeway wantred soil potatoes, this area can produce that product”

“central to equine industry”“being a central farm area, attracts most businesses required to operate intensive farming to thisarea, dirt roads now kept to a reasonable standard”

“allows one of us to work in a major regional centre, in the discipline for which one is qualified,access to goods and services, easy access to cattle market and fertiliser supplies”

“being close to the VLE in Pakenham”

“proximity to markets, availability of appropriate farm contractors, availability of services whenrequired”

“allows access to my city based business, currently a very quiet pleasant area, schooling andretail facilities are good”

“soils, close to Melbourne, employment being close to Melbourne, close to airport, climate”

Q. 36 Do you think that there are any disadvantages to operating your business in theCasey/Cardinia Region?

“city influences imposed on country”

“too much complaints by residents around farmers about chemical smells, irrigation noise,tractor noise”

“cost of land is expensive so it restricts growth”

“roads unable to carry increased traffic, right to use normal farming methods threatened byurban growth, bureaucratic controls”

“concern of increasing sub division, making smaller tracts of land unviable and placingincreasing pressure on sustainability”

“we are being forced out by "city slickers" pushing the price of agricultural land up, shockingroad conditions on Koo Wee Rup swamp, too much traffic for dirt roads”

“price of farming land now so high that is not economic to expand our family operation”

“increasing pressure from hobby farmers who have unrealistic expectations of living in a ruralarea, expect all the services and yet pressure the agricultural industries who are keeping the areagreen and economically viable”

“increase in farm theft, rates too high”


64

“lack of sealed roads and state of unsealed roads, reductions of water allocations, delays,difficulties in obtaining permits, ridiculous laws regarding lopping and removal of overgrown anddangerous trees on ones property”

“urban sprawl close to farms and prime agricultural land, new residents to the area notunderstanding the ways, ethics of country life”

“increasing pressure from urban expansion, area in danger of losing its agricultural focus”

“Casey / Cardinia like and consider themselves to have a rural aspect for their town dwellers, butdo nothing to support the rural part, lot of things like noxious weeds seems to be outside both thewill and jurisdiction of local government, lots of absentee land holders waiting for subdivisionopportunities”

“inappropriate zoning of the land, trespassers, vandals, dogs at large molesting cattle, buildersrubbish blowing onto property causing a hazard to cattle and polluting waterways”

“increasing traffic, on feeder roads same as 30 yrs ago (i.e. unimproved), difficulty in movingfarm machinery on roads, future plans for Berwick- Five Ways Road, if traffic is diverted aroundClyde recreation reserve”

“roads in our area very hard on transport trucks and own vehicles, particularly winter time”

“no room for expansion i.e. most parcels of land not suitable either being too small, expensive,wrong soil type, no available water, road regulations restricting vehicles over 8 tonnes fromtravelling between farms, urban development encroaching on farming land restricting farmingoperations”

“rates and water rates far too high, dumping of rubbish along roads and blowing onto propertynow becoming major problem, proximity of development- theft, dogs etc major problem tofarming, lack of council services in relation to rates”

“rezoning and urbanisation make it harder to run a business profitably, the City of Casey intendto rezone my property and will probably rate me out of business, the council should not beallowed to push profitable businesses out of an area, especially considering the time and capitaloutlay that horticultural business invest in a property, and in the shire”

“rates too high for farmers, farm land being eaten up by housing developments, theft and crime”

“very very poor roads, trucks loading for airport complain about loads moving and damage toproduce, this should be placed back onto the Shires, pay for damaged produce, trucks carryingasparagus can't even be kept clean, roads are a mess and we are carting food”

“green wedge issues that restrict our land usage”

“the rating of agricultural land represents 12% of our gross income from primary production,this reduces our ability to employ labour, expand and purchase goods and services, we willeventually be forced to sell and move to more rural municipality”

“domestic dogs not retained on their owners property


65

“poor roads-worst roads in thirty years, unreal restrictions on farmers, eg clearing for fencerepair or maintenance”

Q.37 Are there any issues affecting the ongoing viability of your business?

“increasing taxes, charges, levies from government at all levels”

“liability insurance for horse associated business. Possible cost of accreditation. To reduce risingcost of feed”

“dairy prices on international markets, right to farm issues”

“land prices are too high for us to expand because city people want the land for lifestyle pursuits.This is also making it hard to rent land, young stock and hay / silage crops”

“land use, 100 acres too large an allotment for horse breeding”

“the ramifications of registering dams and the ability to harvest and conserve the rain that fallson ones property”

“have to work off farm to survive, prices on cattle sales have not increased much in 20 years yetcost have gone up tenfold”

“land prices, hard to expand, buy the next door block”

“future water costs”

“exchange rates, commodity rates, increasing costs, business admin, export logistics”

“the continuation of climate change and the drought due to global warming”

“costs continually increasing much faster than increase in value of cattle, more bureaucracy andred tape, weeds seem more prolific and difficult to contain”

“possibility of free trade agreement with USA allowing chicken meat imports into Australia withall its diseases”

“the profitability of growing asparagus has been lacking for the last 7-8 years”

“excessive council rates on rural property, it takes most of the farm income”

“the main worry is if the rates keep going up so dramatically that we will not be able to keep thearea maintained by spraying weeds and fertiliser and generally keeping the place looking nice”

“we would like to state that farming in an area which will soon be residential is going to beincreasingly difficult if not impossible, hopefully consideration will be made to people in similarsituations as ourselves, subdivision for us would be attractive, we could then re-establishelsewhere”

“land prices; need to be able to subdivide to complete with escalating prices and keep land infarming but that in itself can cause problems”


66

“markets overseas, Australian dollar increase and no free trade agreements between USA, Japanand Europe make exports difficult, overseas farmers receive government assistance andsubsidies”

“the lack of rights to farm”

“currently the availability of treated class A water before next summer”

“a horrific fear that in future, we will be forced out by the ever increasing use of farmland forhousing, makes us feel very insecure indeed”

“the rapid rise in land values over the past two years will make it very difficult to purchaseaffordable land for farm expansion, the continuing demand for land for lifestyle living will meanthat agriculture will continue to become less important in years to come”

“beef prices have not kept up with inflation, we are now using most of our land to agist dairycows or lease to dairy farmers, this is less work and more profitable”

Q. 38 Please mention any other issues you feel are important for agriculture in theCasey/Cardinia Region.

“high cost of production. Improve roads in the Bunyip to Cora Lynn area”

“as small operators we are not really financially viable but the lifestyle issues are verysignificant”

“farmers right to farm on land which is at the interface of suburbia, municipal rating structurewhich is sympathetic to farmers, protection of livestock from wandering dogs, eradication ofweeds”

“Councils must ensure that no more good agricultural land is rezoned for further subdivision,criminal to see beautiful land around Narre Warren, Berwick, Cranbourne going under housing.Farm rates must be kept to an absolute minimum”

“land not viable for income earning farm and small property values without the option tosubdivide will soon force us out of the property. When the pension issue arises, owningunproductive farmland is a liability”

“farmers are slowly being strangled out of existence in both Shires, income from asset value isjust not there”

“drastic need to ban use of all artificial weedicides which are killing our soils. Reducedependency on our water supplies by educating farmers on how to farm properly etc”

“maintaining the horticultural zone on the peat land of Koo Wee Rup swamp”

“need more trees grown to protect the area and livestock, more encouragement and recognitionand assistance by Shire”

“the upgrading of existing feeder roads to cope with traffic demand”


67

“tourism related to each type of enterprise for people to easily find and access in turn generatesemployment, good road access, shire encouragement for new ventures, promotion of farmproducts to domestic and overseas markets”

“more places to ride (horses) off road, competition venue, drivers to be made aware of horses,some sort of control / inspection of how horses are kept and looked after, anybody can currentlyhave a horse even if they have no knowledge”

“preserve the bush and wild life and contain the house explosive growth to some minor extent”

“need to educate land owners about value of re vegetation using native indigenous species andhow to do it properly, methods of farming will have to change to control salinity, rate rebatesmust be introduced on a sliding scale etc, incompatibility of certain farming practices withsuburban lifestyle at rural urban boundaries needs to be planned for”

“hard to find larger affordable parcel of land to expand with water, good soils and councilinterface when developing a new block, right to farm in interface council areas, need buffer zonesnext to vegie farms to minimise complaints from neighbours”

“urban sprawl is making these two regions look untidy, larger farms are squeezed out, theirshould be a 10km green belt buffer zone to segregate farms from urban boundaries”

“the preservation of agricultural business should be a priority of Cardinia and Casey”

“the Shire is concentrating on the towns and not on the agricultural side, so we suffer eg highrates and bad roads”

“open mindedness of the farmers, working in co-operation with each other, helping hand to eachother etc”

“local Council and government are forever increasing our workload to comply with everincreasing legislations, this impacts greatly on the time we have available to address these issuesas well as trying to run a successful operation”

“our unmade roads are wrecking our vehicles and our horse truck and float, the low treebranches along the roads scratch our truck and rip the clearance light off constantly, people areloath to use our roads and ask to meet us at the highway- very bad for business- very bad imagefor the Shire”

“to forever keep in the highest priority of our consideration that, small acre dwellings areencroaching into agricultural areas and not the other way around”

“weed control on many small farms totally inadequate, dogs sometimes troublesome, haveencountered some comment on noise made by cattle in the past by newer residents. Property isremnant of former dairy / grazing property”

“quality assurance and integrated pest management are much more important to Australianagriculture in the future than organic production”

INVESTING IN THE FUTURE OF AGRICULTURE

How this audit will benefit you

It will:-

• allow you to have your say about your industry and farming issues• demonstrate the importance of agriculture to the region, to Victoria and to

Australia• identify the major issues that are important to agriculture in the region• improve industry representation to local, State and Federal Governments• raise the profile of the whole industry

The success of the whole project, of which this audit is part, relies on inputfrom all farmers in the region so you are encouraged to take the small amountof time needed to complete this questionnaire.

Why do we need an agricultural audit?

• Your local Council is giving you the opportunity to raise important issuesfor the future of farming in this region.

• They want to learn more about the diversity of agriculture in the City ofCasey and Cardinia Shire.

• They want to highlight the economic value of farming to the region.• Issues needing follow up action will be identified.

Other potential benefits to be addressed:-

• business development opportunities• export potential• regional marketing programs

We also want to collect information from those who do not work full time ontheir farms. The large numbers of part time farmers are significant to theregion’s economy.

What happens next?

• the information will be collated and analysed• the completed picture of agriculture in Casey and Cardinia will be produced• issues for further action will be prioritised• the report will be circulated widely to government and other organisations• the report will be available to individual farmers for business or industry planning.

We value your privacy.

• The results will be collated and presented in aggregate only.• No individual businesses will be identified at any stage.• None of the individual information provided will be available to any other

individual, organisation or group.• It will not be used for any other purpose.

Please place your completed questionnaire in the enclosed reply paidenvelope or alternatively fax via number (03) 9705 5202 to reach us by:-

Friday 1st August 2003.

Faxing your reply

You do not need to fax the pages in their correct order. Simply fax the five sheetsface down starting from Question 1 and once they have gone through your machine,turn over all five sheets and fax the reverse sides. We will sort them when received.

Any Queries?

If you have any queries relating to the questionnaire or the project, please phone BarriePickersgill, Agribusiness Officer, on 03 9705 5200.

Commonwealth Government Statistical Clearing House

Approval Number 01358 -- 01

This project is funded by the Commonwealth Government’s Regional AssistanceProgram, administered by the Department of Transport and Regional Services and issupported by South East Development.

Casey and Cardinia Regional Agricultural Audit

Valuing our Regional Agriculture

Preliminary Question

1. Do you derive any part of your income from producing and/or selling agricultural/primaryproducts, services or livestock? This includes commercial horse related activities.

No 1 Go to Q 40

Yes 2 Please read the notes below and then proceed to Q 2

Who has received the audit questionnaire

Questionnaires have been mailed to all landowners outside the urban area, irrespective ofland size.

Rates databases have been used to address the mail out. If a company, partnership, family orother organisation has two or more holdings listed, duplicate holdings have been deleted toavoid excess forms being posted. Please accept our apologies if you have received morethan one questionnaire.

If you do have more than one holding in the region comprising the City of Casey and CardiniaShire and you did receive more than one copy of the questionnaire, please combine the datafrom all such holdings onto one form.

Do not include holdings outside the Casey/Cardinia municipal boundaries.

Land Area, Use and Alternative Uses

2. What is the total area of your property/properties?

Include land that you rent or lease from some one else.

___________ hectares or ___________acres.

3. How much of the total area shown above is currently productive agricultural land, ie. aspasture, cropping land or otherwise under cultivation?

____________hectares or ___________acres.


4. If the productive area shown at Q3 is less than the total property area shown at Q2, whatis the non agricultural land used for?

Agricultural Production Over the Last Twelve Months

The questions contained in this section are aimed at identifying the types and levels ofagricultural production and land use.

The term “agricultural production” includes commercial horse related activities.

5. Over the last 12 months what agricultural activities were you engaged in and /or whatagricultural products did you produce? There are seven spaces provided. Please use asmany spaces as you need.

Crop/Livestock Type__________________________________________________________________

Variety/Breed_______________________________________________________________________If Livestock, please state number of animals_______________________________________________Annual Production Output(ie quantity sold in last 12 months)(make sure you include the units you are using, eg. Tonnes, Kg’s, Litres, animal numbers, bunches, dozens, etc.)




Variety/Breed_______________________________________________________________________If Livestock, please state number of animals_______________________________________________Annual Production Output(ie quantity sold in last twelve months)(make sure you include the units you are using, eg. Tonnes, Kg’s, Litres, animal numbers, bunches, dozens, etc.)










Overseas Exporting

6. Do you export overseas any of your primary products, including livestock, directly fromyour property?

No Go to Q 8

Yes

7. Are you considering increasing the proportion of your products that you export?

Yes 2 Go to Q 9

No 1 Go to Q 9

8. Do you have any interest in exporting any of your products overseas?

Yes 2

No 1

Agricultural Employment in Casey/Cardinia

9. Do you work full time in your agricultural activities?

Yes 2

No 1

10. Please estimate how many hours per week you devote to commercial agriculturalproduction.

11. Do you employ people in your business? The term “employ” includes any paid or unpaidfamily members who work for the business.

No 1 Go to Q 16

Yes 2


12. How many of the following types of people work for your business? (The numbers shouldinclude owners/operators and any other family member(s) who work for your business).

Employee Type NumberFull-timePart-timeCasual (excluding seasonal casuals – see Q 13 below)Total

Qualifications (any discipline, not just agricultural) NumberDegree Qualified WorkersDiploma Qualified WorkersSemi skilled/qualified WorkersUnskilled WorkersOther (please specify)

13. Do you employ SEASONAL casual workers during the year?

No Go to Q 15

Yes

14. Please insert the approximate numbers employed in the box adjacent to the relevantmonth(s).

Seasonalworkers(number)

Seasonalworkers(number)

January JulyFebruary AugustMarch SeptemberApril OctoberMay NovemberJune December

Employment Training and Skills Issues

15. Do you find it difficult to get people with the right skills to work for your business? If youdo, please describe briefly.

16. As the owner/operator/manager of the business are there any business or agriculturalskills which you would like to improve through further training or education for yourself? Ifso, please list briefly.


Value Adding

“Value Adding” means increasing the dollar value of a primary product from your agriculturaloperation through further processing (eg. milk into cheese, berries into jams,) or increasingthe consumer appeal of a product (eg. washing and/or attractive packaging for various crops).Value Adding therefore attracts a higher price than you would otherwise have got for the basicproduct. Value Adding can be done either on the farm or at other premises owned by theprimary producer. It is done before you sell the product to any other person.

17. Do you “Value Add” to any of the primary products you produce prior to them leaving yourproperty?

No 1 Go to Q 19

Yes

18. If you do Value Add, please describe briefly how you do this.

Organic Production

19. Do you consider yourself to be an organic producer?

No go to Q 22

Yes

20. Are you accredited or certified as an organic producer?

No 9 go to Q 23

Yes 8

21. If so, under which organisation(s) are you accredited? (Please tick more than one ifappropriate)

NASSA1 BFA2 BDRI3 OHGA4 OVAA5 OFC6

OTHER7 Please State which

22. Do you have any interest in becoming an organic producer?

Yes 2

No 1

1 National Association for Sustainable Agriculture Australia2 Biological Farmers of Australia Cooperative3 Bio-Dynamic Research Institute4 Organic Herb Growers of Australia5 Organic Vignerons of Australia6 Organic Food Chain


Quality Assurance and Quality Management

23. Does your agribusiness have any written system of Quality Assurance or QualityManagement practices in place?

No 1 Go to Q 25

Yes 2

24. Is your Quality Assurance or Quality Management system certified by an external auditingorganisation?

No 1

Yes

Agribusiness Issues

This section is designed to gather information about various issues for agricultural businessesin the Casey/Cardinia Region.

Business Confidence

25. How do you foresee production, income and employment for your business in the next12 months? (Tick one box per line only)

Increasea lot 5

Increasea little 4

Stay thesame 3

Decrease alittle 2

Decrease alot 1

ProductionIncomeEmployment

26. How do you foresee production, income and employment for your business in the next 5years? (Tick one box per line only)

Increase alot 5

Increasea little 4

Stay thesame 3

Decrease alittle 2

Decrease alot 1

ProductionIncomeEmployment

27. Are your responses to Questions 25 and 26 influenced by reduced outputs and/orearnings from the current drought?

No 1 go to Q 29

Yes 2

28. If your business has suffered due to the drought and assuming that the drought is noweasing, please indicate how long you anticipate that it will take your business to recoverfrom the effects of drought?

_________Year(s) _________Months


Business Planning

29. Do you have a strategy or plan for the future of your business?

No 1 go to Q 31

Yes

30. Which of the following best describes your Strategic Plan or Business Plan? (please tickone option)

A plan which is not written 2

A written plan covering one year 3

A written plan covering two to three years 4

A written plan covering four to five years 5

A written plan longer than five years 6

Agricultural Inputs and Sourcing

31. Please list below the five main input costs, ie goods and services, that you purchase forthe operation of your business. This incudes the hiring of contractors if appropriate.

i) ______________________________________________________________________

ii) ______________________________________________________________________

iii) ______________________________________________________________________

iv) ______________________________________________________________________

v) ______________________________________________________________________

32. Please estimate the approximate level of the total inputs (ie goods and services) used byyour business that you source from local businesses operating within the City of Caseyand Cardinia Shire? Please tick only one box.

All of them 6

Most of them 5

About Half 4

A few of them 3

None of them 2

Not sure 1


Water Issues

33. In the operation of your business, do you use water from the following (please tick morethan one option if appropriate)

Town Supply 1

Dam on a waterway or gully 1

Catchment Dam that is not on a waterway or gully 1

Bore 1

Direct from a Local Waterway 1

Recycled Water 1

Purified Effluent 1

Other 1

For “Other” please give details (eg, re-use) ___________________________

34. Are there any issues relating to water that impact on your business operation? Please listup to three.

General Agricultural Issues

35. Do you think there are any advantages to operating your business in the Casey/CardiniaRegion? (please list up to three)

36. Do you think there are any disadvantages to operating your business in theCasey/Cardinia Region? (please list up to three)


37. Are there any issues affecting the ongoing viability of your business? If so, pleasedescribe briefly.

38. Please use the space below to mention any other issues you feel are important foragriculture in the Casey/Cardinia Region.

Please turn over to the last page


For the Future

39. Would you be interested in joining an agribusiness organisation or group if one were to beformed for the Casey/Cardinia region?

No go to Q 40

Yes please add your details below.

Note -The details you add will be transferred to a Casey/Cardinia agribusiness database sothat we can contact you in the future. These details will not be used for any otherpurpose.

If you answered “Yes” to this question and you prefer to keep your business details separatefrom the rest of this form you can either:

a) mail your details back to us in a separate envelope (see reply paid envelope for address)or

b) fax this page back to us separately to 9705 5202 or

c) leave this page blank and phone Barrie Pickersgill with your details on 9705 5200.

Business Name:

Business Address:

Postcode:

Postal Address (If different to Business Address):

Postcode:

Contact Phone No:

Main business contact person (Dr, Mr, Ms, Mrs, Miss)

40. Please estimate the time you needed to complete this questionnaire.

Mins

Please place the completed questionnaire in the reply paid envelope provided. Alternativelyyou can fax the questionnaire back to (03) 9705 5202 (see note at the bottom of page 2 of theintroductory notes re faxing your reply).

Thank you very much for your contribution.

WHEN – Wednesday, 15th October 2003TIME – 11.00 am to 3.30 pm.WHERE – Council Chamber City of Casey offices, Magid

Drive, Narre Warren.

FOCUS ON FARMINGRegional Agribusiness Workshop

Are you interested in the future of farming in Caseyand Cardinia?

If you are, you need to be at this workshop.

The workshop offers a rare opportunity to meet with a wide cross-section of the farming community, agribusiness organisations andgovernment agencies to learn the results of the Regional AgriculturalAudit and to discuss vital questions, such as:

• What are the region’s strengths?• What will our agriculture look like in 25 years time?• What are the key challenges we face in moving forward?• How can we overcome the challenges and build on our strengths to

achieve a positive future?

INVITATIONYou are invited to discuss the FUTURE of FARMING in this region withother farmers, agribusiness organisations and representatives fromvarious government agencies.

Lunch will be provided for all participants. Please however book yourplace at this workshop as numbers are limited and we needconfirmation of your attendance for catering by Friday 10th October.

To BookContact Leanne Terrington or Barrie Pickersgill on 9705 5200

FOCUS ON FARMINGRegional Agribusiness Workshop

The pages which follow are direct copies of the notes which were written by theparticipants at the above workshop held on the 15th October 2003. These notes are beingmailed out to everyone on the agricultural database so that those of you who did not makeit to the workshop can see the results from that day.

The headings to each section indicate at which stage in the workshop process the noteswere produced. I have included an agenda from the workshop along with these notes asthis will serve to remind those who attended of the process and give those who were notthere an indication of the different themes under which the notes were produced. Alsoincluded is a tidied up copy of the ’25 years from now Wish List’ that Bruce Turnercopied from the original white board graphics / notes.

I have included a copy of the PowerPoint presentation which I gave at the workshop,outlining the results of the survey which was done earlier in the project. There are acouple of additional slides in this version that were not included in the workshoppresentation.

I would like to thank all those people who gave up their valuable time to attend theworkshop and who made the day such a success. As you will see from the attached noteswe collected a large amount of material. This has increased the understanding of theissues faced by farmers through out the region.

Please note that I have transcribed the notes written at the workshop exactly as they werewritten. Where I have felt the need for clarification or expansion of a point to make itunderstandable, those clarifications or additional comments are printed in italic font.

Regards,

Barrie PickersgillAgribusiness OfficerCasey and Cardinia Agricultural Audit

City of Casey and Cardinia Shire

Focus on FarmingREGIONAL AGRIBUSINESS WORKSHOP

11.00 am to 3.30 pm, Wednesday 15 October 2003Council Chamber, City of Casey offices, Narre Warren

PurposeTo review the results of the Regional Agricultural Audit and to generate ideas for actionby the farming community and organisations to address outstanding issues.AGENDA

10.45 Arrival Self service tea and coffee availablebefore and during the sessions

11.00 Welcome and introduction Halvard Dalheim

11.10 Format of the day Bruce Turner (facilitator)

11.15 Overview of farming in the region Barrie Pickersgill to present audit results

11.25 Strengths and opportunities Workshop discussion and feedback

12.10 A vision for the next 25 years What will our agriculture look like?

Workshop discussion

12.40 The challenges we face in movingforward

Barrie Pickersgill to present an outline ofthe main themes from the audit results

12.55 Preparation for the afternoonsession

Bruce Turner to outline the process

1.00 LUNCH

1.30 Theme-based discussions– Session 1

Participants select a theme of particularinterest, nominate theme leaders and usequestions (see overleaf) as discussionstarters

2.15 Theme-based discussions− Session 2

Opportunity to change themes for allexcept volunteer theme leaders

2.40 Report back focusing onactions/solutions

Summary presentations from each themeleader followed by discussion

3.25 Next steps and closing remarks Barrie Pickersgill

(See over for ‘guide questions’ for theme-based discussions)

GUIDE QUESTIONS FOR THEME-BASED DISCUSSIONSPlease help your theme leader (who will be a volunteer from your group) to record key points from thediscussion around:

1. Understanding the challengesWhat are the particular issues that affect you within this theme? What are the problems youcurrently face and what do you expect will be challenges in the future?

2. GoalsWhat would be the best possible, long-term outcome(s) from your point of view if theseissues and challenges can be overcome? What would this look like?

3. Strengths and opportunitiesWhich of the strengths and opportunities we mapped before lunch can help us here? Are thereany others?

4. ActionsWhat do we need to do, what can we do, what do we want to do, in the next five years to buildon the strengths and opportunities and realise our long-term goal(s)?- Try to come up with actions/solutions that are realistic and achievable and describe what

needs to be done, who needs to be involved (including perhaps one person from yourtable and/or today’s workshop) and, if possible, when.

Please help your theme leader identify key points for a two-minute summary presentation to thewhole workshop.

Session – Strengths & Opportunities

Participants were asked to identify the Strengths and Opportunities of farming in theregion. Each table wrote a series of small coloured sheets that were displayed for theremainder of the workshop. The issues raised fell into broad categories and are recordedbelow under those categories which have been divided into Strengths andOpportunities.

Strengths

Soil &Climate

Close to theMetropolitan Area

ServiceIndustries

Landvalues

Supply of labour + offfarm employment

Lifestyle

SurvivedDrought.

Productive land.

High rainfall.

Soil Quality.

Good soil &climate.

Fertile country.

Range of soiltypes.

Access to Markets &services.

Large local ‘direct’market.

Proximity to Melbourne& services.

Close to markets &facilities.

Arterial road link-up.

Good access.

Transport linkslocal/overseas.

Supportindustrieshere/near.

Proximity toserviceindustries.

Highcapitalvalue ofland.

Labour supply accessible +contract labour companies.

Availability of part timework off farm to subsidisecosts.

Labour & industry.

Lifestyle.

Opportunities

Value Adding IncreaseEfficiency

Networking Strategic Planning Tourism & Education

Farmdiversification(other Ag/non Agenterprises).

Export Market.

Farming practices(opportunities).

Develop moreversatile/sustainablefarming practices.

Networkingdiscussion group.

Protected horticulturalarea.

Melbourne 2030 plan.

Promotion of tourism.

Education.

Session – A Vision for the Next 25 Years

The workshop participants were asked how they would like to see the region and inparticular, farming in the region, 25 years from now. The comments are recorded as theywere received, ie. table by table (or group by group).

Group 1.

• To have been able to expand operations and maintain options available (rather thanlose them)

• Opportunities to intensify/diversify operations to be available• Agriculture to be more viable for the younger generation• Export markets to have been enhanced• Increased environmental sustainability• Pool of skilled people to have been maintained / enhanced so skills have not been lost

to the industry• Less bureaucracy on permits more manageable farmer friendly system• Increased agricultural awareness amongst broader community

Group 2.

• Available and reliable water supply at an affordable price• Buffer zone (land not road) interface between rural and residential zoned land• Non restricted road system• Council capable of embracing change quickly - zoning

- encourage expansion or change fordemand

• Unity among agribusiness – need to support each other eg. beef v chicken• 2030 restricts ability of farmers to adopt to changing market demands – intensify if

necessary• Greater export markets/ local markets• Farm rate for Casey

Group 3.

• Maintain horticultural zone on peat land in Cardinia (environmentally sensitive areas)• Maintain viable size holdings• Sustainable water supply – agriculture• Improved environmental management (Landcare)• Controlled subdivision• No restriction on alternate agriculture usage• GM free

Group 4.

• Chemical controls over chemical use in residential areas – ‘hot spots’• Natural Gas supply• Major road improvement

• Adoption of farm rate for City of Casey• Increase in general understanding by Councils of what farming is about• Sustainable development• Right to farm – less government restrictions re farm labour/family, permits re trees,

ripping rabbit burrows, etc• Railway network re instated• Less bureaucrats – no State Government – only Federal – Casey to revert back to two

Shires• Re-cycling of water to increase + move to a more equitable distribution• More incentives for those employing water conservation• Greater control over development / housing – re. sustainable development

Group 5.

• Retain farming as sustainable occupation• Rural businesses valued /supported by wider community and governments• More long term view and planning / development of protective strategies• Public and government awareness of importance of agriculture• Need for more subsidies (especially in times of crisis)• Change of attitude - farmers themselves

- non-farming community- Government

Sustainability• Urban / rural balance – representation• Produce sold at value which allows farmers to make a reasonable living• Farmers leave properties in better condition than when they took them over

Group 6.

• An increase in organic farming• Agri-tourism• Food trails (& wine)• Increase in agricultural awareness / education / responsibilities• Better land management• Restrictions on sub divisions particularly on productive farming land

Group 7.

• Green belt for agriculture• Corridor between farming and residential• Emphasis on organic farming

Group 8.

• Family farms to stay as they are• Big farms maintained as big farms• Urban sprawl limited – high density living with nearby open space• Loss of good farming land stopped – preserve good soils• Choice – sub divide if we want to but able to keep big farms together

• Education to new residents re the benefits of country living- how to – dogs control,litter, control of children, driving on narrow roads, stock, passing horses in vehicles,by-laws enforced

• Right to farm – existing farming activities allowed to continue• Weed problem – control - land developers take responsibility

- small land owners- highways

• Rubbish dumping problem – Councils• Security – crime prevention – robberies, gates left open, equipment• Costs of farming kept under control ie. rates

11

Focus on FarmingFocus on Farming

22

Casey & Cardinia RegionalCasey & Cardinia RegionalAgricultural Audit & ActionAgricultural Audit & Action

FrameworkFramework

33

ObjectivesObjectives

Gain data re agricultural productionGain data re agricultural productioncapabilitiescapabilitiesIdentify and understand the challengesIdentify and understand the challengesfaced by farmers in the regionfaced by farmers in the regionDevelop communication and networkingDevelop communication and networkingframeworksframeworksRetain employment levels and developRetain employment levels and developopportunitiesopportunitiesInvestigate potential for future projectsInvestigate potential for future projects

44

The SurveyThe Survey

All holdings outside the urban area wereAll holdings outside the urban area weresent a questionnairesent a questionnaire

3884 forms mailed out3884 forms mailed out–– Casey 1451Casey 1451

–– Cardinia 2433Cardinia 2433

857 were returned = 22.1%857 were returned = 22.1%

55

Respondents by MunicipalityRespondents by Municipality

CaseyCaseyNumberNumber %% By extrapolationBy extrapolation

Income earningIncome earning 138 138 42.242.2 612612No IncomeNo Income 189189 57.857.8 839839

327 327 100100 14511451

CardiniaCardiniaNumberNumber %% By extrapolationBy extrapolation

Income earningIncome earning 387 387 73 73 17761776No IncomeNo Income 143143 2727 656656

530 530 100100 24322432

66

Size of LandholdingsSize of Landholdings

0

50

100

150

200

250

Unkown Under25ha

26-50ha 51-100ha 101-200ha

200+ha

Num

ber

of R

espo

nden

ts

77

Land Sizes (Land Sizes (propertiesproperties under 25 ha) under 25 ha)

05

101520253035404550

< 4.9 ha 5 - 9.9 ha 10 - 14.9 ha 15 - 19.9 ha 20 - 24.9 ha

Freq

uenc

y

Cardinia

Casey

88

Respondents Major CommercialRespondents Major CommercialAgricultural ActivitiesAgricultural Activities

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Dairy farming

Beef

Chicken meat

Eggs

Horses

Vegetables

Orchard fruit

Soft fruit

Wine grapes

Flowers

Nurseries

Hay

Other

Number of Respondents

99

Respondents Secondary CommercialRespondents Secondary CommercialAgricultural ActivitiesAgricultural Activities

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Dairy farmingBeef

Chicken meatEggs

HorsesVegetables

Orchard fruitSoft fruit

Wine grapesFlowers

NurseriesHay

Other

Number of Respondents

1010

Average size of holdingAverage size of holdingby activityby activity

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Dairy Farming

Beef

Other

Chicken meat

Horses

Vegetables

Orchard fruit

Flowers

Nurseries

Hectares

1111

Key InputsKey Inputs

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

LabourRepairs

FeedFertiliser

PowerAnimal HealthFarm Chemical

StoragePackaging

WaterFencing

RatesTransportInsurance

SeedAdminOther

Good

s &

Serv

ices

Pur

chas

ed

Responses

1212

Percentage of local sourcingPercentage of local sourcing

not sure1%

none3% few

12%

half15%

most40%

all29% not sure

none

few

half

most

all

1313

Time Spent on FarmingTime Spent on FarmingActivitiesActivities

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Under10

11 to20

21 to30

31 to40

41 to50

51 to60

61 to70

71 to80

80+

Hours Worked

Resp

onse

s

1414

Total Number ofTotal Number ofPeople EmployedPeople Employed

Employee Numbers other than SeasonalEmployee Numbers other than Seasonal

No. of Employees No. of Employees1122334466

1818

104104

RespondentsRespondents2182181081085151333399

22

11

1515

People employed in FarmingPeople employed in Farming

The above numbers are presented for interest only. It is unclear howThe above numbers are presented for interest only. It is unclear howrepresentative the respondents were in terms of employing people againstrepresentative the respondents were in terms of employing people against

the total survey population.the total survey population.The Total no. of employees includes property owners and family workers.The Total no. of employees includes property owners and family workers.

Number of Respondents Total no of employeesCasey Full time employees 58 254

Part time employees 85 145Casual employees 32 94

Cardinia Full time employees 179 456Part time employees 230 379Casual employees 68 175

1616

Seasonal Workers EmployedSeasonal Workers Employedby Respondentsby Respondents

0100200300400500600700800

Janua

ry

Febr

uaryMarc

hApr

ilMay

June

July

August

Septe

mber

Octobe

r

Novembe

r

Decem

ber

1717

Key Employment IssuesKey Employment Issues

Employment was not a cause of majorEmployment was not a cause of majorconcern for the respondentsconcern for the respondentsThe most frequently mentioned issuesThe most frequently mentioned issueswere:were:–– RecruitmentRecruitment–– TrainingTraining

(and in particular, finding people with the(and in particular, finding people with theright skills)right skills)

1818

Own Training RequirementsOwn Training Requirements

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Chemical Use on Farm

Professional Development

Business Administration

Livestock/Farm Management

None

Tra

ining

Typ

e

Responses

1919

Business ConfidenceBusiness Confidence (12 months forecast) (12 months forecast)

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Decrease alot

Decrease alittle

Stay thesame

Increase alittle

Increase alot

Perc

enta

ge

ForecastProduction

ForecastIncome

ForecastEmployment

“None” responses not included“None” responses not included

2020

Business ConfidenceBusiness Confidence (5 year forecast) (5 year forecast)

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

Decrease alot

Decrease alittle

Stay thesame

Increase alittle

Increase a lot

Perc

enta

ge ForecastProductionForecastIncomeForecastEmployment

“None” responses not included“None” responses not included

2121

Type of Business PlanType of Business Plan

0

50

100

150

200

250

No Plan Plan notwritten

Writtenplan 1 year

Writtenplan 2-3

years

Writtenplan 4-5

years

Writtenplan 5+

Resp

onse

s

2222

Value AddingValue Adding

No activityNo activity 89.5%89.5%

PackagingPackaging 4.2%4.2%

Further ProcessingFurther Processing 2.4%2.4%

Training HorsesTraining Horses 2.0%2.0%

Wine ProductionWine Production 1.0%1.0%

MarketingMarketing 1.0%1.0%

2323

On Farm Quality AssuranceOn Farm Quality Assurance

Yes, documented

25%

No Response6%

Externally Certified

3%

No66%

2424

Organic FarmingOrganic Farming

Do you consider yourself to be an organic producer?Do you consider yourself to be an organic producer?– No 90.0%– Yes but not accredited 9.2%– Accredited organic .8%

Do you have any interest in becoming an organicDo you have any interest in becoming an organicproducer?producer?– No 78.0%– Yes 18.4%– Missing 3.6%

2525

Export (Direct fromExport (Direct fromthe Farm)the Farm)

NoNo 92.4%92.4% 483483YesYes 7.6%7.6% 4040

68% of those already exporting are 68% of those already exporting are considering increasing their export activity.considering increasing their export activity.

Of those who do not currently export, Of those who do not currently export, 16.1% have some interest in becoming 16.1% have some interest in becoming exporters.exporters.

2626

Drought Influence & RecoveryDrought Influence & Recovery

Influenced byInfluenced bydroughtdrought•• 52.2%52.2%

Time to RecoveryTime to Recovery•• Average (mean)Average (mean)

time to recover =time to recover =25.1 months25.1 months

•• Range:Range: 6 - 60 months 6 - 60 months

Not influenced byNot influenced bydroughtdrought•• 43.8%43.8%

2727

Sources of WaterSources of Water

0

50

100

150

200

250

PurifiedEffluent

RecycledWater

Directfrom aLocal

Waterway

Other Dam onwaterwayor gully

TownSupply

Bore Catchmentdam thatis not onwaterwayor gully

Source

Resp

onse

s

2828

Key Water IssuesKey Water Issues

020406080

100120140160180

Wateravailability

Cost Salinity Other None

Issue

Resp

onse

s

2929

Key Advantages ofKey Advantages ofthe Regionthe Region

0 50 100 150 200 250

Proximity to City

Climate

Soil Quality

Council Support

VLE

Access to Workers

Cranbourne Horse Complex

None

Issu

es

3030

Close to MelbourneClose to Melbourne–– Excellent main road networkExcellent main road network–– Access to marketsAccess to markets–– Access to customersAccess to customers–– Within an hours drive to all urban areasWithin an hours drive to all urban areas

Climate of the RegionClimate of the Region–– Normally reliable rainfallNormally reliable rainfall

Quality of SoilsQuality of Soils–– Varied soil typesVaried soil types–– Some extremely Some extremely versatileversatile soils soils

Access to a Labour ForceAccess to a Labour Force


3131

Availability of Farm ContractorsAvailability of Farm ContractorsVictorian Livestock ExchangeVictorian Livestock ExchangeCranbourne Horse ComplexCranbourne Horse ComplexGood Farm Supply StoresGood Farm Supply StoresClose to Major InfrastructureClose to Major Infrastructure–– EducationEducation–– MedicalMedical–– CulturalCultural–– SportingSporting–– Rail NetworkRail Network

Areas of Great Natural BeautyAreas of Great Natural Beauty


3232

Identified ChallengesIdentified Challenges

0 50 100 150 200

Rural Urban Interface

Value of Rates

Rising Costs

Roads

Sustainability

Government Processes

Commodity Prices

Traffic Volumes

Administration

Issu

es

Responses

3333

Price of LandPrice of Land

Farm expansion issuesFarm expansion issues$ return against invested assets$ return against invested assetsFarm successionFarm successionDeterrent to new entrantsDeterrent to new entrantsYoung farmers entry issuesYoung farmers entry issuesCost of ratesCost of rates

3434

Right to FarmRight to Farm

Lack of understandingLack of understandingComplaints (noise, dust, odour, etc)Complaints (noise, dust, odour, etc)Legislative issuesLegislative issuesDog attacks on livestockDog attacks on livestockDumping of rubbishDumping of rubbishTheft from farmsTheft from farmsVandalismVandalismInadequate representation on CouncilsInadequate representation on CouncilsIncreasing traffic on rural roadsIncreasing traffic on rural roadsPlanning issuesPlanning issues

3535

WaterWater

Availability overall (big picture)Availability overall (big picture)AllocationsAllocationsRe-cycled waterRe-cycled waterWater efficiencyWater efficiencyWater conservationWater conservationFarm damsFarm damsWater legislationWater legislationSalinitySalinity

3636

Sustainability - LandSustainability - LandManagementManagement

Weed controlWeed controlPest controlPest controlLand managementLand managementConservationConservationConservation legislationConservation legislationSoil erosionSoil erosionFloodingFlooding

3737

Roads and TransportRoads and Transport

Current and futureCurrent and futuredistribution/logistical issuesdistribution/logistical issuesCatering for larger vehiclesCatering for larger vehiclesIncreased traffic volumesIncreased traffic volumesFundingFundingLoad limitsLoad limitsSpeed limitsSpeed limits

3838

Costs vs Returns priceCosts vs Returns pricesqueezesqueeze

Price takers not makersPrice takers not makersLack of influence over marketingLack of influence over marketingchannelschannelsPower of major retailersPower of major retailersLack of control over price of inputsLack of control over price of inputsLack of control over legislative costsLack of control over legislative costsInternational exchange ratesInternational exchange rates

3939

The Profile � Perception ofThe Profile � Perception ofFarmingFarming

Local Council’sLocal Council’sState governmentState governmentFederal governmentFederal governmentWithin farming circlesWithin farming circlesUrban populationUrban populationNew entrantsNew entrantsNew employeesNew employees

4040

Business Administration �Business Administration �Legislative IssuesLegislative Issues

GSTGSTWorkcoverWorkcoverNative vegetationNative vegetationFarm damsFarm damsSuperannuationSuperannuation

4141

The 8 Major ChallengesThe 8 Major Challenges

Price of landPrice of landRight to farmRight to farmWaterWaterSustainability/Land ManagementSustainability/Land ManagementRoads and TransportRoads and TransportCosts vs Returns price squeezeCosts vs Returns price squeezeThe Profile – Perception of FarmingThe Profile – Perception of FarmingBusiness Administration – LegislativeBusiness Administration – LegislativeIssuesIssues

4242

Session – Theme Based Discussions

The following section relates to the Theme Based Discussions when workshopparticipants selected the particular theme they wished to discuss. There were eight themespresented as challenges to the agricultural sector. Notes from each theme are presentedbelow.

Theme 1 - Price of Land

Negatives Low return on investmentSuccession – may require a moveHard to expandAttracts ‘Green’ part time farmersYoung farmers look elsewhere

PositivesProximity to - resources

- services- infrastructure

Aesthetically pleasingInvestment for future (capital increase) (superannuation)Succession - $’s to hand on greaterAsset to borrow againstAttract city ‘farmers’Quality of land for farming not necessarily price determiner

GoalsGreater farmer representation on CouncilsIncreased agribusiness representation in Economic DevelopmentGreater unity of farmer groups – ‘One Voice’Variation on titles to allow excisions of blocks to allow main farm to surviveNo section 173’s

Actions

Re education at government level – from planners through to CEO’sDecentralisation of - labour

- industriesLocal and State government to continue region promotion campaign

Theme 2 - Right to Farm

1. Understanding

Right to decide what is produced eg. - crop- what you harvest- if you can value add- how you market product- freedom to determine hours of farm operation

Buffer zone – who pays - Council- developer- land owner

Noise – farm operations - animals- pumps- truck movements

Smell – chicken farms - operationsfertilisers / manures

Theft & Vandalism

Trees – crop harvesting – restrictions placed on trees planted for cropping purposes

2. Education

Non farmers to have understanding of what is involved to produce productTo have trees recognised as a cropTo make sure farms operate with a good code of practiceTo be able to value add to product you are producingUnity in understanding other farmers operations

3. Strengths

Awareness & educationZoningUnityRegulations

4. Actions

i. Not to have regulations that will effect the ‘Right to Farm’ – consult with farmer

ii. Authorities to object to complaints that interfere with the farmers ‘Right to Farm’

iii. More farm representation on Council / boards / committees & governments

Theme 3 – Water

Challenges

Groundwater availability - total- when wanted

Groundwater salinity

Recycled water – coming too slowly

Sharing water equitably amongst users

Goals

1. Getting class ‘A’ recycled water to land suitable for high value horticulture ataffordable prices

2. Council and water authorities working together so water availability and land zoningare matched

3. Water used more efficiently

Strengths and Opportunities

Networking – so we work together and with Councils

Actions

1. Council lobbying with industry over importance of recycled water2. Storing some of annual allocation through winter dam fill3. Councils do land capability / suitability audit – work with SRW & Melbourne Water

& industry networks so there is a long term infrastructure plan for recycled waterpiping to suitable areas – both here and further Shires.

4. One water authority (Melbourne Water) to manage recycling process5. Improved education and awareness of water trading rules6. More research and extension on improving water use efficiency7. Improved management of groundwater

Theme 4 – Sustainability & Land Management

1. Issues

a) Fragile soil structure (moderately infertile)b) Water scarcityc) Weeds & pestsd) Loss of indigenous vegetation (& fauna)e) Chemical vs. Organicf) Reward for responsible management – rates reductiong) Bureaucracy gone madh) Lack of - knowledge (landowners)

- sense of responsibilityi) GM crops / ? animals ?j) Rules - relevant }

- necessary } & Reasonable- enforceable }

2. Goals

a) Re GM crops – production maximised but not at expense of long term viability,health, safety, etc.

b) Education of everybody - newcomersfarmerseverybody

c) Means of implementing the goals readilyd) Change of philosophy – landowners as caretakers rather than exploiterse) Farmers can make a good livingf) Future generations to continue in agribusinessg) Increased efficiency in water usage - maximised catchment

- minimised evaporationh) Every one aim for 30% native vegetation (productivity increases up to 30% cover, in

theory)i) Identified the best long term solution to maximise productivity with respect to

fertilisersj) Rates related to relevant aspects of property ownership, not to land value

3. Strengths / Opportunities

a) We (the Shires) do have good climate, fertile land available & topography for goodwater catchment

b) Potential sources of labour to help with environmental improvements, eg Greencorps(unemployed) – could be expanded

c) Acceptance of Melbourne 2030 aimsd) A significant level of interest and wille) Proximity to big centre(s) – (double edged sword)f) State / Local Governments that seem to be listening to the community

4. Actions

- Persuade the powers that be that agriculture needs far more support- Education programs – with accessible venues- Financial incentives / disincentives eg. subsidies / rate reductions- Get unemployed involved- Tap into local knowledge- Reintroduce high level of scientific research (so changes of farm practice have

scientific basis)- Develop a system to recycle water- Improve information collection / distribution / retention (filing)- Recognition that future criteria for sustainability may change. Must leave room

for flexibility- GM Crops. Issue needs debate before introduction – should be trialed on small

scale first in an isolated, secure location. If deemed OK to proceed, GM free areasshould be designated giving CHOISE. Don’t put all our (GM) eggs into onebasket : educate people to eliminate fear

Theme 5 – Roads and Transport

A) Green wedge planning affects farms interrupted by or split / adjacent to Pakenhamby-passDevalues landMakes farming very difficultLegislation is hard to change once implemented

Upgrade load limits on bridges

B) Why do owners have to pay a contribution to sealing when it is a public road

C) Speed limits (lack of) causing surface breakup - type of vehicles ie trucks busesDust control – suppressantRegular road maintenance (grading)Side road clearanceCut water easements into drains

Solving Problems

A) Green wedge needs more discussion by those affectedB) Road funding should be by whole communityC) Road design to suit all. Load & speed limits decrease on dirt roads?

1. Challenges

How to reduce speed on appropriate rural roadsRoads to suit farming practices (built 50 years earlier) ie. B-doubles, tankers, etcUpgrade bridges (to carry heavy loads). Old bridges built approximately 50 years ago –horse and cart daysSeal main rural roads at Government costCardinia classified as an urban shire, not rural – negatively affects funding

2. Goals

Better distribution of rate payers contributions to road costs, not bureaucracy

Best Possible Outcome

Road upgradesFair distribution of construction costsPlan roads to suit vehicle useSafer roads

3. We have good road infrastructure in place. Opportunity of upgrading at minimal costnow.

4. Action

We need to act sooner (rather) than later.More community input at ground level such as to-dayWe want our Council to be a true representative of our concerns.Cranbourne, Pakenham, Officer ready to burst at seams without appropriateinfrastructure in place (roads)

Theme 6 – Costs vs Returns Price Squeeze

Challenges

1. Farm RatesCasey – no farm rate (metropolitan). Can = 30% of net incomeCardinia – not an issue at present

2. CostsRates – Fixed, not related to outputLabour

3. PriceNo say. Takers not makers.Beef farmers go to auctions therefore can control price to some extentVegetables – don’t know from day to day what price they will get

Supermarkets squeeze priceHow can we gain market power?

4. Need for Australia wide co-operatives eg. mushrooms

5. Need for secure contract eg ‘x’ quantity at ‘y’ priceContract difficult to obtain due to variation in demand

6. Time consuming to provide local shops only – especially for sole operator

7. Need to establish market power

Diversify markets?15 acres Asparagus now = 100 acres $ wise in (12 – 15 years) timeNot knowing what amount that is being produced therefore can’t maximiseproductionMiddle man making money not producer

Goals

1. More $’s for producer2. More power / unity for growers. UK – buying groups represent growers – get best

price – dictate prices to supermarketsPotatoes – Packers Group have potential to dictate price but don’t at presentAsparagus – Understanding between growers. 2 groups, Coles and Safeway + it isvery difficult to sell at markets unless you are well known and go each week.

3. Establish a Clearing House. All sales occur here at the Clearing House.Previously Onion Board & Potato Board leading to black market resulting in collapse

4. Educate consumers to demand produce which gives fair price to growersFruit shops }Farmers Markets } can provide thisSupermarket chains very difficult

5. Government regulation to protect growers

6. Farm rate for Casey

Strengths and Opportunities

1. Farmers Markets2. Consumer education – buy locally3. Trend to regionalisation4. Farm gate to plate trend5. Branding

Actions

1. Lobby Casey to revise the way they value / estimate rural land rates. It isinappropriate to base it on recent land sales – need farm rate

2. Increase frequency of Farmers Markets - change in shopping habits- educate public

People shop weekly, so if they are to change from supermarkets, Farmers Marketsneed to be weekly.

3. Identify niche markets and fill them4. Central body – established to fight for price & educate public

Theme 7 - The Profile / Perception of Farming

Urbanites Farmers

BothUnderstanding (between the two groups.

Definition of farming – broad acre vs hobby farms – define (hobby farms as) where (people) don’t (earna living) from the farm

Want farming feel & rural environment Farmers becoming more industrialised

Assets rich verses $ poorDon’t know what farmers needs are in regard tofarming processes Costs of land in these Shires versus costs / rates in

Nth VictoriaIs their perception realistic about farming?

Farmers seen as ‘Rich’ landholdersNot understanding of the ‘needs’ of the urbancommunity

Urban community but look out onto farms Council rules same in suburbia as rural land

Lack of knowledge of what’s produced incommunity / area

Education via ‘Farmers Markets’Interaction and education

Farmers within the community talking to eachother = networks for farmers eg dairy or beef

Venue for farmers to interact amongst themselves

More promotion for farmers in the area eg. Exposand interaction

Farmers willing to talk and meet = free lunch orrelevant issues

Farming groups involved in community

Media support on both sides of the fence

Strengths / Opportunities

Urban interaction with farmers eg. meet / pat animalsCommon interests in area eg. rural landEstablish more of a community spiritMore information in newspapers

Actions

NetworksFarmers MarketPermanent display - rotation of different farming in this area

- funding / education /interest programsInteraction and hands on experience for urbanitesImproving interaction - eg. farming tourism ie. let urbanites have a go at farming

- niche communitiesChallenge to get interaction between different forms of farmingIdentify needs of individuals and what they expect within their environment. Theperception can be improved with interaction - coordinated

- managed

- organisedDisplay farming techniques, practice of farming. Be realisticMore economic disclosure – perceptions of regional Victoria and farmingEducation on both sidesKnowledge of inputs for ongoing farming = educate them!Lobby the Council re rural verses suburbia rules – dogs, cats, trees, permits

Summary

Community interaction and education (Farmers Markets, displays, field days, ag shows)Networks for farmers in different farming scenariosVenue for farmers to get together and talkEstablish more community spiritMedia support for campaign = more articles in local paper. Lobby media to be accurate inreports not sensationalism to sell papers / headlinesShire more aware of farming issues (especially when they class land as ‘primeagriculture’) for things like dogs and cats (limited numbers). Permits for tree clearing,dam cleaning, putting in a culvert.Rented farm houses – problems with uneducated tenants eg. dogs chasing cows andattacking themPromotion via education – community based eg. the carrot is a sausage sizzle

Theme 8 - Business Administration / Legislation

General

GST – in, will not go out. Need for a better understanding on process – educationWorkcover – need review by State GovernmentNative vegetation – better consultation, owners and authorities. Need for flexibility retrees in vs trees outDams – flexibilitySuperannuation – LGA’s reinvest within their areaTown planning 2030 – concernEES (Environmental Effects Statement) – re Pakenham by-pass – too much detail, norecommendationsChild labour permits

Strengths / Opportunities

Opportunity now for Shires to influence State Governments 2030 visionShire to develop own 2030 vision with strong rural inputShires to change LGA superannuation spending

Goals

Reduce / simplify red tape (one stop shop) at all levelsShires to develop own 2030 strategy with rural inputGreater agribusiness input from dedicated officerIncrease Council awareness (including staff) of rural needs / wantsKeep planning controls with local government not with Spring Street.

Ranking of the Top 12 Industry Sectors for Casey and Cardinia - ABS stats 2000-2001

CASEY CARDINIAIndustry Sector $ Value Industry Sector $ value

1 Chicken Meat 26,055,433 1 Chicken Meat 33,958,096

2 Celery 14,378,355 2 Milk 33,840,347

3 Cultivated Turf 8,357,585 3 Asparagus 29,427,242

4 Parsnips 6,517,590 4 Beef (cattle 19,861,051& calves slaughtered)

5 Nurseries 3,942,220 5 Potatoes 18,566,161

6 Cut Flowers 3,865,512 6 Cut Flowers 6,671,078

7 Beef (cattle 3,522,857 7 Apples 6,265,392& calves slaughtered)

8 Lettuce 3,493,716 8 Pasture cut for ) 5,772,504hay (other than Lucern)

9 Milk 3,449,091 9 Small & Berry & Tropical Fruit 2,937,349(strawberries, kiwi fruitblueberries, raspberries, )

10 Leeks 3,441,477 10 Nurseries 2,920,920

11 Asparagus 2,915,448 11 Cultivated Turf 2,806,147

12 Brussel Sprouts 1,287,166 12 Egg Industry 1,171,648

Other figures of InterestTotal Vegetables $ 49,182,302 54,083,402

(asparagus + potatoes = $47,993,403)

Total $ Value of Agriculture 109,568,683 173,091,457

Agricultural Census 2000-2001

Number of Establishments by EVAO and Industry for Casey LGA

Estimated Value of Agricultural Operations ($)

ANZSICLess than

22,50022,500 to< 50,000

50,000 to<100,000

100,000 to<150,000

150,000 to<200,000

200,000 to<350,000

350,000 to<500,000

500,000 to<1,000,000

1,000,000 to<2,000,000 >2,000,000 Total

0111 Plant Nurseries - - 3 2 2 5 2 1 - 1 170112 Cut Flower and Flower Seed Growing - - 5 2 2 1 3 1 - - 150113 Vegetable Growing 2 4 9 5 - 14 6 8 4 5 570114 Grape Growing - - - - - - - - - - -0115 Apple and Pear Growing - - - - - - - - - 1 10116 Stone Fruit Growing 1 - - - - - - - - - 10117 Kiwi Fruit Growing - - - - - - - - - - -0119 Fruit Growing n.e.c. - 1 - - - - - - - - 10123 Sheep-Beef Cattle Farming - - - - - - - - - - -0125 Beef Cattle Farming 32 17 14 1 1 1 - - - - 660124 Sheep Farming - - - - - - - - - - -0130 Dairy Cattle Farming - 4 5 - - 5 2 - - - 160141 Poultry Farming (Meat) - - 3 - - 3 1 1 4 1 120142 Poultry Farming (Eggs) - 1 - - - 1 1 6 - - 100151 Pig Farming - - 1 - - - - - - - 10152 Horse Farming 5 2 1 1 - - - - - - 90153 Deer Farming 2 - - - - - - - - - 201 Agriculture 42 29 40 12 6 30 16 18 8 8 209


Number of Establishments by Area of Holding and Industry for Casey LGA

Area of Holding (ha)ANZSIC < 5 5 to <10 10 to <20 20 to <30 30 to <40 40 to <50 50 to <75 75 to <100 100 to <200 200 or more Total0111 Plant Nurseries 7 2 2 - 1 - 1 - 2 - 170112 Cut Flower and Flower Seed Growing 5 1 6 2 - 1 - - - - 150113 Vegetable Growing 7 10 12 6 2 5 5 6 2 3 570114 Grape Growing - - - - - - - - - - -0115 Apple and Pear Growing - - - - - - - - 1 - 10116 Stone Fruit Growing 1 - - - - - - - - - 10117 Kiwi Fruit Growing - - - - - - - - - - -0119 Fruit Growing n.e.c. - - 1 - - - - - - - 10123 Sheep-Beef Cattle Farming - - - - - - - - - - -0125 Beef Cattle Farming 3 2 1 4 9 9 15 6 9 9 660124 Sheep Farming - - - - - - - - - - -0130 Dairy Cattle Farming - - - 1 - 1 3 4 2 5 160141 Poultry Farming (Meat) 6 1 1 1 - 1 - 1 - - 120142 Poultry Farming (Eggs) 2 4 - - - 1 - - 2 - 100151 Pig Farming - 1 - - - - - - - - 10152 Horse Farming - - 1 3 - 4 1 - - - 90153 Deer Farming - - - - 2 - - - - - 201 Agriculture 32 22 25 17 14 22 25 17 19 16 209

Value of Agricultural Commodities Produced by SLA, 2000-01 Casey

205801612 205801613 205801616 205801618 10

Casey (C) Berwick

Casey (C) Cranbourne

Casey (C) Hallam

Casey (C)South

CaseyTotal

Commodity description Value ($)

Value Annot-ations Value ($)


ValueAnnot-ations Value ($)

ValueAnnot-ations Value ($)

ValueAnnot-ations

0100158 Total area of holding - VACP (ha) 2,077 891 138 * 11,316 14,4221008158 Other pastures cut for hay - value ($) 80,791 0 0 701,203 781,9941008759 Pastures cut for hay - total value ($) 80,791 0 0 701,203 781,9941100658 Pasture seed - value ($) 0 0 0 4 * 41110059 Pasture seed - total value ($) 0 0 0 4 * 41110159 Pastures and grasses - total value ($) 80,791 0 0 701,207 781,9981500158 Wheat for grain - value ($) 0 0 0 424,284 424,2841509259 Cereals for grain - total value ($) 0 0 0 424,284 424,2841908558 Cultivated turf - value ($) 0 8,114,160 0 243,425 8,357,585 31909358 Other crops cut for hay - value ($) 0 13,475 * 0 0 13,4751909959 Crops cut for hay - total value ($) 0 13,475 * 0 0 13,4751918158 Nurseries - value ($) 1,450,250 337,030 * 0 2,154,940 3,942,220 51918358 Cut flowers - value ($) 53,896 * 512,008 * 0 3,299,608 3,865,512 6

1918558Nurseries and flowers and turf - total value ($) 1,504,146 8,963,198 0 5,697,973 16,165,317

3409958 All other vegetables for seed - value ($) 0 0 0 26,796 26,7963505958 Potatoes - total value ($) 0 0 0 1,196,744 1,196,7443600658 Asparagus - value ($) 0 0 0 2,915,448 2,915,448 11

3601258French and Runner beans (fresh market) - value ($) 6,562 * 0 0 0 6,562

3601358 French and Runner beans - total value ($) 6,562 * 0 0 0 6,5623601558 Beetroot - value ($) 0 0 0 81,067 81,0673601758 Broccoli - value ($) 0 22,321 0 1,097,706 1,120,0273601858 Brussels sprouts - value ($) 91,088 * 350,027 * 0 837,051 1,278,166 123601958 Cabbages- value ($) 0 261,203 0 826,983 * 1,088,1863602058 Chinese cabbage- value ($) 0 0 0 272,094 272,094

3602158Capsicum and chillies and peppers - value ($) 0 0 0 5,400 * 5,400

3602458 Carrots - value ($) 0 0 0 963,333 963,3333602758 Cauliflowers - total value ($) 0 0 0 428,760 * 428,7603602958 Celery - value ($) 0 142,830 0 14,235,525 14,378,355 23603258 Cucumbers - value ($) 0 0 0 1,883 * 1,8833604458 Leeks - value ($) 0 1,600,465 0 1,841,012 3,441,477 103604558 Lettuce - value ($) 473,683 * 0 0 3,020,033 3,493,716 93604858 Zucchini - value ($) 0 244,075 * 0 0 244,0753606058 Onions - spring (incl. shallots) - value ($) 0 0 0 896,591 896,5913606158 Onions - white and brown - value ($) 0 0 0 831,286 831,2863606358 Parsley - value ($) 0 0 0 469,150 469,1503606458 Parsnips - value ($) 30,754 * 368,040 0 6,118,796 6,517,590 43606758 Peas - green (for fresh market) - value ($) 6,283 * 0 0 0 6,283

3607158Pumpkins & triambles & trombones - etc - value ($) 0 14,319 * 0 297,643 311,962

3608058 Sweet corn - value ($) 0 0 0 214,663 214,663

3609758Vegetables for human consumption nec - value ($) 108,739 * 708,275 * 0 8,202,470 9,019,484

3610059 Total Vegetables - value ($) 717,109 * 3,711,555 0 44,753,638 49,182,3024203359 Pome fruit - total value ($) 3,654,393 0 0 259 3,654,6524203958 Apricots - value ($) 0 0 0 0 04206658 Plums - value ($) 0 2,799 * 0 0 2,7994206858 Plums and Prunes - value ($) 0 2,799 * 0 0 2,7994207759 Stone fruit - total value ($) 0 2,799 * 0 0 2,7994210059 Orchard fruit - total value ($) 3,654,393 2,799 * 0 259 3,657,4514300958 Blueberries - value ($) 0 0 0 0 04309359 Total fruit excluding grapes - value ($) 3,654,393 2,799 * 0 259 3,657,4514523058 Apples - value ($) 3,586,748 0 0 259 3,587,0074617058 Pears excluding Nashi - value ($) 67,645 0 0 0 67,6456300457 Wool - Other - value ($) 0 42 0 405 4476300458 Wool - Shorn - value ($) 0 662 0 5,496 6,1586300459 Wool - Total - value ($) 0 704 0 5,901 6,6057002058 Milk - value ($) 0 0 0 3,449,091 3,449,091 97701058 Sheep and lambs slaughtered - value ($) 0 0 0 6,988 6,9887704558 Cattle and calves slaughtered - value ($) 774,314 176,909 28,654 2,542,980 3,522,857 7

7705558 Pigs slaughtered - value ($) 0 0 0 87,713 87,7138006658 Poultry slaughtered - total value ($) 0 16,440,462 0 9,614,971 26,055,433 1

8007058Eggs produced for human consumption - value ($) 0 0 0 6,146,430 6,146,430 5

8504758 Honey - value ($) 36,193 0 0 4,230 40,4238504958 Beeswax - value ($) 980 0 0 540 1,5208505058 Honey and Beeswax - total value ($) 37,173 0 0 4,770 41,9439009959 Total value of fruit - ($) 3,654,393 2,799 * 0 259 3,657,451

9011959Total value of crops (excluding pastures & grasses) - ($) 5,875,648 12,691,027 0 50,902,950 69,469,625

9013959 Total value of crops - ($) 5,956,439 12,691,027 0 51,604,157 70,251,623

9015959Total value of livestock slaughterings - ($) 774,314 16,617,371 28,654 12,252,652 29,672,991

9017959 Total value of livestock products - ($) 37,173 704 0 9,606,192 9,644,0699019959 Total value of agriculture - ($) 6,767,926 29,309,102 28,654 73,463,001 109,568,683

Notesn.p. not available for publication

*This estimate has a relative standard error between 25% and 50% and should beused with caution

**Estimate has a relative standard error greater than 50%, it is too unreliablefor general use

Agricultural Census: Agricultural Commodities, SLA Estimates, Year Ending 30 June 2001Casey

11Casey (Total)

Description Estimate (Number)0100101 Total area of holding (ha) 144220100111 AOH derived 124561005101 Pure lucerne cut for hay - area (ha) 01005102 Pure lucerne cut for hay - production (t) 01008101 Other pastures cut for hay (sown or native) - area (ha) 14621008102 Other pastures cut for hay (sown or native) - production (t) 56541008701 Pastures cut for hay - total area (ha) 14621008702 Pastures cut for hay - total production (t) 56543503101 Potatoes (early crop) - area (ha) 193503102 Potatoes (early crop) - production (t) 5863503601 Potatoes (main crop) - area (ha) 893503602 Potatoes (main crop) - production (t) 24833505901 Potatoes - Total area (ha) 1083505902 Potatoes - Total production (t) 30693600601 Asparagus - total area (ha) 1233600602 Asparagus - production (t) 5873601101 French and runner beans (processing) - area (ha) 03601102 French and runner beans (processing) - production (kg) 03601201 French and runner beans (fresh market) - area (ha) 13601202 French and runner beans (fresh market) - production (kg) 26493601311 French and runner beans - total area (ha) 13601312 French and runner beans - total production (kg) 26493601501 Beetroot - area (ha) 253601502 Beetroot - production (t) 3953601701 Broccoli - area (ha) 763601702 Broccoli - production (kg) 6422913601801 Brussels sprouts - area (ha) 523601802 Brussels sprouts - production (kg) 7537693601901 Cabbages - area (ha) 753601902 Cabbages - production (t) 24913601911 Brussels sprouts and cabbages - total area (ha) 1273601912 Brussels sprouts and cabbages - total production (t) 32453602001 Chinese cabbage (incl. bok choy and wong bok) - area (ha) 243602002 Chinese cabbage (incl. bok choy and wong bok) - production (kg) 3769663602101 Capsicum chillies and peppers - area (ha) 23602102 Capsicum chillies and peppers - production (kg) 26523602401 Carrots - area (ha) 563602402 Carrots - production (t) 14713602701 Cauliflower - area (ha) 363602702 Cauliflower - production (t) 6983602901 Celery - area (ha) 4123602902 Celery - production (kg) 226502123603201 Cucumbers - area (ha) 13603202 Cucumbers - production (kg) 21703604401 Leeks - area (ha) 1303604402 Leeks - production (kg) 2042783

3604501 Lettuce - area (ha) 3373604502 Lettuce - production (t) 44933604701 Marrows and squashes - area (ha) 03604702 Marrows and squashes - production (kg) 03604801 Zucchini - area (ha) 63604802 Zucchini - production (kg) 1720173604911 Marrows squashes and zucchinis - area (ha) 63604912 Marrows squashes and zucchinis - production (kg) 1720173605101 Melons - rock and cantaloupe - area (ha) 03605102 Melons - rock and cantaloupe - production (t) 03605201 Melons - watermelons - area (ha) 03605202 Melons - watermelons - production (t) 03605301 Melons - other - area (ha) 03605302 Melons - other - production (t) 03605801 Mushrooms - area (ha) 03605802 Mushrooms - production (kg) 03605803 Mushrooms - area (sq. metres) 03606001 Onions - spring (incl. shallots) - area (ha) 1493606002 Onions - spring (incl. shallots) - production (kg) 5883143606101 Onions - white and brown - area (ha) 323606102 Onions - white and brown - production (t) 16603606301 Parsley - area (ha) 533606302 Parsley - production (kg) 1360643606401 Parsnips - area (ha) 1433606402 Parsnips - production (t) 51713606601 Peas - green (for processing) - area (ha) 03606602 Peas - green (for processing) - production - (shelled weight) (kg) 03606701 Peas - green (for fresh market) - area (ha) 53606702 Peas - green (for fresh market) - production (pod weight) (kg) 24363606811 Peas - green - total area (ha) 53606812 Peas - green - total production (pod weight) (kg) 24363606901 Peas - snow - area (ha) 03606902 Peas - snow - production (kg) 03607101 Pumpkins triambles & trombones - etc. - area (ha) 343607102 Pumpkins triambles & trombones - etc. - production (t) 5323608001 Sweet corn - area (ha) 213608002 Sweet corn - production (t) 1483608401 Tomatoes (processing) - area (ha) 03608402 Tomatoes (processing) - production (t) 03608501 Tomatoes (fresh market) - area (ha) 03608502 Tomatoes (fresh market) - production (t) 03608811 Tomatoes - total area (ha) 03608812 Tomatoes - total production (t) 03608901 Swedes - area (ha) 03608902 Swedes - production (t) 03609511 Vegetables for human consumption - total area (ha) 22083609701 All other vegetables for human consumption - area (ha) 3074203901 Apricots - trees under 6 years - number (n) 04203902 Apricots - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 124203903 Apricots - production (fresh weight) (kg) 04203915 Apricots - total trees - number (n) 12

4204301 Cherries - trees under 6 years - number (n) 04204302 Cherries - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 04204303 Cherries - production (kg) 04204315 Cherries - total trees - number (n) 04205501 Nectarines - trees 6 years and under - number (n) 04205502 Nectarines - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 04205503 Nectarines - production (kg) 04205515 Nectarines - total trees - number (n) 04205701 Olives - trees under 6 years - number (n) 04205702 Olives - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 04205703 Olives - production (kg) 04205715 Olives - total trees - number (n) 04206001 Peaches (processing) - trees under 6 years - number (n) 04206002 Peaches (processing) - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 04206003 Peaches (processing) - production (kg) 04206015 Peaches (processing) - total trees - number (n) 04206101 Peaches (fresh market) - trees 6 years and under - number (n) 04206102 Peaches (fresh market) - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 04206103 Peaches (fresh market) - production (kg) 04206115 Peaches (fresh market) - total trees - number (n) 04206211 Peaches - trees under 6 years - number (n) 04206212 Peaches - 6 years and over - number (n) 04206213 Peaches - total production (kg) 04206215 Peaches - total trees - number (n) 04206601 Plums - trees 6 years and under - number (n) 04206602 Plums - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 1784206603 Plums - production (kg) 14624206615 Plums - total trees - number (n) 1784206701 Prunes - trees under 6 years - number (n) 04206702 Prunes - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 04206703 Prunes - production (kg) 04206715 Prunes - total trees - number (n) 04206811 Total plums and prunes - trees 6 years and under - number (n) 04206812 Total plums and prunes - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 1784206813 Total plums and prunes - total production (kg) 14624206815 Total plums and prunes - total trees - number (n) 1784300901 Blueberries - not yet bearing area (ha) 04300902 Blueberries - bearing area (ha) 14300903 Blueberries - production (kg) 04300915 Blueberries - total area (ha) 14301901 Raspberries - not yet bearing area (ha) 04301902 Raspberries - bearing area (ha) 04301903 Raspberries - production (kg) 04301915 Raspberries - total area (ha) 04302201 Strawberries - not yet bearing area (ha) 04302202 Strawberries - bearing area (ha) 04302203 Strawberries - production (kg) 04302215 Strawberries - total area (ha) 0

Note

*

This estimate has a relative standard error between 25% and 50% and should be used with caution


Number of Establishments by Industry and EVAO for Cardinia (S)

Estimated Value of Agricultural Operations ($)

ANZSIC <22,50022,500 to<50,000

50,000 to <100,000

100,000 to<150,000

150,000 to<200,000

200,000 to<350,000

350,000 to<500,000

500,000 to<1,000,000

1,000,000 to<2,000,000 >2,000,000 Total

0111 Plant Nurseries - 3 1 - 1 5 - - - 1 110112 Cut Flower and Flower Seed Growing - 4 5 6 - 1 2 3 - 1 230113 Vegetable Growing 2 5 9 7 6 19 20 21 12 3 1040114 Grape Growing 2 5 1 - - - - - - - 90115 Apple and Pear Growing 4 - 2 4 1 3 - 3 2 - 190116 Stone Fruit Growing - 1 - - - - - - - - 10117 Kiwi Fruit Growing - 1 - - - - - 1 - - 20119 Fruit Growing n.e.c. 1 - 2 - 1 - - 1 - 1 70123 Sheep-Beef CattleFarming 1 1 1 - - - - - - - 40125 Beef Cattle Farming 145 69 28 7 6 4 2 - - - 2610124 Sheep Farming 3 - - - - - - - - - 30130 Dairy Cattle Farming 5 13 26 31 27 40 14 9 1 - 1660141 Poultry Farming (Meat) - - - 1 - 2 6 9 4 1 240142 Poultry Farming (Eggs) - - 1 - - - 1 1 1 - 50151 Pig Farming - - - - - - - - - - -0152 Horse Farming 10 6 1 - 1 - - - - - 180153 Deer Farming - 1 - - - - - - - - 101 Agriculture 180 114 81 56 44 76 46 49 20 7 674


Number of Establishments by Area of Holding and Industry for Cardinia (S)

Area of Holding (ha)ANZSIC < 5 5 to <10 10 to <20 20 to <30 30 to <40 40 to <50 50 to <75 75 to <100 100 to <200 200 or more Total0111 Plant Nurseries 5 4 1 - - - - 1 - - 110112 Cut Flower and Flower Seed Gr 4 4 4 1 2 1 2 2 2 - 230113 Vegetable Growing 1 4 14 15 11 8 13 13 19 7 1040114 Grape Growing 2 1 - 2 3 - 1 - - - 90115 Apple and Pear Growing - 4 2 4 2 2 4 - - - 190116 Stone Fruit Growing - - 1 - - - - - - - 10117 Kiwi Fruit Growing - - - 1 - - - - 1 - 20119 Fruit Growing n.e.c. - 2 - 1 - 1 1 - 1 - 70123 Sheep-Beef Cattle Farming - - - - - - 1 - 3 - 40125 Beef Cattle Farming 4 3 15 37 26 35 60 17 45 19 2610124 Sheep Farming - - 1 - - 1 - - - - 30130 Dairy Cattle Farming 3 1 - 7 8 12 23 32 61 19 1660141 Poultry Farming (Meat) 4 1 9 5 - 2 - - 2 - 240142 Poultry Farming (Eggs) - 1 - 1 1 1 - - - - 50151 Pig Farming - - - - - - - - - - -0152 Horse Farming - 4 7 - 3 1 - - 3 - 180153 Deer Farming - - - - - - - 1 - - 101 Agriculture 25 29 56 75 58 72 107 68 139 46 674

Value of Agricultural Commodities Produced by SLA, 2000-01 Cardinia. 205801452 205801453 205801454 10

Cardinia (S) North

Cardinia (S) - Pakenham

Cardinia (S) - South

Cardinia -Total

Commodity description Value ($)




Value Annot-ations

0100158 Total area of holding - VACP (ha) 18,092 13,747 22,250 54,089

1005158Pure lucerne pastures cut for hay - value ($) 29,022 * 15,498 * 178,878 * 223,398

1008158 Other pastures cut for hay - value ($) 1,616,992 1,668,169 2,487,343 5,772,504 81008759 Pastures cut for hay - total value ($) 1,646,014 1,683,667 2,666,221 5,995,9021100658 Pasture seed - value ($) 2,582 * 0 38,442 * 41,0241110059 Pasture seed - total value ($) 2,582 * 0 38,442 * 41,0241110159 Pastures and grasses - total value ($) 1,648,596 1,683,667 2,704,663 6,036,9261500158 Wheat for grain - value ($) 59,656 * 96,639 * 94,126 * 250,4211501758 Barley for grain - value ($) 26,429 * 84,810 * 0 111,2391509259 Cereals for grain - total value ($) 86,085 * 181,449 * 94,126 * 361,6601510858 Cereals cut for hay - value ($) 0 41,607 * 0 41,6071806959 Oilseeds -total value ($) 27,927 * 5,314 * 0 33,2411809059 Legumes for grain - total value($) 35,160 * 82,860 * 0 118,0201809158 Field peas for grain - value ($) 0 7,275 * 0 7,2751900958 Canola - value ($) 27,927 * 5,314 * 0 33,2411905258 Lentils - value ($) 28,213 * 75,585 * 0 103,798

1907658Faba beans (incl.tick and horse and broad - value ($) 6,947 * 0 0 6,947

1908558 Cultivated turf - value ($) 0 2,806,147 0 2,806,147 111909358 Other crops cut for hay - value ($) 0 n.p. ** 0 90,1141909857 Other crops - value ($) 63,895 * 6,251 * 159,539 * 229,6851909959 Crops cut for hay - total value ($) 0 131,721 * 0 131,7211918158 Nurseries - value ($) 2,420,480 132,770 * 367,670 * 2,920,920 101918358 Cut flowers - value ($) 4,832,639 697,649 1,140,790 * 6,671,078 6

1918558Nurseries and flowers and turf - total value ($) 7,253,119 3,636,566 1,508,460 * 12,398,145

3403158 Potatoes for seed - value ($) 712,147 0 51,081 * 763,228

3409958 All other vegetables for seed - value ($) 0 0 30,815 * 30,8153505958 Potatoes - total value ($) 16,691,836 979,253 * 895,072 18,566,161 53600658 Asparagus - value ($) 4,407,950 781,527 * 24,237,765 29,427,242 3

3601258French and Runner beans (fresh market) - value ($) 0 0 37,155 37,155

3601358 French and Runner beans - total value ($) 0 0 37,155 37,1553601558 Beetroot - value ($) 12,508 * 0 21,422 * 33,9303601758 Broccoli - value ($) 68,251 * 0 874 69,1253601958 Cabbages- value ($) 0 0 347,863 * 347,8633602058 Chinese cabbage- value ($) 0 0 433 433

3602158Capsicum and chillies and peppers - value ($) 524,602 0 12,491 537,093

3602458 Carrots - value ($) 0 0 1,441 * 1,4413602758 Cauliflowers - total value ($) 0 0 80,024 * 80,0243604458 Leeks - value ($) 0 0 589,659 * 589,6593604558 Lettuce - value ($) 24,652 * 0 0 24,6523604858 Zucchini - value ($) 21,278 * 0 29,387 * 50,6653606058 Onions - spring (incl. shallots) - value ($) 0 0 102,223 * 102,2233606158 Onions - white and brown - value ($) 0 0 113,526 113,5263606358 Parsley - value ($) 0 0 77,092 * 77,092

3607158Pumpkins & triambles & trombones - etc - value ($) 0 0 126,111 126,111

3608058 Sweet corn - value ($) 30,832 * 265,615 * 523,268 819,7153608458 Tomatoes (processing) - value ($) 0 3,277 * 0 3,2773608558 Tomatoes (fresh market) - value ($) 0 0 54,826 * 54,8263608858 Tomatoes - total value ($) 0 3,277 * 54,826 * 58,103

3609758Vegetables for human consumption nec - value ($) 2,016,085 * 0 1,005,104 * 3,021,189

3610059 Total Vegetables - value ($) 23,797,994 2,029,672 28,255,736 54,083,4024200258 Oranges - navel - value ($) 0 115,913 * 0 115,9134200758 Oranges - total value ($) 0 115,913 * 0 115,9134201058 Grapefruit - value ($) 0 0 0 04201258 Lemons and limes - value ($) 18,055 * 16,305 48 * 34,4084201859 Citrus fruit - total value ($) 18,055 * 132,218 * 48 * 150,3214203359 Pome fruit - total value ($) 2,366,496 4,049,662 0 6,416,1584203958 Apricots - value ($) 7,302 * 165 * 0 7,4674204358 Cherries - value ($) 0 0 0 04205558 Nectarines - value ($) 22,784 * 268 * 0 23,052

4205758 Olives - value ($) 0 0 0 04206158 Peaches (fresh market) - value ($) 52,965 * 0 0 52,9654206258 Peaches - value ($) 52,965 * 0 0 52,9654206658 Plums - value ($) 20,393 * 4,419 0 24,8124206858 Plums and Prunes - value ($) 20,393 * 4,419 0 24,8124207759 Stone fruit - total value ($) 103,444 4,852 0 108,2964209758 Other nuts - value ($) 34,084 * 0 0 34,0844209959 Orchard fruit - other & nuts - total value ($) 34,084 * 0 0 34,0844210059 Orchard fruit - total value ($) 2,522,079 4,186,732 48 * 6,708,8594300958 Blueberries - value ($) 105,617 * 198,034 * 0 303,6514301958 Raspberries - value ($) 0 72,277 * 0 72,2774302258 Strawberries - value ($) 1,813,205 * 0 0 1,813,205 124305058 Kiwi fruit - value ($) 748,216 0 0 748,2164307259 Small and berry and tropical fruit - value ($) 2,667,038 270,311 * 0 2,937,349 94309359 Total fruit excluding grapes - value ($) 5,189,117 4,457,043 48 * 9,646,2084523058 Apples - value ($) 2,340,818 3,924,574 0 6,265,392 74613058 Pears - Nashi - value ($) 5,939 34,613 0 40,5524617058 Pears excluding Nashi - value ($) 19,739 90,475 0 110,2145110053 Grapes - Wine - value ($) 74,124 52,628 0 126,7525110058 Grapes - total value ($) 74,124 52,628 0 126,7526300457 Wool - Other - value ($) 1,770 2,728 1,268 5,7666300458 Wool - Shorn - value ($) 20,272 26,181 17,691 64,1446300459 Wool - Total - value ($) 22,042 28,909 18,959 69,9107002058 Milk - value ($) 10,097,390 7,548,596 16,194,361 33,840,347 27701058 Sheep and lambs slaughtered - value ($) 50,370 52,029 34,381 136,7807704558 Cattle and calves slaughtered - value ($) 5,168,257 5,590,015 9,102,779 19,861,051 47705558 Pigs slaughtered - value ($) 8,975 0 0 8,9757707458 Other livestock slaughtered nec - value ($) 73,453 2,812 8,582 84,8478006658 Poultry slaughtered - total value ($) 15,195,895 6,555,912 12,206,289 33,958,096 1

8007058Eggs produced for human consumption - value ($) 165,005 404,864 * 601,779 * 1,171,648

9009959 Total value of fruit - ($) 5,263,241 4,509,671 48 * 9,772,960

9011959Total value of crops (excluding pastures & grasses) - ($) 37,239,568 10,583,504 30,099,805 77,922,877

9013959 Total value of crops - ($) 38,888,164 12,267,171 32,804,468 83,959,8039015959 Total value of livestock slaughterings - ($) 20,496,950 12,200,768 21,352,031 54,049,7499017959 Total value of livestock products - ($) 10,284,437 7,982,369 16,815,099 35,081,9059019959 Total value of agriculture - ($) 69,669,551 32,450,308 70,971,598 173,091,457

Notesn.p. not available for publication

*This estimate has a relative standard error between 25% and 50% and should beused with caution

**Estimate has a relative standard error greater than 50%, it is too unreliablefor general use

Agricultural Census: Agricultural Commodities, SLA Estimates, Year Ending 30 June 2001Cardinia.

DescriptionEstimate (Number)

0100101 Total area of holding (ha) 540900100111 AOH derived 535221005101 Pure lucerne cut for hay - area (ha) 2951005102 Pure lucerne cut for hay - production (t) 12341008101 Other pastures cut for hay (sown or native) - area (ha) 83971008102 Other pastures cut for hay (sown or native) - production(t) 417341008701 Pastures cut for hay - total area (ha) 86921008702 Pastures cut for hay - total production (t) 429673503101 Potatoes (early crop) - area (ha) 823503102 Potatoes (early crop) - production (t) 19043503601 Potatoes (main crop) - area (ha) 15403503602 Potatoes (main crop) - production (t) 457133505901 Potatoes - Total area (ha) 16223505902 Potatoes - Total production (t) 476173600601 Asparagus - total area (ha) 8713600602 Asparagus - production (t) 59233601101 French and runner beans (processing) - area (ha) 03601102 French and runner beans (processing) - production (kg) 03601201 French and runner beans (fresh market) - area (ha) 23601202 French and runner beans (fresh market) - production (kg) 150003601311 French and runner beans - total area (ha) 23601312 French and runner beans - total production (kg) 150003601501 Beetroot - area (ha) 133601502 Beetroot - production (t) 1653601701 Broccoli - area (ha) 73601702 Broccoli - production (kg) 396403601801 Brussels sprouts - area (ha) 03601802 Brussels sprouts - production (kg) 03601901 Cabbages - area (ha) 273601902 Cabbages - production (t) 7963601911 Brussels sprouts and cabbages - total area (ha) 273601912 Brussels sprouts and cabbages - total production (t) 7963602001 Chinese cabbage (incl. bok choy and wong bok) - area (ha) 03602002 Chinese cabbage (incl. bok choy and wong bok) - production (kg) 6003602101 Capsicum chillies and peppers - area (ha) 203602102 Capsicum chillies and peppers - production (kg) 2637853602401 Carrots - area (ha) 23602402 Carrots - production (t) 23602701 Cauliflower - area (ha) 143602702 Cauliflower - production (t) 1303602901 Celery - area (ha) 03602902 Celery - production (kg) 03603201 Cucumbers - area (ha) 03603202 Cucumbers - production (kg) 03604401 Leeks - area (ha) 183604402 Leeks - production (kg) 350009

3604501 Lettuce - area (ha) 43604502 Lettuce - production (t) 323604701 Marrows and squashes - area (ha) 03604702 Marrows and squashes - production (kg) 03604801 Zucchini - area (ha) 213604802 Zucchini - production (kg) 357073604911 Marrows squashes and zucchinis - area (ha) 213604912 Marrows squashes and zucchinis - production (kg) 357073605101 Melons - rock and cantaloupe - area (ha) 03605102 Melons - rock and cantaloupe - production (t) 03605201 Melons - watermelons - area (ha) 03605202 Melons - watermelons - production (t) 03605301 Melons - other - area (ha) 03605302 Melons - other - production (t) 03605801 Mushrooms - area (ha) 03605802 Mushrooms - production (kg) 03605803 Mushrooms - area (sq. metres) 03606001 Onions - spring (incl. shallots) - area (ha) 63606002 Onions - spring (incl. shallots) - production (kg) 670753606101 Onions - white and brown - area (ha) 63606102 Onions - white and brown - production (t) 2273606301 Parsley - area (ha) 63606302 Parsley - production (kg) 223583606401 Parsnips - area (ha) 03606402 Parsnips - production (t) 03606601 Peas - green (for processing) - area (ha) 03606602 Peas - green (for processing) - production - (shelled weight) (kg) 03606701 Peas - green (for fresh market) - area (ha) 03606702 Peas - green (for fresh market) - production (pod weight) (kg) 03606811 Peas - green - total area (ha) 03606812 Peas - green - total production (pod weight) (kg) 03606901 Peas - snow - area (ha) 03606902 Peas - snow - production (kg) 03607101 Pumpkins triambles & trombones - etc. - area (ha) 163607102 Pumpkins triambles & trombones - etc. - production (t) 2153608001 Sweet corn - area (ha) 1043608002 Sweet corn - production (t) 5663608401 Tomatoes (processing) - area (ha) 13608402 Tomatoes (processing) - production (t) 333608501 Tomatoes (fresh market) - area (ha) 13608502 Tomatoes (fresh market) - production (t) 403608811 Tomatoes - total area (ha) 23608812 Tomatoes - total production (t) 733608901 Swedes - area (ha) 03608902 Swedes - production (t) 03609511 Vegetables for human consumption - total area (ha) 28633609701 All other vegetables for human consumption - area (ha) 1034203901 Apricots - trees under 6 years - number (n) 04203902 Apricots - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 1484203903 Apricots - production (fresh weight) (kg) 61834203915 Apricots - total trees - number (n) 1484204301 Cherries - trees under 6 years - number (n) 2494204302 Cherries - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 14944204303 Cherries - production (kg) 04204315 Cherries - total trees - number (n) 1743

4205501 Nectarines - trees 6 years and under - number (n) 2684205502 Nectarines - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 3024205503 Nectarines - production (kg) 112574205515 Nectarines - total trees - number (n) 5704205701 Olives - trees under 6 years - number (n) 53194205702 Olives - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 04205703 Olives - production (kg) 04205715 Olives - total trees - number (n) 53194206001 Peaches (processing) - trees under 6 years - number (n) 04206002 Peaches (processing) - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 04206003 Peaches (processing) - production (kg) 04206015 Peaches (processing) - total trees - number (n) 04206101 Peaches (fresh market) - trees 6 years and under - number (n) 1284206102 Peaches (fresh market) - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 6404206103 Peaches (fresh market) - production (kg) 231004206115 Peaches (fresh market) - total trees - number (n) 7684206211 Peaches - trees under 6 years - number (n) 1284206212 Peaches - 6 years and over - number (n) 6404206213 Peaches - total production (kg) 231004206215 Peaches - total trees - number (n) 7684206601 Plums - trees 6 years and under - number (n) 604206602 Plums - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 8964206603 Plums - production (kg) 129584206615 Plums - total trees - number (n) 9564206701 Prunes - trees under 6 years - number (n) 04206702 Prunes - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 04206703 Prunes - production (kg) 04206715 Prunes - total trees - number (n) 04206811 Total plums and prunes - trees 6 years and under - number (n) 604206812 Total plums and prunes - trees 6 years and over - number (n) 8964206813 Total plums and prunes - total production (kg) 129584206815 Total plums and prunes - total trees - number (n) 9564300901 Blueberries - not yet bearing area (ha) 04300902 Blueberries - bearing area (ha) 24300903 Blueberries - production (kg) 143164300915 Blueberries - total area (ha) 24301901 Raspberries - not yet bearing area (ha) 04301902 Raspberries - bearing area (ha) 44301903 Raspberries - production (kg) 31124301915 Raspberries - total area (ha) 44302201 Strawberries - not yet bearing area (ha) 274302202 Strawberries - bearing area (ha) 284302203 Strawberries - production (kg) 3012724302215 Strawberries - total area (ha) 55

Note

*This estimate has a relative standard error between 25% and 50% and should be used with caution

Documents

Casey and Cardinia Regional Agricultural Audit and Action … · 2012. 12. 12. · Casey and $173,091,457 for Cardinia giving an annual value of $282,660,140 for the region (refer