Download FINAL REPORT Queensland Farmers Federation Climate Change

QFF Climate Change Project – Final Report
Queensland Farmers Federation Climate Change Project
IMPROVING THE CAPACITY OF
QUEENSLAND
INTENSIVE AGRICULTURE TO MANAGE
CLIMATE CHANGE
June 2008
Prepared by Adam Knapp
and Peter Perkins
2
Contents
Forward .............................................................................................................................. 6
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 8
1.
Introduction................................................................................................................. 12
1.1 Background on industry situation prior to project ................................................ 12
1.1.1 Sugar ...................................................................................................................... 13
1.1.2 Horticulture .............................................................................................................. 14
1.1.3 Nursery and Garden ................................................................................................ 14
1.1.4 Dairy ........................................................................................................................ 14
1.1.5 Cotton...................................................................................................................... 15
1.1.6 Chicken Meat .......................................................................................................... 15
1.1.7 Aquaculture ............................................................................................................. 15
1.1.8 Irrigation .................................................................................................................. 15
1.1.9 Climate Change Project ........................................................................................... 16
1.1.10 Climate Variability .................................................................................................. 17
1.1.11 Sustainable Agriculture and FMS .......................................................................... 18
1.2 Industry’s motivations for tackling Climate Change .............................................. 19
1.2.1 Political landscape of climate change in Australia .................................................... 20
1.2.2 Current political structure surrounding climate change in the QLD
Government from an Agricultural perspective ................................................................... 21
1.2.3 Current political structure surrounding climate change in the Federal
Government from an Agricultural perspective ................................................................... 24
1.2.4 Agriculture sectors response ................................................................................... 27
1.2.5 Specific requirements for the QFF family of interest groups..................................... 28
2. Project Summary ........................................................................................................... 29
2.1 Objectives ................................................................................................................. 29
2.2 Outputs ..................................................................................................................... 30
2.4 Project Scope ........................................................................................................... 30
2.5 Methodologies .......................................................................................................... 31
3. Climate Change for Queensland Intensive Agriculture production regions .............. 35
3.1 Changing conditions for Queensland agricultural production ............................. 35
3.2 Climate Change Predictions for Intensive Agricultural regions............................ 36
3.3 Ongoing Climate detail and scenarios .................................................................... 43
3
4. Climate Change Impacts – common issues ................................................................. 44
4.1 Impacts associated with other large-scale external drivers .................................. 44
5. Risks and Opportunities Assessment .......................................................................... 44
5.1 Adaption .................................................................................................................... 46
5.2 Production Risks – Tipping Points .......................................................................... 47
5.3 Mitigation Options .................................................................................................... 49
5.4 Summary ................................................................................................................... 51
6. Queensland Intensive Agriculture FMS Adaption’s to Climate Change ..................... 52
6.1 Sugar ...................................................................................................................... 52
6.2 Horticulture ......................................................................................................... 60
6.3 Production Nursery ........................................................................................... 65
6.4 Dairy ....................................................................................................................... 72
6.5 Cotton .................................................................................................................... 79
6.6 Prawn Farmers ................................................................................................... 85
6.7 Chicken Meat ....................................................................................................... 86
6.8 Irrigators .............................................................................................................. 88
6.9 Agribusiness, Banks and Insurance............................................................ 94
7. Opportunities to Enhance Energy Efficiency and Minimise GHG in
Queensland’s Intensive Agricultural Sector .................................................................... 96
8. Climate Communication Strategy ................................................................................. 98
8.1 Masters of Climate – Land and Water Australia .......................................................... 98
8.2 QLD Regional Climate Drivers and Scenarios ............................................................ 98
9. Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 100
9.1 Climate Data............................................................................................................. 100
9.3 Future Modelling Research....................................................................................... 101
9.3 Research and Development Agenda and CCRSPI process ...................................... 102
10. Project References..................................................................................................... 103
10.1 Meetings ................................................................................................................. 103
10.2 Useful Websites...................................................................................................... 104
10.2 Literature References ............................................................................................. 105
11. Appendices ................................................................................................................ 114
Attachment 1: Energy Efficiency Report ......................................................................... 114
4
Attachment 2: Industry Action Plans ............................................................................... 114
Attachment 3: Fact Sheets ............................................................................................. 114
Attachment 4: Literature Review..................................................................................... 114
Attachment 5: Expert Panel Minutes .............................................................................. 114
Attachment 6: Climate Adaption for Intensive Agriculture Historical Weather Data
and Trends ..................................................................................................................... 114
5
Forward
Australia’s climate is changing as a result of anthropogenic greenhouse emissions and
further changes are inevitable regardless of efforts to reduce global emissions. For
agriculture, the measured and projected increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide will
continue to drive changes in climate, and in the functioning of terrestrial and aquatic
ecosystems. Farmers and rural communities have successfully adapted to, day-to-day, and
year-to-year variations in climate over many decades, and understand the risks to
productivity and sustainability posed by climate variability, over relatively short timeframes.
Climate change however, adds substantial uncertainty and complexity to the management of
farming systems, as temperatures in Australia are likely to increase by 1-5C by 2070, and
rainfall - particularly in southern Australia – is likely to decrease. All regions, north and south,
will be subject to more extreme weather events. Agriculture will need to adapt to these
challenges in climate, and the additional risks they pose, just as it has successfully adapted
to other significant challenges in the past. However, without urgent attention to agricultural
adaptation there will be significant impacts on productivity, profitability and sustainability in
many key industries, both extensive and intensive.
This project, conducted by the Queensland Farmers’ Federation (QFF), and supported by the
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) National Agriculture and Climate
Change Action Plan, is therefore both a timely, and very important initiative in helping the
intensive agricultural industries of Queensland, to effectively and efficiently adapt to current
and future changes in climate for key production areas of the State. The key elements of this
project can be generally described under the following headings:




Development of detailed climate scenarios for key production areas
Risks and opportunities assessment for each intensive industry
Risk management and adaptation
Capacity building, education and communication
All elements have been tackled in a highly professional and integrated manner. A very well
qualified and knowledgeable Expert Panel of scientists used a targeted selection of climate
models, in conjunction with studies of historical climate data, to provide detailed future
climate scenarios for each of the regions where the key intensive agricultural industries are
located. Importantly, a highly participatory process involving the scientists, the Project
Steering Committee, and key industry personnel were used to ensure that this enhanced
climate information addressed the highest priority needs for each industry. Similarly, an
excellent participatory process was used to help each industry identify the potential risks and
opportunities arising from the projected changes in various climate parameters. This
dialogue between the ‘ground level practitioners’, the climate scientists and other advisers
was totally aligned with international best practice, and was a credit to the participants. Each
of the intensive industries involved in the project has used the project data to inform not only
its risks and opportunities assessment, but also as a basis for the industry to identify and
implement adaptation strategies focussed on future productivity, profitability and
sustainability. Given the relatively short duration of this project, more work will be required
on these adaptation strategies, and also on the capacity building, education and
communication necessary to ensure that the strategies identified can be effectively and
efficiently adopted in a timely manner, by all industry stakeholders.
6
Overall, this project has been an excellent example of what is required to help agricultural
industries in Australia adapt to climate change. It has set a high standard in its integration of
first-class scientific outputs, with comprehensive industry knowledge and expertise to help
plot future pathways for each of the intensive industries. As a result, all participants are in a
much better position to adapt to climate change than they were before the project
commenced. This exemplary approach needs to be repeated for other industries in
Queensland, and in other regions of Australia.
Professor Timothy G. Reeves
Timothy G. Reeves & Assoc. Pty. Ltd.
7
Executive Summary
Adaptation to climate change is the biggest challenge facing Australian agriculture in the next
20 to 30 years. The impacts of climate change are being felt with hotter temperatures –
January 2006 was the hottest month in Queensland’s recorded history - and less frequent
rainfall. Like all changes, a changing climate brings both risks and opportunities. Those who
understand the nature and implications of the change better, can adapt more effectively to
avoid the risks and seize the opportunities, by identifying risks, implementing management
practices and monitoring performance.
As part of the Australian Government’s National Agriculture and Climate Change Action Plan,
Queensland Farmers’ Federation (QFF) undertook a strategic climate change project that
was industry-led and focused on the needs of Queensland’s intensive agriculture. The
project particularly investigated the role of risk management tools in industry Farm
Management Programs as a means of farmers adapting to climate change. The industries
involved in the project included cropping (sugar cane and cotton), horticulture (tree, perennial
and seasonal crops, nursery and flower production) and intensive livestock (dairy,
aquaculture and meat chicken). The project commenced in November 2007 and completed
June 2008.
The “Climate change risks and opportunities assessment for Queensland’s intensive
agriculture sector” activity was part of the overall project. QFF invited a number of key
scientists and agri-business analysts to participate on an “Expert Panel” and assist QFF to
conduct a Risks and Opportunities Assessment which:
 Identified regions and commodities most at risk, and what factors drive the risks
 Provided a preliminary 2nd level analysis of broader implications of identified risks
(e.g. for supply chains, markets, regional development, banking/insurance etc)
 Identified opportunities and possible amelioration strategies for Queensland’s
intensive agriculture (e.g. new varieties, new crops, new practices, new locations)
 Scoped requirements and adaptation information gaps (e.g. new varieties, new
crops, new practices) in shorter term climate projections and regional/industry
scenarios and make recommendations for future investment
 Developed a prototype action plan to guide industries in their planning roles
The project has developed far-reaching science capabilities in regards to climate change
scenario development and linkages between those developments and risk management for
intensive agricultural industries in Queensland.
The Queensland Farmers’ Federation recognises that changes in Queensland’s climate are
happening and will continue to do so. Responding to and managing for a changing climate is
fundamentally a responsibility of growers and rural industries but coherent government policy
and targeted responsive scientific research is needed to support rural industries and growers
address and respond to risks arising from a changing climate, while at the same time
reducing their greenhouse gas production. QFF strongly believes that further Research and
Development and adaptation program design needs to be specifically designed to promote
direct interaction between researchers and farmers to improve communication as this
process was unique to the project design and is critical in future research. To build on the
investment and achievements, future recommendations include:
Climate Data
Of necessity the QFF Climate Change Project had to conduct its activities in a brief eightmonth window that often limited investigations and assessments. Nonetheless utilizing the
unique Expert Panel and industry workshops, considerable progress has been made in
8
identifying what is being done to help Queensland’s intensive agricultural industries manage
the effects of climate variability and the impacts of climate change.
In progressing investigations into climate risks in the future, it became clear that this type of
work is very much a “work-in-progress” and it is vital that the underlying climate science
research, where possible should be more closely aligned to the decision-making needs of
farm families and agribusinesses. A major “sticking point” in the industry workshops
conducted during this project was the clear need for more disaggregated climate data and
more climate parameters to match those on-ground weather events that may impact the
output of intensive farming operations.
While some examples of specific climate information required by industry groups are
reported elsewhere in Section 6, as a group the intensive agriculture industries developed a
wish list of climate parameters that need to be disaggregated to the regional Queensland
level and updated periodically as the climate science capability is further refined. This is the
detailed climate data that is required to assist farm decision-making;
 Rainfall – annual and seasonal in percentage change and mm amounts
 Rainfall incidences and intensities, e.g. number of consecutive dry days (<2 mm),
number of rain days (>10mm), annual number of electrical storms, cyclonic lows,
 Temperature – annual and seasonal average change percentage and degrees
 Temperature – monthly minimums and maximums % change and degrees
 Frosts – average number frost free days, average timing first & last frost
(<2 deg)
 Evaporation – annual and seasonal percentage change and mm amounts
 Heat stress days – average number days + 30 and + 35 degrees
 Stream flow, runoff yields, modelled water allocations.
The industry project participants acknowledged that there may be an accuracy trade-off with
some of these climate scenarios but felt an effort should be made to bring the data into a
mode where it could be used. It is therefore a strong recommendation of this project that
the science effort be continued in this direction.
Climate Change Data
Aside from the discussion above, project participants also made some observations that
might help climate scientists develop more useful analyses and presentation of climate
change information in the future. In particular, a number of participants noted that graphic
presentations on their own are often difficult to interpret, or at least obtain the proper
perspective. So it is always useful to present tabular summary data (statistical) as well. We
thank the USQ researchers for attempting to accommodate this request in the Experimental
presentations in Section 3.
Associated with this argument, industry participants also noted their desire to have both %
change and the absolute change presented. This then led to discussion on “% change from
what?” as a major issue in interpreting climate change data. Many industry participants noted
that if climate change is already happening and trends are already evident, then shouldn’t
meteorological and climate data be compared to trend, rather than “averages”? QFF believes
this is a particularly important issue when it comes to annual rainfall, given the inter-decadal
decline for much of coastal Queensland is already happening at a significant rate of
50mm/decade or more.
There was also some debate about the usefulness or otherwise of climate change modelling
scenarios being against the thirty year average between 1961 and 1990. QFF believes that
climate scientists should review the relevance of this baseline, especially as industry
9
practitioners try to relate future scenarios to recent experiences, rather than distant past
events. While there are undoubtedly sound statistical reasons for presenting GCM outputs in
this way, farmers certainly are one interest group that like to see how models track current
climate factors before placing a strong interpretation on what they “predict” 20, 40 and 60
years hence.
Future Modelling Research
While climate change modelling output is now showing indicative shifts in rainfall on a
seasonal or, in some circumstances, monthly rainfall, a key aspect still required is provision
of daily precipitation and temperature values (maximum and minimum) that can be provided
as input into agricultural production models. These types of outputs extend to daily
evaporation rates and solar radiation rates that are critical in development of more accurate
projections for intensive agricultural production. A key aspect of developments of seasonal
climate outputs relevant to agricultural production has been the capability of the provision of
daily time-steps in rainfall/temperature radiation forecasts. However, this type of output under
climate change modelling scenarios that will actually be capable of being integrated into
agricultural systems models and decision support systems remains to be done.
Another key important aspect in climate change modelling is to determine ways of
understanding reasons for some model disagreements, especially at critical times of the year
for intensive agricultural production. In this respect, interaction with those major climate
modelling centres that have produced useful climate change scenarios under various
emission scenarios is important in order to find ways of overcoming model disagreements
(although these disagreements are being reduced in extent) in order to provide even
greater cohesiveness in climate model scenarios for Queensland intensive agriculture.
Research and Development Agenda and CCRSPI process
It is recommended that:
10

Improve national research coordination across climate variability and climate
change research at all levels of government and across all agricultural sectors
(and ideally also fisheries and forestry).

Build research capacity through targeted, research scholarships and dedicated
academic positions to undertake an increasing research agenda on agriculture
and climate change.

Further research and development into improved technologies and management
practices that reduce emissions and increase adaptation options in agriculture.

This project approach be repeated for other agricultural industries, and for other
agricultural regions of Australia.

Additional resources be provided to assist the key intensive industries in
Queensland to develop and enhance adaptation strategies and effectively
communicate these to all key stakeholders.

Additional resources be provided to assist with the capacity-building, education
and communication strategies required to help key stakeholders in the various
industries effectively and efficiently adopt climate adaptation strategies in a timely
manner.

This project report be provided to Land and Water Australia as part of the CCRSPI
process, as an outstanding example of approaches to linking policy, industry and
science in addressing the challenges of climate change.

Presentations on the project be made to key stakeholders in government
(Queensland and Federal), to AgForce and to the NFF executive focussing on the
approach taken and the results obtained.
Decision Support Tools
As a result of the USQ work and feedback at workshops, it has become clear that a new set
of decision-support tools (sometimes referred to as ‘discussion-support tool’ where the
farming community engages in discussions with advisers and scientists) be developed for
intensive industries in Queensland. Such tools need to be developed as much to assist the
scientific community in assessing the relevant decision-systems and processes needed for
these industry sectors, as for understanding within the industries themselves. A useful
reference for these aspects includes Risbey et al. (2004).
Industry Farm Management Systems also need to be constantly updated to take into
account ongoing research. This will require close and ongoing relationships between
industry bodies and rural R & D corporations, as well as continuing investment into updating
FMS programs.
As a foundation activity, this project has helped position QFF and its members to strategically
respond to climate change. It has resourced the horticulture, cane, dairy, cotton and
production nursery industries to incorporate additional climate risk management tools into
their Farm Management Systems (FMS) programs. The project has raised the opportunity of
analysing the climate change science and policy as it relates to Queensland’s intensive
agricultural industries, investigate industry awareness and attitudes, enhanced
communication and networking and started the preparation of strategic action plans.
11
QFF Climate Change Project – Final Report
1. Introduction
1.1 Background on industry situation prior to project
Features of intensive agriculture in QLD and GVP
It is convenient to categorise agriculture activities by a number of conventions including
commodity output, land use and production systems. In Queensland, an often used
convention is to differentiate between mostly coastal activities and those that take place in
the wide expanses west of the Great Dividing Range. This division also tends to correlate
with rainfall, the coast being a high rainfall zone relative to the drier inland. However,
Queensland covers a wide range of possible agro-climatic definitions ranging from the wet
tropics in the far north to the near desert conditions of the southwest channel country. Annual
rainfalls vary from over 4000mm in the Tully-Babinda region of Far North Queensland to less
than 150mm in far South West corner of the state.
Importantly, Queensland farmers have adapted well to this diversity and a wide range of
productive systems have been developed to make best use of the land and climatic
conditions. This has given rise to farming systems that can be categorised as either intensive
or extensive. The extensive farms are also referred to as broadacre or pastoral. The
Queensland Farmers’ Federation represent those in the intensive agriculture sector. As well
as being intensive land users, these farmers also make use of irrigation systems and many
operate continuous production systems producing all year round.
Unfortunately, the last seven years of drought in Queensland have had a severe impact on
primary production, particularly on intensive agricultural commodities because of the problem
of reduced irrigation water supplies and water allocations. Nonetheless, the intensive
agriculture sector remains a vital contributor to the Queensland economy and accounts for
about half the states annual $12.3 billion primary production.
Agriculture continues to be a major employer in Queensland providing 3.7 per cent of jobs or
79,400 positions in 2007. In 2002, prior to the drought taking hold 106,500 jobs were filled in
rural industries representing 6.3 per cent of the Queensland workforce. Aside from drought,
the last five years have also coincided with strong employment growth in Queensland and
now attracting and retaining employees in primary industries is a significant challenge. This is
particularly the case for those areas, mostly in central and northern Queensland that
experienced drought-breaking rains during the “La Nina” summer of 2007-08 and now need
new employees to help sustain the recovery in agriculture made possible by full water
storages and replenished aquifers.
GROSS VALUE OF QUEENSLAND AGRICULURE PRODUCTION ($m)
Commodity Group
Beef Cattle
Sheep & Wool
Dairy
Pigs
Poultry & Eggs
Fruit
Vegetables
Amenity horticulture **
Sugar Cane
Raw Cotton
Cereal Grains
Miscellaneous
Fisheries
Forestry **
All Primary Production
Meat processing
Dairy processing
Fruit & vegetable processing
Sugar milling
Cotton ginning
Grain milling
Seafood processing
Nursery services
Timber processing
Primary 1st Round Processing
2003-04
3,071
177
228
206
307
734
834
1,355
740
410
557
529
379
725
10,252
836
125
154
311
47
104
27
**
**
1,604
2004-05
3,631
170
217
235
333
777
713
1,460
917
419
474
380
335
725
10,786
977
119
147
385
48
88
24
1,787
2005-06
3,607
155
218
230
314
911
945
297
963
359
454
254
250
190
9,148
971
119
183
404
41
85
18
615
330
2,766
2006-07
3,802
165
207
237
348
1,046
803
555
1,075
122
429
283
255
200
9,527
1,022
113
182
452
14
80
18
665
347
2,893
2007-08
3,370
180
255
220
410
1,140
780
605
750
110
970
165
270
200
9,425
933
140
189
315
13
181
20
700
347
2,837
Source: DPI&F Prospects June 2008. ** not disaggregated from GVP.
In the context of a changing climate where the science indicates that Queensland will
experience reduced annual rainfall and increased average temperatures, it follows that
intensive agricultural production systems are likely to be impacted differently than the
extensive systems mainly because the former are dependent on stored water for year round
production. The increased gaps between rain events and longer dry periods within seasons
will exacerbate this. To provide a brief context for this QFF Climate Change project it is
useful to describe the principal industries participating in this study as they relate to
Queensland and its climate.
1.1.1 Sugar
Approximately 94 per cent of Australia’s sugar output comes from Queensland. Because
cane requires processing very soon after it is cut, the sugarcane industry has regional
processing centres and as such is an important regional employer for many coastal towns
and cities along 2100 km of coastline between Mossman in Far North Queensland and
Grafton in Northern New South Wales. The main cane growing regions are the wet tropics of
Far North Queensland, the dry tropical Burdekin irrigation region south of Townsville, the
semi-tropical Central region around Mackay, and the Southern region around Bundaberg and
Maryborough.
13
1.1.2 Horticulture
Queensland fruit and vegetable industry is as diverse as the State itself. Horticulture
contributes approximately 16 per cent of the gross value of the State’s primary industries and
directly employs about 25,000 people. Queensland growers produce more than 130 types of
fruit and vegetables and hundreds more in different varieties. Queensland’s production
accounts for about 30 percent of all fruit and vegetables grown in Australia including 80
percent of Australia’s tropical fruits. The industry incorporates tropical plantations, orchard
trees, vines and high rotation field crops. Much of the industry is seasonal but irrigation is
used to extend growing seasons. The principle growing regions are as follows;










Atherton Tablelands and Far North Coast
Burdekin and Charters Towers
Bowen
Mackay, Capricorn and Emerald
The Burnett
Upper Mary and Sunshine Coast
West Moreton
Chinchilla and Darling Downs
Stanthorpe and Granite Belt
St George.
1.1.3 Nursery and Garden
The amenity horticulture industry is an important part of Queensland’s agriculture sector and
provides considerable value adding services throughout the production-wholesale-retail
nursery chain. Direct employment in the industry was estimated to be at 3,350 people in
2000-01 and this is likely to be the current size of the sector, with growth earlier this decade
now offset by contraction due to drought and water restrictions adversely affecting both the
production and demand aspects of the industry. The Queensland industry is very much
affected by demand conditions in the principle southern markets of Sydney and Melbourne.
1.1.4 Dairy
The Queensland dairy industry consists of approximately 650 producers in four principal
regional areas. This is less than half the number of dairy farms that operated in 2000. While
the local industry still supplies a modest proportion to the manufactured products and export
markets, the vast majority of Queensland milk goes directly to the fresh milk market. Indeed,
because of the long drought in Queensland since 2002 and the steady increase in milk
demand it is likely that Queensland became a net importer of milk sometime in 2007 and will
remain so with production constrained by lingering drought in most of the local milk
producing regions. While a summer-winter pasture regime remains an important component
of dairy production systems, because of drought and less reliable water supplies for irrigation
most Queensland dairy farms now incorporate supplementary feeding systems similar to
beef feed lots. There are four milk processing companies operating in the state and it is
estimated that the industry currently employs about 2,300 people. The industry is located in
the following regions;




14
South East Queensland
Wide Bay, Burnett, Central Queensland
Darling Downs
Atherton Tablelands
1.1.5 Cotton
Queensland normally produces about 30 per cent of the nation’s cotton crop, but recent
drought has cut production dramatically. The Queensland cotton industry is concentrated
where normally reliable summer irrigation supplies are available. The dryland area (rain fed)
is normally an opportunity crop when conditions suit. The industry is characterised by its
significant reliance on specialist agronomic and crop monitoring services while the crop is
growing, and specialist harvesting and transport contractors for picking and delivering to
regionally based cotton gins. This feature means that a number of Queensland’s regional
centres have a significant reliance on the cotton industry. The main Queensland cotton
growing regions are;




Darling Downs
St George - Dirranbandi
Border Rivers (Goondiwindi)
Central Queensland (Emerald) and Dawson Valley.
1.1.6 Chicken Meat
The chicken meat industry is largely centred in the South East corner of Queensland and
continues to experience strong growth. As elsewhere in Australia the chicken industry is
highly integrated and is often portrayed as the success story of co-operation among all
segments of the industry. The outcome has been a remarkable achievement in growth and
consumer acceptance that perhaps only the Australian wine industry may have paralleled.
Chicken meat consumption rose from 5kgs per head in the mid 1960s to 26kgs in 1990 and
to 37kgs now. The Queensland chicken meat industry is well structured to manage drought
issues with confidence but the recent droughts have highlighted the added risks of water
availability for both drinking and cooling.
1.1.7 Aquaculture
Aquaculture prawn farming began in the 1980’s with most farms being located on flat land
adjacent to seawater sources, such as tidal rivers or creeks. Prawn farms require
temperatures above 25 C during production season, therefore 80 per cent of Australian
prawn farms are located in Queensland. Total land currently used for production is in excess
of 900 hectares and clusters of the farms can be found on the Logan River south of Brisbane
and around Mackay, Townsville and Cairns. The biggest farm is located north of Cairns at
Mossman and produces prawns all year round. The other farms produce one crop per year
and harvesting is usually completed by the end of April. It takes approximately six months for
prawns to grow to harvesting size and most of the prawns are sold domestically in Australia.
Processing is carried out immediately after harvest so most farms have their own production
facilities that include grading, cooking and freezing. Prawn farming is the main element of
Queensland’s aquaculture sector providing the equivalent of 300 full-time jobs to produce in
excess of 3,000 tonnes of product for an annual value that exceeds $45 million per annum.
1.1.8 Irrigation
Queenslanders experience a climate of extremes and wide variability. This is manifest most
clearly with rainfall and that is why Queensland has developed much of its industry around
human attempts to moderate the effects of that variance. While the principal of collecting
rainfall in the summer “wet season” to be used later in the “dry season(s)” is simple enough,
the practise has proven a great challenge because of the variability in Queensland’s rainfall
is far greater than variation between seasons. This has meant that water availability was and
still is the major determinant of industry development, be it for coal mines, tourist resorts or
farms. The variability in Queensland rainfall is reflected in stream flows, the extent of which is
illustrated in the table below;
15
Variable Stream Flows in Queensland Mgl/year
Locations
Burdekin at Clare
Thomson at Stonehenge
Burnett at Walla
Balonne at Weribone
Maximum
Discharge
50,927,000
16,735,000
10,619,000
6,215,000
Average
Discharge
11,249,000
2,895,000
1,504,000
1,462,000
Minimum
Discharge
540,000
92,000
55,000
102,000
Zero
Flow
(months)
3
6
8
6
Source: DPI State Water Conservation Strategy September 1993
The original development of irrigation in Queensland took the form bores and small weirs.
After World War Two, a number of large dams and irrigation distribution systems were
constructed to provide for irrigation agriculture and these all have become important
contributors to the state’s agriculture output. By 1990, 420,000 hectares or 14% of the total
area cropped was irrigated from either private operations (bores, farm dams or stream
diversions) or the Government irrigation schemes. At that time irrigated output amounted to
$1.2 billion or 52per cent of the value of all crop output. It should be noted that as of 1990, 44
per cent of all water used in Queensland agriculture came from groundwater sources, and in
volume terms, this is more than the rest of Australia combined.
The Australian Water Account 2004-05 identified that the irrigated area in Queensland had
risen to 542,000 hectares and that 63 per cent of this was irrigated by “self-extraction”.
An important consideration in managing water for irrigation of agriculture production systems
is the evaporation. It is this climate influence that reduces both water availability and soil
moisture (plant available water). Queensland is generally moisture deficient because of the
mostly hot and dry (for eight months) climate. Annual evaporation rates range from 1270mm
in the south-east to 3500mm in the far south-west. Only the wet tropics generally have
surplus moisture on a year to year basis.
Because of the variability and strong seasonality of these climate influences, there is little
scope in Queensland for reliable water supply from “run-of-river” diversions. Instead storages
need to be constructed with sufficient capacity to enable supply through prolonged dry
periods.
1.1.9 Climate Change Project
This project drew upon a relatively small, cross-disciplinary group of specialists and industry
participants with extensive knowledge of Queensland’s intensive agriculture industries and
systems. At the project initiation stage it was recognised that the project offered a unique
new input into the climate change debate for it also involved farmers themselves. Given this
mix of players, it was recognised that there needed to be a common base of knowledge
where ever possible so that communication and feedback between scientists and farmers
was well understood on both sides. To this end, some “landmark” climate change reports
were made available to all and were taken as read.
16
Generally, these were CSIRO Reports or special purpose Australian Government reports.
For the agriculture specific materials we relied heavily on the Australian Greenhouse Office
report “An overview of the adaptive capacity of the Australian agricultural sector to climate
change – options, costs and benefits” (2003). The lead author of that report Dr Mark Howden
has noted that these specialist climate change reports tend to lack completeness in that
there is limited industry participation and a paucity of analyses of the benefits and costs of
implementation of adaptation strategies. We feel that this project has come some way in
addressing those shortcomings, but it is only a beginning. All participants saw this project as
very much a work-in-progress, but one that built a solid foundation from which to build
capacity and enhanced competitiveness to deal with global challenges.
1.1.10 Climate Variability
Project participants recognised that an important benchmark for judging climate change
scenarios is existing or recent climate experiences. Industry advisors and farmers in
particular saw this as a crucial part of the project. For this reason, QFF commissioned the
University of Southern Queensland Australian Centre for Sustainable Catchments (USQ)
scientists to provide historical weather data and analyses for selected weather stations as
the baseline from which the key climate change scenarios would be overlayed. It was hoped
this would provide farmers with some details as to how their local weather has changed over
time, what trends in key measures (of rainfall and temperature in particular) might already be
evident in the data, and how current weather will be altered by climate change as described
by the scenarios prepared for this project.
It was at this stage of the project that participants decided that, given the very short period
available for analysis and discussion it was best to limit the climate change projections to
2030. This also was seen as about as far as farmers would accept as credible or useful
information. As with many of the requests made by industry groups involved with this project,
this one proved to be difficult and time consuming on the USQ researchers. Nonetheless,
USQ has produced some high quality data for 16 weather stations as detailed in Appendix 6.
This proved to be quite constructive information especially as it provided some clear
evidence that Queensland’s climate is already changing and that reasonable statistical
measures could be applied to the data to project what might occur in the future, should the
observable trends continue. This then led to the recognition that there might be some
underlying reasons for the observed changes and that there may be a way to model the
determinants of the observed climate variability and change. This provided one of the
platforms for introducing the work of the IPCC 2007 Climate Change scenarios and how they
might apply to the intensive agriculture regions of Queensland.
The Steering Committee recognised that there is a considerable “credibility” issue when it
comes discussing climate change projections with farmers and so it was planned that where
possible some Facts Sheets would be provided to background industry participants in the
project on the current state of understanding of Queensland’s variable and changing climate.
17
It was hoped that the Land & Water Australia and the Managing Climate Variability program
could provide such information, particularly the Masters of the Climate and the Australia’s
Regional Climate Drivers projects. Unfortunately delays prevented that occurring the project
commissioned several fact sheets from Bureau of Meteorology that will be available in July.
Participants were provided with various reports and one in particular, the Sugar Research
and Development Corporation “Climate Change and the Australian Sugarcane Industry:
Impacts, adaptations and R&D opportunities” was used as good reference guide to the
current state of climate knowledge as it affects Queensland. The Cotton Research Centre
report “Climate Change in Cotton Catchment Communities – A Scoping Study” (2007) was
also found to provide useful information. It was also hoped that the Queensland Centre of
Climate Change Excellence would have developed some useful background material during
the life of the project but unfortunately the “Climate Change in Queensland: What the science
is telling us” was not released until June 24 2008.
Some earlier research materials form the Bureau of Meteorology were used and some
research papers such as Nicholls, N., Drosdowsky, W. and Lavery, B. article “Australian
rainfall variability and change” provided good benchmarks from which to judge some specific
Queensland weather phenomena.
1.1.11 Sustainable Agriculture and FMS
Sustainable agriculture is a concept that embraces a complex web of issues. Some of these
are the state of the soil; water availability; choice of crop; stocking rates; needs for
pesticides, herbicides and fertiliser; climate variability and protection of biodiversity. Then
there is a range of economic issues (e.g., markets and production costs).
The development of a strategic, coordinated Government approach to sustainable agriculture
policy and programs is a key priority for QFF and will play a key role in managing the
complexity.
QFF advocates a Farm Management Systems (FMS) approach to property management.
Under a FMS, an agricultural enterprise assesses risk, implements recommended
management practices, monitors performances and adapts activities accordingly. Industry
organisations and government both have a role in assisting the farm enterprise implement an
FMS. This has been recognised through the QFF FMS Framework, QFF’s policy position on
farm level management, and the QFF- Queensland Government Memorandum of
Understanding on progressing Farm Management Systems which was established in March
2005.
In addition to partnerships between QFF member organisations and the Queensland
Government, the partnership principle extends to stakeholders, particularly the Queensland
regional Natural Resource Management (NRM) groups to foster an environment that
supports the Farm Management Systems approach. A Memorandum of Understanding
between QFF and the Queensland Regional NRM Groups Collective was established in June
2004, with both FMS and Climate Change being agreed policy areas for collaboration.
The key elements of industry led FMS programs include:
1. Risk management/ continual improvement
2. Best management practices
3. Performance verification
4. Program delivery and review
18
Climate and energy are appropriate inclusions for FMS programs as these represent key
long term risks faced by farming enterprises. However, it needs to be recognised that as
FMS is a voluntary programs for farm enterprises, industry organisations need to show
clearly that FMS programs will improve both profitability and sustainability. Government
and industry could collaborate on the development of appropriate risk management tools
to bolster climate adaptation for possible inclusion in FMS programs. Such collaboration
could be developed under the auspices of the QFF/Government MOU Implementation
Group.
As the review of Federal agricultural policy noted, a key to farmers’ ability to adapt to
climate change and maintain profitability is business flexibility. One factor affecting
flexibility is the extent of regulation, which constrains the ability of businesses to cope
with new circumstances and adapt autonomously.1 The FMS program is based
fundamentally on voluntary adoption, encouraging producers to adapt their tools and
systems to meet their own risk assessment and property needs. Such an approach is
particularly suited to climate change adaptation, but cannot be approached in isolation of
other regulatory policies. As the Federal review noted:
“In uncertain conditions, farm management systems that offer business flexibility and a regulatory
environment that minimises operating constraints provide the best chance of success in adapting to climate
change. The translation of complex climate information into forms usable by producers will build farmers’
capacity to adapt, manage risk and undertake cost effective mitigation.”2
1.2 Industry’s motivations for tackling Climate Change
The QFF family of industry organisations already has a strong track record of
involvement and leadership in sustainable resource use matters and those cross linked
to weather and climate. These are integral parts of the modern farm operation trying to
achieve continuous improvement and profitability. In recent years intensive agriculture
farms have had to deal with some exceptional weather conditions, and the question has
emerged as to whether or not these conditions are “normal” and need to be factored into
the daily operational equation of farming in Queensland.
At the same time Queensland farmers have noticed, not just local media attention on
drought, water and weather extremes, but also the national and international debate
about climate change. And while climate variability and seasonal climate forecasts have
been part of the information landscape for a decade or more, it has only been since
about 2005 that Climate Change and Agriculture has emerged as point of possible
government interest and action. The Queensland intensive agriculture sector noted that
much of this early discussions centred on some very “big picture” material and did not
bear specific reference to the intensive agriculture sector. By 2007 it became clear that
more detailed and specific information was needed to help define the climate change
issues for the intensive agriculture regions of Queensland, plus commodity specific
information that might help better climate adaptation at the farm level and direct some
future decision making about investments in farm and processing infrastructure.
More detail of the specific expectations of the various interest groups involved in this
project are outlined in other sections of this report.
1
Agriculture and Food Reference Group “Creating Our Future” DAFF Canberra February 2006 p. 193
2
Ibid p.195
19
1.2.1 Political landscape of climate change in
Australia
Over the last decade, Climate Change has emerged as a major policy priority in
Australia. The growing concern over increases in global temperatures and carbon
dioxide levels has resulted in the Australian Government investing substantial funds in
climate change research and signing international agreements to reduce green house
gas emissions. This change has largely been driven, by a general perception that the
government should take action to prevent further warming and help Australian’s adapt to
climate change.
In 1992, Australia signed the non-binding United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC) to indicate its support for reducing green house gas
emissions. In December 2007 Australia ratified the Kyoto protocol (an amendment to the
UNFCCC) making an international commitment to reduce green house gases.
Policies on climate change now exist at federal, state, regional and local level in both
public and private sectors. At a federal level, policy initiatives and programs such as
Caring for Our Country, Renewable Energy Target, National Emissions Trading Scheme,
Reef Rescue Package and Australia’s Farming Future all demonstrate the political
importance of climate change. These initiatives are informed by federal policy
documents and scientific reports such as the National Agriculture and Climate Change
Action Plan (Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry 2006), National Inventory
Report for the Australian Government Submission to the United Nations framework
Convention on Climate Change (Department of Climate Change 2008), Detecting,
Understanding and Attributing Climate Change (Commonwealth of Australia 2007),
Climate Change Impacts and Risk Management: a Guide for Business and Government
(Commonwealth of Australia 2006a), Climate Change Scenarios for Initial Assessment
of Risk in Accordance with Risk Management Guidance (Commonwealth of Australia
2006b) and Climate change in Australia (CSIRO & Australian Bureau of Meteorology
2007).
The uncertainly of climate change and associated environmental and economic impacts
has resulted in a considerable need for industry consultation and review. Recently, the
Australian government has commenced two reviews into climate change to inform future
policy development; The Garnaut Climate Change Review and the Senate Inquiry into
Climate Change and the Australian Agriculture Sector.
The Garnaut Climate Change Review has been commissioned by Australia's
Commonwealth, State and Territory Governments to examine the impacts, challenges
and opportunities of climate change for Australia. The draft Report from this review will
be delivered to the Australian governments by 30 June 2008 and the final report by 30
September 2008. More specifically, the Senate Inquiry into climate change and the
Australian agriculture sector will examine the impact of climate change on Australia’s
agriculture sector. Results from the Senate Inquiry will be made public in September
2008. Numerous industry bodies have made submissions to the Garnaut Review and the
Senate Inquiry including, Growcom and QFF.
20
Climate change has also been the focus of state government policy and research. The
Queensland government Climate smart adaption plan (QLD Climate Change Centre of
Excellence 2007) and Climate Smart 2050 (Queensland Government 2007) establish the
framework for adaptation through identifying climate change principles, strategies and
outcomes across a variety of priority of sectors including agriculture. This adaptation
plan is supported by a variety of government agencies including the Office of Climate
Change, Queensland Climate Change Centre of Excellence and the Premier's Council
on Climate Change. Implementation of the Climate Smart Adaptation Strategy is
financed by a $430 million dollar Queensland Climate Change Fund.
Various other groups and organisations have also developed a climate change policies
to guide business decisions. In particular regional NRM groups across Queensland have
recognised the importance of climate change. This recognition is evident in natural
resource management plans of various NRM groups in Queensland (Burdekin Dry
Topics NRM 2005; Burnett Mary Regional Group 2006; Condamine Alliance 2004;
Mackay Whitsunday NRM 2005; Northern Gulf Resource Management Group 2004;
Queensland Murray Darling Committee 2006; SEQ Catchments 2004; Terrain Natural
Resource Management 2007). Various private enterprises have also recognised the
political shift that is occurring in Australia. Organisation such as Woolworths (2007),
have developed “sustainability strategies” to demonstrate to the consumer that they are
environmentally responsible and are engaged on the issue of climate change. Most
significantly, a recent study by the Climate Institute (2008) on attitudes of the Australian
public found that 90 per cent of Australians were concerned about climate change.
Although considerable uncertainly still on the science behind climate change, it is
increasingly certain that changing consumer concerns and government policy designed
to reduced emissions will dramatically alter the future of business and more particularly
agriculture in Australia.
1.2.2 Current political structure surrounding climate
change in the QLD Government from an Agricultural
perspective
Environmental Protection
Agency
Department of
Sustainability, Climate
Change and Innovation
ClimateSmart
2050
ClimateSmart
Adaptation
2007–12
$430 million
Queensland
Climate Change
Fund
Office of Climate Change
Establish
broad policy
direction
Establish
funding
priorities
Policy advice,
information and
scientific data
Queensland
Climate Change
Centre of
Excellence
(QCCCE)
Secretariat
support
Premier's
Council on
Climate
Change
CSRIO
Council of Australian
Government (COAG)
Working Group on
Climate Change and
Water
21
Summary of different roles in Queensland Government’s response to Climate Change:
Title
General description
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Portfolio
of
Sustainability,
Climate Change
and Innovation
Office of Climate
Change
Overarching Government Coordinate regulation and protection of natural
department responsible environments in QLD
for climate change
Overarching Government Coordinate QLD response to climate change
portfolio responsible for
climate change within the
EPA
Deals
with
specific  Coordinating the implementation of ClimateSmart
climate change policy
2050
functions.
 Analysing Queensland's greenhouse gas emissions
Leads the development of
projections and developing policy recommendations
a
whole-of-government
for achieving further cuts to our emissions profile
policy framework
 Coordinating the implementation of ClimateSmart
Adaptation 2007–12
 Facilitating administering the , which will provide
approximately $30 million per year for future climate
change initiatives
 Providing to the Premier's Council on Climate
Change
 Being represented on the Council of Australian
Government (COAG) Working Group on Climate
Change and Water
A specialist whole-of- Provide decision makers throughout Queensland with
government unit based policy advice, information and scientific data on
within the Office of climate change and its impact on the community, the
Climate
Change, economy and the environment.
Environmental Protection
Agency.
Specific research currently focusing on:
Queensland
Climate Change
Centre
of
Excellence
(QCCCE)
Provides specific climate
science and research to
inform
Queensland's
response
to
climate
change
application
of
international
research
and science to the
Queensland context
Specific responsibilities
1. Climate systems research - produce seasonal
climate forecasts and downscaling of general climate
circulation models
2. Impacts of climate change and applications analyse the output from climate change models and
examine the effects of climate change on the
economy including agriculture.
assessing climate risk including the assessment of
how vulnerable Queensland’s regions and sectors
are to the impacts of climate change.
3. Adaptation and mitigation systems –
ensure that information from climate change models
is better integrated with economic, social, institutional
and policy considerations.
4. Information and knowledge systems
develop information products and synthesis
documents to help the community, industry and
government better understand climate change
impacts and scenarios.
Premier's Council
on
Climate
Change
22
Advisory
Council Provide advice about:
established to ensure
Queensland’s efforts in  priorities for Queensland Government action to
addressing
climate
reduce Queensland’s greenhouse gas emissions,
change are informed by
including sectoral responses such as sustainable
the best available local
energy options, transport strategies and built
and national knowledge
environment energy efficiency
and experience. Meets  adaptation measures relevant to Queensland, that
three to four times per
assist communities and industries address the
year and provides broad,
inevitable results of climate change.
high-level advice.
 priority areas for investment from the $430M
Queensland Climate Change Fund
 opportunities for innovation arising from climate
change for communities and the private sector
 major implementation issues
23
1.2.3 Current political structure surrounding climate
change in the Federal Government from an Agricultural
perspective
COAG
Working
Group
Adaptation
R&D
CSIRO
Flagship
on Climate
Adaptation
Tools
Tools
NACCAP
Water
Dept. of
Energy
Programs
24
Australia’s
Farming
Future
Caring
for Our
Country
Programs
DAFF
Programs
ETS
Garnaut
Review
Department
of Climate
Change
(DCC)
Dept. of
Environment
& Water
Programs
C.C.R.S.P.I
National
Water
Initiative –
Water for
our Future
Mitigation
Green
Paper
Climate
Science
R&D
CSIRO/BOM
Centre for
Australian
Weather &
Climate
Research
Clean
Energy
Plan
C.C.R.S.P.I
Other
DCC/CSIRO
Programs
Australian Government Initiatives and Contributions – Climate Change
Impacts and Adaptation
Department of Climate Change
The Australian Government Department of Climate Change provides national climate change
adaptation policy leadership and coordination. The Department works with partners
(including the CSIRO Climate Adaptation Flagship and states/ territories) and stakeholders in
vulnerable sectors and regions to assist decision makers to better manage the risks from
climate change impacts. The Department of Climate Change delivers a number of key policy,
program and research functions to deliver the information that policy and decision-makers
need to determine climate change adaptation strategies and actions.
Major contributions of the Australian Government’s $170 million commitment towards the
implementation of the National Climate Change Adaptation Framework (endorsed by the
Council of Australian Governments in April 2007 to guide action by governments over the
next five to seven years in vulnerable sectors) include the establishment of a Climate
Change Adaptation Research Facility (Griffith University), which will lead Australia’s
researchers in generating robust biophysical, social and economic information that decision
makers need to manage the risk of climate change. This effort is supported by up to $50
million funding for national climate change adaptation research to build understanding and
adaptive capacity to reduce sectoral and regional vulnerability to the impacts of climate
chance. Further information is available from
http://www.climatechange.gov.au/impacts/about.html
The Garnaut Review
The Garnaut Climate Change Review has been commissioned by Australia's
Commonwealth, state and territory governments to examine the impacts, challenges and
opportunities of climate change for Australia. A Draft Report was released in July 2008, and
the Final Report will be released in September 2008 http://www.garnautreview.org.au n
Climate Adaptation
CSIRO Flagship on Climate Adaptation
The Australian Government commitment of $170 million mentioned above also includes $44
million to establish a new CSIRO Flagship on climate adaptation which also helps equip
Australia with practical and effective adaptation options to respond to climate change and
variability. The Flagship will have four themes, including one on “Adaptive Primary Industries,
Enterprises and Communities”. Further information is available from
http://www.csiro.au/org/ClimateAdaptationFlagship.html
Australian Climate Change Science Program
The Australian Climate Change Science Program5 aims to improve understanding of the
causes, nature, timing and consequences of climate change so that industry, community and
government decisions can be better informed. The program is administered by the
Department of Climate Change and conducted in partnership with leading science agencies,
notably the CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology. The program addresses six key themes:






understanding the key drivers of climate change in Australia
improved climate modelling system
climate change, climate variability and extreme events
regional climate change projections
international research collaboration
communications.
25
Key areas of research include improving climate change projection based on probabilities;
detecting climate change in Australia, for example, from shifts in mean maximum air or sea
surface temperature, or increased frequency and intensity of extreme events such as drought
and tropical cyclones; and attributing changes in climate to specific factors such as
greenhouse gas emissions, changes in land use, or to natural variability. Further information
is available at www.climatechange.gov.au/science/index.html
CSIRO/BOM Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research
The Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research, a partnership between CSIRO
and the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) - A new science team is leading Australia’s climate
change and weather research. The Centre will provide seasonal weather/climate forecasts,
support impact and adaptation research, enhance prediction of extreme weather/climate
events and provide superior research capability for determining accurate water budgets for
different systems (taking into account temperature, precipitation, soil moisture, runoff,
evaporation and stream flows).
Australia’s Farming Future
In 2007, the Australian Government committed $130 million over four years for the
Australia’s Farming Future Initiative to address the impacts of climate change on the primary
industries sector. This initiative, consisting of three distinct but connected programs will build
on the Government’s commitment to fast track the National Agriculture Climate Change
Action Plan, prepare the sector to adequately respond to climate change and assist with
moving farmers towards drought preparedness. This initiative includes the Climate Change
Productivity and Research Program ($15 million) and the Climate Change Adaptation
Partnership Program ($60 million). Further information is available from www.daff.gov.au
Managing Climate Variability Program
The Managing Climate Variability6 (MCV) program has been helping Australian farmers to
manage climate risk on the ground for over a decade, providing practical tools to incorporate
climate variability understanding into farm business decisions. Administered by Land & Water
Australia, it aims to enhance adaptation responses to a variable climate. The program’s top
priority is to provide more accurate and reliable climate information, forecasts and tools to
enable farmers and natural resource managers to reduce their exposure to risk from climate.
MCV program has been funded jointly by seven of the rural R&D corporations, the
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) and the Natural Heritage Trust,
with strong support from the National Farmers’ Federation. Its Masters of the Climate project
has developed a wide range of useful case studies of how innovative individual farmers in
many sectors are incorporating climate risk into their business management decisions. The
MCV program has contributed to the development of seasonal climate forecasting tools that
assist managers to make decisions which maximise climate opportunities and reduce costs
in poor seasons. Examples of such tools are: Yield Prophet, WhopperCropper, Australian
Rainman and AussieGRASS. Further information on the MCV program and forecasting tools
can be found at http://www.managingclimate.com.au/
South-east Australia Climate Initiative
South-east Australia Climate Initiative (SEACI) is seeking to develop much finer-grained
projections of likely climate change impacts in south-eastern Australia, with a particular focus
on long range water availability and crop yield forecasts. This project, relevant to a number of
regional NRM bodies in the Murray Darling Basin, is jointly funded by the Department of
Climate Change, the Murray Darling Basin Commission, the Managing Climate Variability
program and the Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment, and it is being
delivered by CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology. Additional information can be found at
http://www.mdbc.gov.au/subs/seaci/index.html
26
1.2.4 Agriculture sectors response
Agricultural systems have shown considerable capacity to adapt to the climate changes in
land management practices, crop and cultivar choice, selection of animal species, and
technologies to increase efficiency of water use. These and other adaptive strategies have
been used to change the geographic and climate spread of many agricultural activities. All of
these actions could and will be deployed by farmers to further respond to climate change,
although as the degree of climate change increases the limits of this adaptive capacity may
be tested. There may be some gains in some regions emerging from low levels of climate
change as a result of longer growing seasons, fewer frosts, higher rainfall (northern
Australia) and plant responses to elevated levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.
As part of the early stages of this project a number of discussions were held between
members of the Expert Panel and industry participants to try to identify the major climate
variability adaptations that are notable in Queensland’s intensive agriculture sector. While
there have been many plant agronomy and animal husbandry advances the most notable
Queensland adaptations tend to relate to water and temperature management to cope with
tropical and semi-tropical weather extremes that are a feature of Queensland’s weather. It
was concluded from these discussions that it was important that a comprehensive literature
review be conducted which might also provide some guidance for the Risk and Opportunities
Assessments to be carried out as the project progressed. USQ allocated some PhD students
to the task and a comprehensive compendium was developed. It is reproduced in Appendix4.
By the time of the Expert Panel workshops in early 2008 it became clear that for some
specific commodities and some Queensland regions that genuine “scientific” literature was
often lacking partly because the production systems information is proprietary rather than
public and partly because the vastness of Queensland and its agro-climatic conditions
sometimes makes it impossible to generalise. As one expert observed, “it is often an
exercise in what we don’t know, when it comes climate impacts on farm outputs”.
Generalised approaches with biophysical models, phenological development models
(APSRU) and thermal time calculators (ClimSim) are useful as guiding principles but often
lack the precision needed at the farm level to guide operational change in the business.
Likewise, identification of the certain “limits to production” may have only limited usefulness.
However, it was concluded that the agribusiness units and regions most at risk will be:

those already stressed, economically or biophysically, as a result of land
degradation, salination and loss of biodiversity;

those at the edge of their climate tolerance; and

those where large and long life investments are made, such as in dedicated irrigation
systems, region and commodity specific processing facilities, and slow growing
cultivars (long production span).
As the project progressed, it became clear that the Climate Change Scenarios were often not
disaggregated sufficiently to provide some of the regional and seasonal precision that
farmers are looking for. The QFF developed a data matrix that it feels is still required to help
Queensland’s intensive agriculture businesses, and any Queensland business or community
for that matter. This data matrix is reproduced in Appendix 2a, and should not be read as the
definitive specification of data requirements but rather the “wish list” of the various project
participants after the initial work shopping stages of this project. We will continue to work
with QCCCE, USQ, QUT and others to see further progress in getting useful data for
Queenslanders planning actions to cope with climate change. The overarching template is
consistent with that used by the Queensland government for its underlying “ClimateSmart”
strategies.
Throughout this project QFF and its members have been working on developing both
commodity specific and sector wide action plans to ensure that landholders have the tools to
27
assess the risks and opportunities associated with climate change and factor that into their
operating businesses. Farmers have been dealing with climate variability for many
generations, including, over the last seven years, the worst drought on record, Those that
have the risk management skills best able to deal with climate change will best placed in the
longer term.
1.2.5 Specific requirements for the QFF family of
interest groups
Managing climate change has become an increasingly important policy area for Queensland
Farmers Federation (QFF). QFF is the peak rural industry body in Queensland, uniting 13 of
the State’s peak rural industry organisations, who collectively represent more than 13,000
primary producers across the State. The farmers, QFF and its members represent contribute
around $4.6 billion annually to the State’s economy and employ over 30,000 workers in rural
communities.
QFF Member bodies include:
o
Australian Prawn Farmers Association
O
CANEGROWERS
o
Cotton Australia
o
Growcom
o
Nursery & Garden Industry Queensland
o
Qld Chicken Growers Association
o
Qld Dairyfarmers’ Organisation
o
Qld Irrigators Council Association Inc
o
Flower Association of Queensland Inc
o
Qld Chicken Meat Council
Emerging Primary Industries Group
o
Biological Farmers of Australia
o
Queensland Aquaculture Industries Federation
Through QFF, rural industry resources are pooled to ensure powerful representation and
effective strategy development on important industry issues. QFF provides direction,
leadership and representation on issues of common interest to the rural sector in
Queensland. QFF’s goal is to secure a sustainable and profitable future for our members, as
a core and dynamic element of the economy.
The project was developed to identify relevant climate change tools and models for
incorporation into industry Farm Management Systems (FMS) programmes, including
developing the links between climate change and drought to better support drought
preparedness and longer term risk management as an integral part of industry FMS or Best
Management Programs.
28
QFF does not see adaption and mitigation as separate objectives. Agriculture is facing
both risks and opportunities in responding to climate change. An integrated approach
utilising FMS systems to review risks and opportunities and determining a solution is
seen as integral to tackling climate change.
QFF is a member of the State Government’s Sustainable Agriculture Committee, a high
level state policy group and Climate Change is a part of the this group’s agenda and the
Federal Government’s ETS and Agriculture Reference Panel. QFF is therefore well
placed to assume a state and national leadership role in developing and implementing
programs to address future climate change policy issues, particularly in developing links
between its already established FMS framework and government directions on climate
change issues. This project has significantly enhanced the capacity of the intensive
agricultural industries of Queensland (QFF’s member organisation’s) to build climate
change adaption into industry FMS programs, while building knowledge, skills and
industry awareness to address future policy challenges.
2. Project Summary
The “Improving the Capacity of Queensland Intensive Agriculture to Manage the Impacts
of Climate Change Project” was one of 19 to receive funding from the Australian
Government’s National Agriculture & Climate Change Action Plan Implementation
Programme.
2.1 Objectives
The objectives of the project are defined below:

Enhance the capacity of Queensland’s intensive agriculture and irrigated
industries to provide leadership on climate change for their producers.

Identify relevant climate change tools and models for incorporation into industry
FMS programs, including developing the links between climate change and
drought to better support drought preparedness and longer term risk management
as an integral part of industry Farm Management Systems.
29
2.2 Outputs
To help achieve the project’s objectives and align with the expected outcomes of the project,
each segment was expected to deliver a tangible output.
For instance, in the early stages of this project it was hoped to develop some Queensland
Climate Fact Sheets that would help explain both climate variability and climate change. As a
part of this process the plan was to also include a Queensland Climate Drivers fact sheet so
that the climate change scenarios and future updates would link to the major Queensland
weather phenomena and make climate change more meaningful at the practical level.
Unfortunately the tight timelines for this project meant that some plans proved too ambitious,
or suitable data and commentary simply could not be produced in the period before June
2008.
Nonetheless each of the five principle aspect of this project had a set outcome and this
report forms the comprehensive record of the projects achievements and outputs. A major
output is the FMS/BMP Climate Change Action Plan for each of the five funded commodity
groups set out in Appendix 2. Additionally, after review this report may be re-edited for
publication either in brochures or fact sheets form.
2.3 Outcomes
The following outcomes were outlined in the project proposal accepted by the funding
agency:
1. Climate adaptation research effort for Queensland’s intensive agriculture and irrigated
sector is improved;
2. Industry FMS/BMP programs incorporate climate change adaptation tools;
3. Industry’s capacity to understand and exchange information on climate change
implications with producers is enhanced;
4. Producers’ on-farm water planning, security and efficiency of use is improved;
5. Industry’s capacity to provide leadership and address future policy challenges for
water planning, security and efficiency is enhanced.
2.4 Project Scope
The project scope focussed on the following key areas:
30

QFF coordination of project deliverables;

The development of a ‘Risks and Opportunities Assessment’ for Queensland’s
intensive agriculture sector;

Opportunities to enhance energy efficiency and minimise Greenhouse Gas (GHG);

Development of climate change resources for Queensland’s intensive agriculture
sector;

Climate change and industry FMS programs (cane, cotton, dairy, horticulture,
nursery, poultry, prawns).
2.5 Methodologies
The QFF Climate Change Project was established in November 2007 and completed in June
2008. The project assisted QFF and its member organisations to explore climate change
adaptation challenges and opportunities for producers in the Queensland intensive
agriculture sector, and scope practical and strategic responses.
The industries involved in the project include cropping (sugar cane and cotton), horticulture
(tree, perennial and seasonal crops, nursery and flower production) and intensive livestock
(dairy, aquaculture and meat chicken).
QFF provided overall taking control in the coordination of the project and the selection and
management of the Expert Panel which was utilised to guide the risks and opportunities
assessment.
The “Climate change risks and opportunities assessment for Queensland’s intensive
agriculture sector” activity was part of the overall project. QFF invited a number of key
scientists and economists to participate on an “Expert Panel” and assist QFF to conduct a
Risks and Opportunities Assessment which:
 Identified regions and commodities most at risk, and what factors drive the risks
 Provided a preliminary 2nd level analysis of broader implications of identified risks
(e.g. for supply chains, markets, regional development, banking/insurance etc)
 Identified opportunities and possible amelioration strategies for Queensland’s
intensive agriculture (e.g. new varieties, new crops, new practices, new locations)
 Scoped requirements and adaptation information gaps (e.g. new varieties, new
crops, new practices) in shorter term climate projections and regional/industry
scenarios and make recommendations for future investment
 Developed a prototype action plan to guide industries in their planning roles
The Expert Panel was developed to:
 Contribute to an analysis of the current understanding of climate impacts on intensive
agriculture in Queensland;
 Confirm the methodology required for the risks and opportunities assessment;
 Assist industry to refine questions and responses on the topic;
 Where appropriate be available to assist in any industry/producer workshopping
sessions;
 Peer review the final report;
 “Direct traffic” for work between sessions; and
 Recommend a process to continue science input post-project.
The membership of the Expert Panel is included over. Key dates and process for the Expert
Panel were agreed at the inception of the project:



December 6 2007 -First Expert Panel meeting to determine information needs
February 5 - Second Expert Panel meeting to discuss collated background analysis
February 20 -Expert Panel and Industry Workshop to refine collated background
analysis and determine methodology for risk/opportunities assessment
31



April 30 - Expert Panel and Industry Workshop to conduct risk/opportunities
assessment
24th May - Draft report including Expert Panel peer review comments
June 30 2008 - Final report.
Expert Panel membership
Name
Title
Professor Timothy Reeves
Mr Gary Sansom
Professor Roger Stone
Facilitator, Deakin University
Chair; President QFF
Director Australian Centre for Sustainable Catchments,
University of Southern Qld Toowoomba
Director, Institute for Sustainable Resources,
Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane
Program Coordinator, Managing Climate Variability,
Land and Water Australia
Senior Scientist (Former)
Queensland Climate Change Centre of Excellence
Senior Scientist
Queensland Climate Change Centre of Excellence
Principal Scientist, A/Focus Team Leader Agricultural
Systems Modelling, DPI&F, (APSRU)
Senior Principal Horticulturist, Horticulture and Forestry
Science, DPI&F
Interim Science Director, Climate Adaptation Flagship
CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Brisbane
Australian Bankers Association
Cropping Systems Scientist, Tropical Landscapes Production Systems, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems,
Toowoomba
Hydrologist, DNR&W, Toowoomba Queensland
Professor Peter Grace
Colin Creighton
Dr Neil White
Dave McRae
Dr Daniel Rodriguez
Peter Deuter
Dr Craig Miller
Mr Stephen Carroll
Dr Sarah Park
Dr Mark Silburn
A project Steering Committee was also formed. This committee consisted of representatives
from QFF’s member organisations and DAFF. Its role was to oversee the overall project
including budgets, milestones, coordination of activities and communication to/from member
organisations. The project steering committee provided advice as appropriate to the Expert
Panel.
QFF’s Sustainable Agriculture Policy Officer was engaged full time on the project up to June
30 to coordinate the project and to ensure the milestones were achieved on time and on
budget. Administration and financial management systems were tailored to the project to
ensure that the requirements of the funding agency were met.
QFF contracted the National Centre for Agricultural Engineering at the University of Southern
Queensland to develop energy efficiency guidelines and toolboxes for intensive industry
sectors. Nine on-farm energy audits were conducted in this project, which included:





32
Cotton  2
Sugar  2
Horticulture  2
Nursery  2
Prawn farm x 1
QFF also commissioned five of its member organisations to develop industry specific risk
assessments and Action Plans (CANEGROWERS, Growcom, Qld Dairyfarmers’
Organisation, Cotton Australia, and Nursery & Garden Industry Queensland).
QFF commissioned the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) to produce two fact sheets and has
also developed a report on the work of this project for public release.
The following key project areas and Activities were identified as being critical to achieving the
project objectives:
Project Area
1. QFF
Coordination
2. QFF
“Risks
and
opportunities
assessment for
Queensland’s
intensive
agriculture
sector”
Activities
 Establish a QFF Climate Change Project Steering Group
 Prepare a Detailed Project Implementation Plan to guide the project
activities
 Conduct overall project management
 Establish linkages with researchers/research bodies such as the
Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility at Griffith University,
Queensland Centre for Climate Change Excellence (QCCCE),
Agricultural Production Systems Research Unit (APSRU), CSIRO,
rural R&D corporations, University Southern Qld, University of
Queensland, James Cook University, University of the Sunshine
Coast and Queensland University of Technology, Department of
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF), Australian Greenhouse
Office and Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries (DPI&F).
 Engage with the state Chief Executive Officers Sustainable
Agriculture Committee and associated taskforces on Climate Change,
and with the National agenda (including the Natural Resource
Management Ministerial Council (NRMMC) National Agriculture and
Climate Change Action Plan and actions such as the Vulnerability
Assessment of Australian Agriculture and options available for
measuring and monitoring agricultural emissions, for example
Emissions Intensity Benchmarking).
 Strengthen the links between industry Farm Management Systems
(FMS) programs, on-farm tools and the banking/insurance sector in
relation to climate change.
Link with NRMMC action on
Environmental Management Systems (EMS), being managed by the
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry.
 Contribute to Risks & Opportunities Assessment report (see below)
and recommendations for future investment and R&D
 Seek to have input into the PISC Climate Change Research Strategy
for Primary Industries being coordinated by Land and Water Australia
(LWA).
 In consultation with member organisations, establish a process
(namely a Project Science Advisers and facilitated Expert Panel) and:
 Conduct a Risks and Opportunities Assessment which
o Identifies regions and commodities most at risk, and what
factors drive the risks
o Provides a preliminary 2nd level analysis of broader
implications of identified risks (eg for supply chains, markets,
regional development, banking/insurance etc)
o Identifies opportunities and possible amelioration strategies
for Queensland’s intensive agriculture (eg. new varieties,
new crops, new practices, new locations)
33
o


3. QFF
“Opportunities
to
enhance
energy
efficiency
and
minimise GHG”
4. QFF
“Develop
climate change
resources
for
Queensland’s
intensive
agriculture
sector”
5. Climate
change and
industry FMS
programs (cane,
cotton, dairy,
horticulture,
nursery, poultry,
prawns)
34




Scopes requirements and adaptation information gaps (eg.
new varieties, new crops, new practices) in shorter term
climate projections and regional/industry scenarios and make
recommendations for future investment
o Develop a prototype action plan to guide industries in their
planning roles (see below)
Align the above risk assessment work for regions and commodities
with the current NRMMC national agriculture vulnerability assessment
being administered by DAFF
In conjunction with QCCCE conduct a climate change risk
assessment process with stakeholders within Queensland’s irrigation
sector (see ClimateSmart plan) to assist with the above analysis.
Investigate energy efficiency tools and technologies and recommend
a process to establish an industry energy auditing advisory service for
common areas of farming systems (to consider energy management
links to water movement, farming medium and nutrient supply).
Identify commodity specific energy efficiency guidelines/tools for
incorporation into industry FMS programs.
Utilising the Project Science Advisers and Expert Panel outputs
(above), link to the LWA led “Masters of the Climate” project where
appropriate including the production and distribution of regionally
relevant Fact Sheets covering:
a) Regional Weather Drivers;
b) Climate Variability;
c) Climate Change Prognosis;
d) Implications for the Regions Natural Resources [e.g. soil
moisture, river flow, soil erosion, extreme events, vegetation etc];
e) Projections for Impact on Key Industries; and
f) Smart Strategies and Decision Tools.
Utilising the Project Science Advisers and Expert Panel outputs as
well as existing and new resources developed through this project,
each industry to develop an industry action plan to deal with the
risks/opportunities associated with climate change including:
 the linkages as appropriate to industry FMS programs
 training and resource requirements for industry extension and
advisory staff to assist them in their role with producers
 a feedback process for providing producers with relevant data
that can be incorporated into their long term risk management
decisions.
QFF Climate Change Project – Final Report
3. Climate Change for Queensland Intensive
Agriculture production regions
3.1 Changing conditions for Queensland agricultural production
Project participants sought a general review of the changing agro-climate conditions relevant
to Queensland’s intensive agriculture regions and commodities, and how these may have
dictated changes in farming activities in the state over the past few decades. It was felt that
this type of benchmarking would prove useful in guiding discussions about what to do in the
future. As with a number of important issues encountered in the course of this project, limited
time and money meant that other more pressing issues took precedent. Nonetheless some
progress was made in a general sense with identifying how Queensland already copes with a
variable climate and these are outlined in various places throughout this report. However, it is
felt that this area needs some specific research and QFF will be suggesting to various
research bodies that documenting change that has already occurred should become part of
the climate change projections research.
As this project commenced three of the industry groups (sugar, dairy and cotton) already had
scoping studies for climate change research underway. Participants recognised that these
studies were generally preliminary in nature and not designed for farm level use. In the first
meetings with the science experts it was explained that these studies generally used IPCC
data and extracted some type of “mid point” of the parameters for Australia. For instance we
summarised the projections to 2030 to show an overall picture, but the scientists indicated
that “more useful” data could be extracted if we used the “best models” and sought monthly
data to extract key climate factors that might be more useful to farmers. The summary of
those studies is reproduced in the table below, and this was the motivation to ask the USQ to
review the IPCC data and come up with what they (“in their expert opinion”) regarded as
more useful data for Queensland intensive agriculture regions.
Summary Climate Change Projections to 2030 – Published Data
Region
Northern (FNQ)
Townsville
Mackay
South Qld
Northern NSW
Kairi (FNQ)
Oakey
Gympie
Gatton
Emerald
Rainfall
Summer
+4%
0%
+4%
0%
0%
0%
-2%
-2%
-2%
Autumn
-3%
-3%
-3%
-3%
0%
0%
-3%
-3%
-3%
Temperature
Spring
-10%
-7%
-7%
-10%
-7%
-2%
-8%
-8%
-8%
Year (^c)
+0.2 to 1.6
+0.2 to 1.6
+0.2 to 1.6
+0.2 to 1.6
+0.2 to 1.8
+0.5 to +1.5
+0.5 to +1.5
+0.5 to +1.5
+0.5 to +1.5
Source
SRDC Sugar 2007
CSIRO Dairy 2007
CRC Cotton 2007
Evaporation (Yr)
Northern (FNQ)
Townsville
Mackay
South Qld
Northern NSW
Kairi (FNQ)
Oakey
Gympie
Gatton
Emerald
Winter
-10%
-3%
-3%
-3%
-3%
-1%
-4%
-4%
-4%
Runoff (Yr)
0 to +16%
0 to +16%
0 to +16%
0 to +16%
0 to +16%
Other
Sea levels
Sea levels
Sea levels
-5.0% to -9.0%
-5.0% to -9.0%
-5.0% to -9.0%
SRDC Sugar 2007
CSIRO Dairy 2007
CRC Cotton 2007
3.2 Climate Change Predictions for Intensive Agricultural regions
A key component of this project has been to develop “fresh” climate projections specifically
for the intensive agriculture regions of Queensland. This has required both the advancement
of far reaching science capabilities in relation to climate change scenario development for
2030 (based on the A1B emissions scenario), and linkages between these developments
and risk management for Queensland intensive agricultural industries. This has been
achieved by utilising experimental climate change output design frameworks in conjunction
with CSIRO (Dr Ian Smith, CSIRO) involving the selection of 5 (five) Global Circulation
Models (GCMs) identified to provide optimal performance for the Queensland region based
on their ability to model ENSO events (the El Nino / La Nina Southern Oscillation
phenomena). This climate change modelling systems approach at the University of Southern
Queensland (in conjunction with CSIRO) has enabled the creation of a new series of climate
change scenario outputs for rainfall likelihoods, maximum/minimum temperatures and solar
radiation levels at a shire scale (pre March 2008 boundaries) on a seasonal basis for
Queensland.
Due to the five models being run at different resolutions the output had to be downscaled to a
1ox1o grid, using a first order conservative remapping on all input fields, to be able to provide
a comparable regional average.
For precipitation flux, seasonal averages were calculated by taking the sum of the 3 months
while for temperature and radiation seasonal averages for calculated from the means. As the
baseline period (1961-1990, 20C3M) for each model is a result of modelled output using the
same climate drivers, all models needed to be run separately, and all results averaged to
provide an overall result.
To provide a spatial analysis of the results on a regional scale, the results were interpolated
using Kriging and mapped using a GIS application.
For precipitation the change percentages were downscaled to a site level using simple
unintelligent downscaling and multiplied by the 1961-1990 averages to provide an
approximate millimetre increase.
Changes in Precipitation at a regional level: Queensland Murray-Darling
Basin Region
For the Murray Darling Basin, Queensland regional region (as depicted), the more obvious
feature is a reduction over mean rainfall by 10 per cent to 30 per cent in key winter growing
periods. Although this would not be expected to substantially impact streamflow for irrigation
in the region that is largely governed by summer rainfall.
36
For this reason, rainfall in the January to March period is critical for recharge processes for
rivers and associated irrigation systems in this region. The analysis presented in this
experimental output suggests some potential for recharge in the river/irrigation systems
between January and March but not, importantly, for the total October to March period. The
October to March period is normally referred to as the overall recharge period for this region
suggesting some overall reduction in irrigation available for the total summer period.
This result concurs with the initial outputs from the CSIRO ‘best 5 model experimental
approach’ (Smith et al. 2007) for the overall Murray Darling Basin that suggests a reduction
of between 9 per cent and 29 per cent for the total basin system. In other words, while
January to March rainfall changes suggest that period as the more beneficial in terms of
rainfall over an annual period it would not be enough to completely compensate for potential
for reduced rainfall for early summer, spring (and winter). This aspect could have major
implications grain/cotton production in this region (including feedgrain), especially that
subject to irrigation needs.
37
To exacerbate the problem, increases in solar radiation (further below) for this region) as well
as increases in minimum and maximum temperature suggest increased evaporation rates,
important for water supply issues. It should be noted that these increases depicted are for
mean increases in values and that shifts in, for example, numbers of days exceeding critical
thresholds would be relevant. For example, an increase or 1oC and 2oC in mean values can
mean a doubling of the number of days exceeding 36o C (important for cotton plant survival)
by 2070. It is suggested approximately half that level of increase would be likely by 2030 and
more work on this issue would need to be completed with a more comprehensive project
area.
38
39
Notes on changes in precipitation and temperature/solar radiation for the
‘North-East Coast’ region.
As with most regions of Queensland, rainfall reductions of between 8 per cent and 25 per
cent are common, especially in the winter/spring period. Conversely, there is an increase in
precipitation (and consequent slight reduction in an otherwise increase in solar radiation) for
the January to March period. It is suggested this type of mean pattern may be beneficial for
industries such as the sugar industry where reduction in mean July to September rainfall
and, to some extent, October to December rainfall may assist in harvest operations and
similar mill industry issues. Enhanced solar radiation may also be beneficial for that industry.
It is notable there is some gradation in precipitation decrease across this region from east to
west, again suggesting a less deleterious outcome than may otherwise be the case, for that
industry.
In terms of water replenishment, the core period for management in that respect will involve
the key January to March period when probably more of the precipitation percentage on an
annual basis will occur.
40
41
Minimum/ Maximum temperature
42
3.3 Ongoing Climate detail and scenarios
Climate Risk Management Tools
Decision-support tools appropriate for climate risk management in agriculture have largely
been developed for broad acre systems and are associated with climate variability and
seasonal forecasting (3-6 month outlook).
In this respect, there are a number of references that suggest these seasonal forecast-based
decision-support systems are useful in highlighting, on a year-to-year basis, the potential for
more (for example) low rainfall seasons and, therefore, the user begins a process that
creates an adjusting process that will enable adaptation to climate change more easily. Thus,
decision-support tools that facilitate adaptation to seasonal conditions can assist long-term
strategic adjustment to climate change (eg: Meinke and Stone, 2005). It is suggested any
currently available decision-support systems or spreadsheets be utilised more strongly by
industry as an adaptation strategy that will better equip farmers and industry to cope with
long-term climate change.
Examples of such systems include:



“How wet” (Qld Dept Natural Resources and Water)
“How often” (Qld Dept Natural Resources and Water)
‘Whopper Cropper’ (Qld Dept Primary Industries) (for wheat/sorghum) (funded by
Land and Water Australia).
Otherwise, we have yet to locate a suitable vehicle for such a climate risk management tool
that has been developed for climate change.
A relatively recent workshop developed by the Federal Department of Agriculture, Forestry,
and Fisheries (AFFA) through Bureau of Rural Sciences provided the following output:
“Decision-support tools will be important in helping producers deal with a changing climate.
However, to be effective, such tools must start from a farm business perspective, must use
the language that farmers use, and MUST be developed in partnership with industry.”
(Farming Profitably in a Changing Climate, Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra, 2004).
In this respect, it is strongly suggested a new set of decision-support tools (sometimes also
referred to as ‘discussion-support tool’ whereby the farming community engages in
discussions with advisers and scientists) be developed for intensive industries in
Queensland. Such tools need to be developed as much to assist the scientific community in
assessing the relevant decision-systems and processes needed for these industry sectors. A
useful reference for these aspects includes Risbey et al. (2004).
It is suggested any further projects related to intensive agriculture in Queensland urgently
address this issue in developing appropriate decision-support tools that currently do not exist
in any framework, as far as we are aware. (Dr Risbey in CSIRO is currently working on other
joint projects with the ACSC at USQ).
43
4. Climate Change Impacts – common issues
Below is some discussion on the climate change impacts and common issues identified.
4.1 Impacts associated with other large-scale external drivers
Project participants were aware of many other “climate change projects” and wanted to make
sure at least a check list of factors discovered in these researches were at least recorded so
people could rethink them at some future date. The economic modelling of international trade
impacts was an important talking point at one stage of the project when ABARE released its
report. At various workshops impacts such as those on energy and fertiliser markets were
also identified as important, and many participants actually wondered whether these impacts
might not be much greater in impact on their business profitability than the rainfall and
temperature changes that may be in the offing. Unfortunately this part of the project has not
been progressed due time and resource constraints.
5. Risks and Opportunities Assessment
The “climate change risks and opportunities assessment for Queensland’s intensive
agriculture sector” activity was a major part of the overall project. QFF initiated a unique
“Expert Panel” of key scientists and economists to assist conduct the Risks and
Opportunities Assessments. At an early stage it was recognised that the risks and
opportunities for intensive agricultural activities varied considerably by commodity and
region, but it was felt that a reasonably standardised approach was required to at least
provide a consistent benchmark across climate factors. An expectation emerged that this
project might develop a template that defined risks and opportunities along a spectrum
starting at current industry practises to manage climate variability through to major changes
required by changed agroclimatic conditions. From a mixture of industry meetings and
workshops the following key “findings” emerged;






While it was widely recognised that Australia, and Queensland in particular, already
has a high level of adaptive capacity in dealing with climate variability, it was agreed
that documenting any critical “tipping points” and possible significant production
inhibitors would be useful;
Project participants considered and agreed to an appropriate methodology to detail
climate parameters relevant for risks and opportunities assessments by intensive
agricultural industries in Queensland;
Industry participants then began to identify those regions and commodities
considered most at risk, and what climate factors drive those risks;
Then follow through with a preliminary 2nd level analysis of broader implications of
the identified risks (e.g. for supply chains, markets, regional development,
banking/insurance, etc);
Identify
opportunities and possible amelioration strategies for Queensland’s
intensive agriculture (e.g. new varieties, new crops, new practices, new locations,
etc);
Develop a prototype action plan to guide industry groups in their planning roles.
The project aimed to develop the necessary science capabilities in regards to climate change
scenario development, and linkages between those developments and risk management for
intensive agricultural industries in Queensland.
44
There is a constructive tension between the information needs of decision makers at the farm
level and the professional requirements of scientific work. As this project developed it
became clear that what was “wanted” at the farm level may yet to have been developed and
scrutinised by the science community. For instance industry participants said they found
“real” temperature and rainfall data much more useful than data presented as anomalies.
From this feedback the industry steering committee developed a list of specific climate
information needed to identify farm risks and management actions for the Climate Change
Scenarios 2030 at a regional (town) level. (This list was a truncated version the 10 historical
weather parameters analysed for 16 towns for the Climate Variability and Trends
assessment). Industry requested the mid C02 scenarios from the relevant models for Eastern
Australia (as agreed between USQ Professor Roger Stone and CSIRO Dr Ian Smith) as
follows:
1. Rainfall - annual and four season mm change in precipitation and percentage change
2. Temperature - annual average change and seasonal min max
3. Evaporation - % annual and seasonal
4. Frost free days - number (average first and last frost <2 degrees)
5. Heat stress days - both over 30 and + 35 degrees
6. Any suitable measure of other extreme weather events e.g. cyclones, storms.
Given the short life of this project it was probably unsurprising that a member of the Expert
Panel noted that the request required a trade off with “serious science, being what normally
requires a 3 to 5 year science program across about 20 scientists!”
It is important to record here that industry felt strongly that this project had to yield
appropriately disaggregated climate data for point references (towns) in Queensland from the
IPCC 2007 outputs. In the early workshops many industry representatives and farmers
identified that Climate Change reports to date tended to be “useless” because the data was
too unrelated to their particular circumstances and often provided such a wide range of
possibilities as to be meaningless for practical decision making. These farm level views
turned out to be consistent with those in the Econnect Communications User Needs Analysis
report (May 2008), the analyses for which were conducted during the life of this project for
the Managing Climate Variability program.
Of course it is unsurprising that industry might not fully appreciate the underlying science that
must necessarily be applied for “reliable” climate data manipulations and computations. In
any event, in the short time frame of this project USQ was able to derive useable data sets
that were consistent with the direction that CSIRO was taking to make the IPCC 2007 more
“relevant and user friendly” in the Australian context. A key component has been to utilise a
new climate change scenario output design framework in conjunction with CSIRO to
generate a new series of ‘experimental’ climate change scenario information at a small
regional scale for Queensland on a seasonal (and monthly) basis as detailed in Section 3.2
of this report.
From this data and climatological analyses provided by the University of Southern
Queensland the Expert Panel and industry representatives were able to discuss and
summarise the industry risk and opportunities for those major driving factors likely to impact
on intensive agricultural activities in the medium term, including key risks to production, on
mitigation options, and on industry adaptation.
45
5.1 Adaption
Adaption is the most significant challenge for agriculture as future profitability is directly
related to how effectively farmers do adapt. However, this is not new information and there is
considerable literature identifying how well Australian farmers have coped with climate
variability and change to date. The issue under consideration in this project is whether or not
that adaptive capacity is sufficient for the climate challenges ahead.
While there is no definitive answer as to what lies ahead there is sufficient information to
identify likely planning scenarios that a well managed business would factor into its plans.
CSIRO’s Dr Mark Howden has written extensively on this issue and in his latest “Adapting
agriculture to climate change” paper (PNAS Dec 2007) identifies that already established
rates of climate change and the fact that these are already trending to the high end of
“official” scenarios is reason enough for investing in increased adaptive capacity. But if a
further incentive is required then it is that early adaptors are likely to be the greatest
beneficiaries of the inevitable.
To be successful farmers need to improve their capacity to manage risk. The climate of the
future is likely to be more variable and therefore more risky. The first challenge is to identify
how those risks might be manifested and then how best to ameliorate them. Every rural
industry needs to undertake a detailed assessment of future risks, vulnerabilities and
opportunities under various climate change scenarios. Part of that analysis needs to be
about finding the “pressure points” (i.e. where practices need to change) and the “tipping
points” (i.e. where the entire nature of the business needs to change). Industry is only at the
very early stages of this process, and programs need to map out further ongoing activities in
that direction. There is currently still a real shortage of climate research expertise capable of
undertaking such assessments.
Pressure points and tipping points will vary from industry to industry and from region to
region. Often, it may be the increased likelihood of the extreme events (e.g. more 35+
degree days, longer dry spells, more storms) that farmers need to consider. Continuous two
way conversations will be needed between farmers and researchers to identify these issues
as part of ongoing opportunity and vulnerability assessments, because prompt response is
likely to be a wiser course than delay.
Having identified vulnerabilities, risks and opportunities on a commodity/industry basis, the
next stage must be that of developing options in response to those. Some of that will be
about farm level and supply chain practices, some will need to be about changes to crop
varieties, planting schedules and animal management, and some will need to be about major
changes to businesses. The farm level operational changes are best worked through industry
FMS programs, as very often the best adaptation techniques are about using already
identified (or a modification) of best practice techniques. For irrigated farms (the majority of
Queensland agriculture), the biggest challenge from climate change is likely to be the impact
on water availability. Building on existing water use efficiency programs (e.g. the Queensland
Rural Water Use Efficiency Program, the CRC Irrigation Futures, and the National Plan for
Water Security) is likely to be the best way to adapt to changes in water availability.
Changing crop varieties is a much more complicated issue that requires years of research
and development. For example, a “tipping point” for Queensland’s $40 million lettuce industry
and $45 million apple industry is higher temperatures. More research is needed to keep
developing more heat tolerant varieties. The “tipping point” for Queensland’s cotton and
sugar industries is water availability. Biotechnology opens up the prospect of more drought
tolerant varieties. But that long term research needs to be underway now.
46
Changing business is a decision only the farmer can make, but s/he needs to be presented
with the options and risks. Part of that is scientific (e.g. at what point is it too hot or too dry to
grow lettuce) and part is commercial (e.g. what else can the land or infrastructure be used
for). Industry level and regional land use planning is essential to ensure the necessary
changes to infrastructure are appropriately planned.
Adaptation to mitigation is another key challenge for rural industry. Inevitably, the cost of
energy and energy associated inputs will rise, particularly with an Emissions Trading
Scheme. The cost of fertilisers based on petroleum-based products will rise, the use of more
fertilisers to accommodate growing populations and markets will promote emissions of
nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas 300 times as potent as carbon dioxide. Farmers, particularly
irrigation farmers, are heavy users of electricity as well as fossil fuels. Adaptation needs to
include more on-farm focus on energy efficiency.
Water availability is a key variable in Queensland agriculture and climate change, and water
use efficiency a key adaptation challenge. Elevated levels of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere can potentially have positive effects on water use efficiency and yield in marginal
environments. However there are increasingly competitive demands on the limited water
supply. And this is likely to increase as rainfall and runoff is projected to decline but demands
for other water uses increase. Further complicating cross forces exist for example in the
nursery and garden sector where a “tipping point” for nursery production is adequate in-crop
irrigation water, plus adequate water for the product end user (urban, landscapes, timber and
horticulture) if they are to realise the full “value” of the green life purchased.
While the National Water Initiative and the National Plan for Water Security are both major
initiatives to deal with the transitional processes involved with water scarcity, adjustment
issues will arise. Even before that, meaningful data and useful model projections remain a
priority. In the Murray Darling 2030 CSIRO Sustainable Yields projects for example,
preliminary model outputs produce an incredibly wide range of estimates. For the recent
Border Rivers report 40 per cent of the models showed an increase in runoff and 60 per cent
showed a reduction. These modelled assessments are likely to be a key input for the Basin
Strategic Plan, which is turn will be used to redefine water entitlements and impact many
hundreds of millions of dollars of production. The modelling uncertainty needs to be
addressed as a matter of urgency if water planning is to produce sustainable outcomes.
The most important message from farmers and industry organisations on adaptation is that
most of what is required in adaptation (and indeed mitigation) is already recognised within
industry Farm Management Systems. This is not to say that these Farm Management
Systems are as widely used as industry would like, but they provide robust and proven
frameworks for incorporating climate change and broader sustainability (e.g. water quality,
soil health, and bio-security) policies and programs. Federal and State Governments need to
invest more heavily in the overarching Farm Management Systems in order to achieve even
better overall results and the necessary up skilling to incorporate the risk management tool
kits that are needed to face future challenges. Farm Management Systems will need to be
revised and updated regularly, but the base of work is already in place.
5.2 Production Risks – Tipping Points
A key industry requirement has been to best identify their core climate production
requirements so that they can then identify any critical “tipping points” that may have serious
and irreversible consequences for that particular industry or region. During the formative
stages of this project it became clear that there potentially as many “tipping points” for
agricultural production systems as there are varieties of plants and species of animals. In
47
order to keep this assessment manageable it was agreed that only temperature and moisture
could be fully assessed in the tight time frame of this project.
In Queensland temperature and moisture are often combined to define to critical humidity
conditions for efficient farm production, and these conditions can be man-made to some
extent by having irrigation available to alter the “natural environment” at certain times of the
year. In Section 6 some of these critical production issues are discussed, but it is worth
noting that many industry participants in workshops saw certain climate change issues as
potentially “tipping points” but beyond the production system itself. For instance there was
considerable discussion about the implications of increased “heat stress” days on farmers
themselves and the farm hands needed to operate in “oppressive weather”. Equally it was
noted that the “mental stress” of operating in extended periods of production down time, such
as during long periods of severe drought, or after a destructive storm event may require new
approaches to managing the farm business.
While there are certain high profile industries that are indicating that climate change may
force them to completely change their production systems or even locate out of Queensland,
it was clear during this project that the intensive agriculture sector did not see the changing
climate scene as sufficiently threatening up to 2030 to warrant such drastic steps. However,
some workshop participants did note that some of the climate scenarios for 2050 and 2070
did suggest clear “tipping points” for many of Queensland’s current agricultural activities and
research and planning to deal with these challenges were needed sooner rather than latter.
For instance, the availability of irrigation water during extended hot and dry periods is seen
by many Queensland farmers, as the ultimate test of the sustainability of production systems.
If competing demands dictates that water is diverted to non-farm uses then many
Queensland farm operations will cease to function.
While that challenge is likely to emerge post 2030, there are some immediate changes
already emerging because some agricultural systems are already at their sustainable limit
because of climate changes in recent decades. It is interesting that both the wine grape
industry and the peanut industry do see temperature and humidity changes already
underway as sufficient to dictate that some peanut production relocate to the Northern
Territory and wine producers are planning significantly changed business models to cope
with a climate no longer conducive to certain grape varieties. And there are elements of the
Queensland dairy industry that have already decided to invest in “feed lot systems” and
move away from pasture based production systems. This latter change is probably due more
to the long and exceptional drought between 2002 and 2008 but the investments needed to
facilitate such fundamental shifts in the milk production system would clearly have a payback
period stretching into the “climate change” range.
48
5.3 Mitigation Options
Farming enterprises in intensive agriculture tend to be highly developed and with little land
available for revegetation (other than in small lots). Unlike the extensive farming sector,
intensive farms will not be in a position to offer carbon offsets in the form of vegetation.
Mitigation will, in most cases, increase the costs of farming without an offsetting direct
income stream.
Scope to offer other sequestration practices (e.g. soil carbon, tillage,
nitrous fertiliser management etc.) is constrained by the rules in the Kyoto protocol on the
recognition of soil carbon, and on additionality and permanence requirements. Further, the
science underpinning almost all agricultural mitigation options is currently underdeveloped,
and some years away from providing the rigour needed for commercial uptake and technical
verification and measurement.
Soil carbon sequestration does however offer ancillary benefits which underpin sustainable
agricultural production. Even small increases in soil carbon as a result of best management
practices will increase native soil fertility (and reduce expensive fertiliser N inputs), reduce
erosion and contribute to overall soil health and food security. Further, while it is difficult to
count soil carbon at a farm level, such improvements on a broader level can make a major
difference to the national greenhouse gas inventory. Grace’s research found that
conventionally tilled crop pasture systems emit 14 per cent more than those under minimum
tillage, which in turn emit 10 per cent more than no-till systems. Complete adoption of notillage across six regions of South Eastern Australia would yield a saving of an additional
18.6 million tonnes of carbon over 20 years, the equivalent of 20 per cent of annual fossil fuel
emissions for year 2000. 3 Soil carbon gains from moving to zero tillage would be difficult to
capture as an ETS offset with the permanence, additionality and variability rules. However,
uptake of the practice would have a large cumulative mitigation impact if the incentives for
uptake of the practice were in place, and would also improve the general sustainability of
agriculture. Improved nitrous fertiliser application rates raise similar issues.
QFF’s submission to the Garnaut Review argued that in asking how much of the mitigation
burden agriculture should take on, Governments need to look at the broader risk situation.
Between 1990-2005, emissions from agriculture were static (87.9 Mt CO2e), and fell sharply
when land use is taken into account (from 216.6 Mt to 121.6 Mt). By contrast, emissions from
the energy sector rose by 36 per cent in the same period (from 287 Mt to 391 Mt). This data
highlights three factors about agriculture and greenhouse gas emissions:
1. Agriculture has carried the burden on Australia’s rising energy emissions by the imposition
of land clearing controls;
2. Excluding land clearing, agricultural emissions are static and do not represent the major
risk of rising that energy and industrial emissions do;
3. Agriculture, at 16 per cent of emissions (rising to 22 per cent with land use changes added
in) is still a significant part of Australia’s emissions and needs to play its role.4
3
Grace P Submission to the Garnaut Climate Change Review Paper on Agriculture and Land Use Jan
2008
4
QFF Submission to the Garnaut Climate Change Review Paper on Agriculture and Land Use Jan
2008
49
QFF argues that the best means for agriculture to contribute to mitigation is by further roll out
of industry best management practices regimes. A few examples illustrate this:
a. Nitrous oxide: Best practice application of nitrogen fertilisers should align fertiliser
application to plant growth, and increase nitrogen use efficiency thereby reducing losses to
the atmosphere and as runoff (e.g. Nursery production utilising controlled release
fertilisers);
b. Soil management: Best practice farm management includes ‘controlled traffic’ which
reduces disturbance of the soil, and reduced till;
c. Water use efficiency: As well as an adaptation technique, water use efficiency reduces
energy usage from pumping as well as the possibility of water logging, which can accelerate
emissions (e.g. nitrous oxide);
d. Energy efficiency: Energy efficiency audits and practices help reduce the carbon footprint
as well as reduce costs;
e. Effluent management: A key challenge for intensive animal industries, this has the
potential to impact on methane and nitrous oxide emissions;
f. Mulching: The move in the cane industry to trash blanketing rather than burning of cane
has significantly reduced emissions;
g. Tree buffers: Tree buffers assist with air, visual pollution and biodiversity in intensive
farms, while also providing a carbon sink;
h. Break crops: Planting of break crops (e.g. legumes) helps to improve the carbon and
nitrogen levels in the soil;
i. Feedstock management: The link between feedstock efficiency and methane emissions is
still being developed, but some advice is already available;
j. Drought risk management skills: Use of risk management skills can help ensure that the
farm is better prepared for drought, and thus not over stocked or over farmed on a risk
management basis.
Industry Farm Management Systems also need to be constantly updated to take into account
ongoing research. This will require close and ongoing relationships between industry bodies
and rural R&D corporations, as well as continuing investment into updating FMS programs.
Management of methane and soil carbon remain a key challenge for rural R&D.
As previously stated, intensive agriculture has little scope to provide vegetation carbon
offsets. However, intensive agriculture could be able to provide other offsets in terms of
practice changes. These open up complex issues about the recognition of ‘short-term’
offsets, or the legal enforceability of commitments to change practices ‘permanently’.
Practices such as zero tillage for increased soil carbon storage, reducing nitrogen fertiliser
use for nitrous oxide abatement, and reducing stocking rates in drier seasons for methane
reduction, all have the potential to provide carbon offsets if the ETS recognises short-term
offsets. However, as such offsets are unlikely to comply with the current accounting rules
under the Kyoto protocol, they are unlikely to be recognised.
50
The inability of an ETS to recognise some of the most significant mitigation actions available
to intensive agriculture raises two other major policy considerations. First, it means that the
costs of intensive agriculture will rise with few opportunities to mitigate that cost without
reducing productivity. Early ABARE estimates suggest that cropping operations face a 4.5
per cent increase in costs if agriculture is excluded from the ETS, and a 6 per cent increase
in costs if it is included (assuming a $40/tonne carbon price).5 This would be in addition to
the cost of adapting to climate change in the face of reduced water availability, higher
temperatures and increased biosecurity and extreme events risk.
Second, it also fails to enforce the potentially positive links between mitigation actions and
adaptation and sustainable agriculture actions. Improving soil carbon, water use and nutrient
management have long been key objectives of sustainable agriculture programs and
included in industry risk-based Farm Management Systems. Such practices improve
sustainability and resource resilience, key objectives of Government policy. There could be
a policy ‘win-win’ if mitigation, adaptation and sustainable agriculture policies each re-enforce
the other. The development of such policy linkages is beyond the scope of this paper.6
However, the action plans being developed by industry are increasingly recognising the
enormous overlap between mitigation and adaptation responses.
5.4 Summary
One clear conclusion after the six month period of this project is that climate change offers
some acute challenges for Queensland’s intensive agriculture sector. The message that
came from farmers however is that these challenges are ongoing opportunities rather than
some sudden threat. These farmers suggest that climate change parameters need to be
brought down to farm level factors that impact production system decision making. Farmers
see weather and climate as continuous factors in the production mix and not a discrete oneoff issue that to be assessed. It is for this reason that the Risk and Opportunities Assessment
component of the project proved most difficult. However, one thing did become clear and that
was the need to have regular updates of the climate change science. Feedback from farmers
suggested that the Farm Management Systems framework provides a very sensible and
systematic framework to incorporate ongoing updates of climate information that may impact
the production systems. QFF supports this view and will work with policy makers and the
science community to move the debate to a more continuous information flow of ongoing
climate science data that can be incorporated into business decision making frameworks.
5
ABARE presentation to QFF Future of Farming seminar 10 May 2008
6
For further discussion, see the QFF Submission to the Garnaut Review Paper on the ETS April 2008
51
6. Queensland Intensive Agriculture FMS
Adaption’s to Climate Change
Using the progressive outputs from Expert Panel meetings, workshops and internal
materials each participating industry has developed a preliminary industry action plan to
deal with the risks/opportunities associated with climate change including:
 The linkages as appropriate to industry Farm Management Systems programs;
 Training and resource requirements for industry extension and advisory staff to assist
them in their role with producers;
 A feedback process for providing producers with relevant data that can be incorporated
into their long term risk management decisions.
QFF member organisations Cotton Australia, CANEGROWERS, Queensland
Dairyfarmers’ Organisation, Nursery and Garden Industry Queensland, and Growcom are
developing industry specific action plans through various grower workshopping processes
see Attachment 2 for Draft Action Plans. Industry Farm Management Systems program
coordinators are members of the project steering committee as are the QFF Drought
Policy Officer and Water Policy Officer.
6.1 Sugar
Industry Overview
Sugarcane production in Australia is mainly focused in discontinuous regions spanning 2100
km of the coastal plains of eastern Australia, from Mossman in the Far North of Queensland,
to Grafton, northern New South Wales (Figure 1). The majority of these regions are within 50
km of the coastline and in close proximity to tidal rivers and creeks. In 2006 production in
Queensland occupied nearly 380,000 ha of land (Australian Sugar Milling Council, 2006).
Queensland generally produces approximately 94% of the country’s raw sugar production
(CANEGROWERS, 2007). Northern New South Wales accounts for around 4% of production
and a small area in Western Australia’s Ord River Irrigation Area produces the remainder.
Depending on prices, the industry generates between $1.5 - $2 billion in direct revenue, with
approximately $1.2 billion from export markets (CANEGROWERS, 2007).
52
Figure 1: Sugarcane growing regions of the east coast of Australia. Source: CANEGROWERS
website.
The sugarcane industry on the east coast of Australia can be categorised into four regions
referred to as the Far North (Mossman in the north, south to Ingham), the Burdekin and
Atherton Tablelands, the Central region (Proserpine south to Maryborough) and the
remaining areas in south east Queensland and northern New South Wales. The four regions
span a number of climatic zones, from the wet tropics in the north through to the dry tropics
and humid sub-tropics in more southerly locations, and can be defined by 3 major climatic
constraints to primary production; water availability, radiation and temperature.
Potential yield is limited in the Far North by an excess of summer rainfall (annual rainfall is
approximately 3000 mm) and associated cloud cover and low levels of radiation. The
Burdekin and Atherton Tablelands, although not geographically linked, are both distinct from
other cane growing regions in that production is enhanced by an abundant supply of
irrigation water from the Burdekin Dam and the Atherton Tableland water supply scheme,
respectively. The production potential of the dry tropics of the Central region, although
providing an ideal temperature for the growth of sugarcane, is constrained by a limited supply
of irrigation and rainwater. Conversely, south east Queensland and northern New South
Wales receive abundant rainfall for sugarcane production, but cool winter temperatures and
low radiation levels result in slow growth rates.
53
Climate Change Impacts
Risks
In the southern region (Bundaberg centric) present limited supply of irrigation water is likely
to be exacerbated by the projected decrease in rainfall. Adaptation must focus on improved
efficiency of water use. Projected warming will increase the duration of the growing season.
Planting earlier in the season needs to be considered in a value-chain contest. Present
competition for land-use from other crops may increase, particularly from short-duration
annual crops. Diversification Options also need to be considered in terms of short, medium
and long-term climate change projections.
Northern region: Increased water logging may limit paddock access, particularly during the
growing season. Reduced spring rain would negatively impact crop establishment. Herbert &
Burdekin region: The security of water supply from the Burdekin Dam may be threatened.
Rising water table and salinity issues, exacerbated by rising sea levels, will require
improvements in irrigation and better institutional arrangements in these irrigated areas.
Declines in winter and spring rain may increase traffic ability, improving harvesting efficiency.
Central region: Limited water supplies may be further strained by projected drying. Warming
will extend growing seasons and improve crop growth in the frost-prone western districts.
Poor drainage and tidal intrusion in the lower floodplains are likely to be exacerbated by
projected sea level rise.
As with horticultural and other crops, government policy on emissions trading also threatens
to pose additional challenges to maintain profitable and productive enterprises in
Queensland.
Opportunities
Sugar cane is highly versatile crop so new opportunities will occur as a result of its ability to
grow in marginal areas unsuitable for other crops and it high biomass potential in a more
carbon restrained world. Renewal energy e.g. bagasse and ethanol still have the greatest
potential of all crops in the Australian market to meet these needs. Sugarcane worldwide is
seen more as an energy crop and recent work in crop breeding have developed a high
biomass plant and more water use efficient use to meet these challenges. Downstream
processing requires some additional work; this has been recognized and progressed.
Issues Analysis
Probably the greatest impact (and adaptation challenge) for the Australian sugarcane
industry will be the projected change in the amount, frequency and intensity of future
rainfall. In many regions the amount of effective rainfall available to the crop will be reduced,
whilst demand is likely to increase due to greater rates of evapo-transpiration linked to
atmospheric warming.
A range of adaptation strategies are needed across the entire sugar cane industry value
chain in the coming years if it is to remain sustainable under a changing climate. Strategies
must be tailored to individual regions to take account of differences in biophysical and
logistical characteristics.
Adaptation options available to the sugarcane industry can be categorised into those seeking
to: improve the management of limited water supplies; technological fixes based on
reductionist analysis; engineering design principles, or computer-aided models; altered
cropping system design and agronomic management (typically requiring changes in attitudes
54
and behaviour); decision making tools (including the use of climate forecasting and
information sources); and institutional change.
Many of the knowledge gaps detailed above can be best filled through the
enhancement of existing R,D&E activities. Other knowledge gaps are either related to
projection uncertainty and impacts of future climate variability, or sugarcane physiology.
Building social capital through targeted extension, improving skills and providing a more
industry-wide knowledge base are all essential for future adaptation. Additional knowledge
gaps will undoubtedly come to light as the sugarcane industry responds to a changing
climate.
Based on these analyses:

Many of the adaptation options are available through programs and activities linked to
the Sugarcane farm management systems program. Further resources will be
required to make these activities more widely available.

Particular emphasis on resources and training requirements will be required for
activities associated with the emissions trading scheme which is yet to be developed.

Some feedback processes for primary producers are already available – for example
monitoring for irrigation requirements with the recently developed WaterSense tool
notable amongst these. However more information linking potential efficiency gains
with emissions reductions and financial costs and benefits are required.
Objectives
The objectives of the Sugar Climate Change Response Strategy is to:
1. Develop a Climate Change Policy covering adaptation activities, mitigation activities, and
activities related to emissions trading scheme.
2. Work closely with government departments to enhance climate change awareness and
communication.
3. Analyse potential changed incidence of pests and diseases in various regions and at
different times of the year using the sugar financial packages FEAT – FUTURECANE
Farm Economic Analysis Tool.
4. Increase resources to highlight, extend and increase adoption of on-farm water efficiency
activities including on-farm energy efficiency activities,
5. Consider research directed to the possible requirements for more transformational
change ranging from changes in types of irrigation systems and other farming practices
currently available in the sugarcane industry,
6. Resource the awareness of and adaptation to the developing emissions trading scheme.
7. Continue research into varieties suitable for changed climate conditions e.g. sugarcane
varieties that are more “water efficient”, more tolerant of higher temperatures and able to
be tolerant of possible increased pest and disease incidence.
55
8. Consider the integration of sugarcane climate change policy (which would cover growing,
harvest and delivery to manufacture) to other aspects of the sugar industry eg milling and
other manufacturing.
Priorities
In the recently published SRDC Climate Change Technical Report (Park et al. 2007a) it was
concluded that further R&D projects should address the following knowledge gaps and
priority research, development and extension (R,D&E) areas:

Improvements in farming practice, especially precision irrigation, on-paddock water
use and off-paddock water quality impacts and the management of increased climate
variability through seasonal forecasting;

Innovative farming and processing systems that take an integrated and sustainable
approach to risk and opportunity across all inputs such as plant varieties, nutrient
management practices and energy use in mills, through to the outputs of sugar,
fertiliser and bio-energy, ensuring a flexible and financially resilient industry;

Capitalisation of bio-energy opportunities and carbon trading potential for value
adding and preferably integrated within innovative farming and processing systems to
maximise cross industry benefits;

Greater focus in sugarcane physiology and plant improvement in varietal
characteristics that enhance resilience to climate change, industry adaptation to
higher temperatures, reduced water availability, and extreme events. This will also
require knowledge of the genetic x environment x management (G*E*M) interactions.

Enhancing human capital through building skills and enhancing science capability in
climate understanding and risk management across the sugar industry so that the
knowledge and tools required by the industry may be delivered;

Linking of biosecurity management to a changing climate so that potential threats in
biosecurity are understood;

An understanding of the global context of climate change impacts on worldwide
production, profitability and markets relative to the Australian sugar industry to help
continually optimise market position.
Park et al. (2007a) note that many of the knowledge gaps detailed above can be best
filled through the enhancement of existing R,D&E activities. For example, research
into plant agronomy, physiology and plant genetics already incorporates many of the
key attributes of climate, albeit with increased emphasis on climate related attributes
called for as part of the response to a changing climate.
Likewise, research on sustainability of on-farm practices is already addressing issues
regarding off-farm pollutant and enrichment. A more variable and event-driven climate will
make this research even more imperative if the sugarcane industry is to respond to
community demands and demonstrate resilience.
56
Many of the knowledge gaps detailed above can be best filled through the enhancement of
existing R, D&E activities. Other knowledge gaps are more specific to climate change
science and increasing climate variability. One of these applications may be in predicting
climatically-optimal growth locations for the relocation of sugarcane production. In addition,
building social capital through targeted extension, improving skills and providing a more
industry-wide knowledge base are all essential. Additional knowledge gaps will undoubtedly
come to light as the sugarcane industry responds to a changing climate.
Strategy
Adaptation Options for Dealing with Climate Change
The sugarcane industry in Australia has a long record of managing the impacts of weather
and climate-related events. Nevertheless, additional adaptation measures will be required to
reduce the adverse impacts of projected climate change and variability, regardless of the
scale of mitigation undertaken over the next two to three decades. (IPCC 2007).
Similar to other cropping systems, many of the management-level adaptation options
suitable to the sugarcane production system are largely extensions or intensifications of
existing climate risk management or production enhancement activities in response to a
potential change in the climate risk (Howden et al., 2007). Adaptation strategies can be
categorised into the following approaches:
Improved management of limited water supplies – this may be achieved through more
efficient use of water supplies (e.g. the use of more efficient irrigation water delivery
technologies and schedules, improved soil structure for improved infiltration and moisture
conservation, and trash blanketing, and minimum tillage for reduced evaporation); improved
capture and storage of water (e.g. harvesting rainfall and excess surface water in on-farm
storage facilities, laser levelling and the re-use of tail water), and the maintenance of belowground water sources (e.g. restrictions on groundwater pumping and the construction of new
bores, abandonment of saline bores, ongoing monitoring of water quality).
Integration of stream flow forecasting, storage options and crop water demand could also go
a long way to improving the use of catchment runoff for crop production. A change in pricing
and regulations, such as the date of the water year, would also help create incentives for
more efficient use of catchment runoff.
Technological fixes – these might be achieved through technologies currently on the
market or those which await invention, refinement or delivery. Technological fixes may
include improved varieties with desirable traits consistent with prevailing climate conditions
(e.g. greater drought resistance, water use efficiency, tolerance of increased temperatures,
reduced lodging, low vegetative growth and stalk fibre content); or machinery technologies
(e.g. wet-weather harvesters and machinery able to effectively harvest lodged cane, and
improved within-mill clarifier design and modified mud scrapers).
These technical fix adaptive options are generally based on reductionist analysis,
engineering design principles, and computer-aided modeling, as opposed to more attitudinal
fixes that require a change of thought process or behaviour.
57
Cropping system design and agronomic management strategies – these may include
farm-scale planning and design (e.g. tree planting for shelter and soil protection, introduction
of precision agriculture, laser levelling, diversification into alternative/additional crop species),
or improved and more flexible agronomic management (e.g. adjustment of planting dates
and crop varieties; revision of best management practice for erosion, pest, disease and weed
control, trash blanketing, nutrient cycling and improved soil structure, and the optimisation of
resources to achieve maximum yield in the prevailing climate). These adaptive options
require a greater element of attitudinal change than the technical fixes detailed above.
Improved decision-making – this may be achieved through the utilisation of decisionsupport tools and information, especially those incorporating seasonal climate forecasts, to
reduce production risk.
Institutional change – these might include physical infrastructure (e.g. construction of
seawalls and storm surge barriers, dune reinforcement, land acquisition and the creation of
marshland/wetlands as buffer zones against sea level rise and flooding, and the protection of
existing natural barriers), industry reform (e.g. revision of quarantine boundaries, relocation
of the sugarcane production to ore southerly areas to track poleward shifts of climate zones,
increased flexibility in capacity and operations in the value chain to track changes in the
quality and quantity of throughput to maintain optimal efficiency), or greater diversification
into alternative rural enterprises and off-farm income.
Summary
The sugarcane industry is well positioned to manage of the impacts on climate change on its
business. SRDC has funded CSIRO to critique the industry’s position with a 2007 précis
highlighting impacts, adaptation and R and D opportunities.
It was noted that many of the knowledge gaps about the industry’s adoption to climate
change could be best filled through the enhancement of existing R, D& E activities. For
example, research into plant agronomy, physiology and plant genetics already incorporates
many of the key attributes of climate, albeit with increased emphasis on climate related
attributes called for as part of the response to a changing climate.
The Sugarcane Industry has an ongoing SmartCane program with an FMS activity for
growers to assist them improve their on farm sustainability and profitability. This FMS activity
has a number of tools, which will enable growers, adopt and manage to climate change.
These tools include an ongoing audit of farm activities; a financial planning tool to assist
growers model changes to farm inputs, rotational crops and harvesting strategies and pest
and nutrient management amongst others. The incremental effects of climate change and
the impacts on the industry viability will be hosted in extension programs as required.
The training and resource requirements to maintain an active FMS activity will be
accelerated by the addition of up to 6 extension officers as part of the Reef Rescue
program. These officers would assist growers undertake an independent farm audit, deliver
nutrient and pest management planning as well as assisting in the delivery of FEAT training.
These officers would also assist in the delivery of incentives as proposed under Reef Rescue
to prepare and assist growers develop improved farm practices enhancing resilience in the
sugarcane sector for climate change.
58
The FEAT economic tool will be a key in the ongoing support of growers for climate change
mitigation. This tool will enable growers to actively predict the impact of different
management scenarios e.g. irrigation strategies on their profitability and sustainability as
climate change manifest.
Ongoing communication with the broad sugarcane industry about ongoing climate change
adoption will be maintained through the Industries’ fortnightly CANEGROWERS magazine
which is disseminated widely among its 3000 plus members. SRDC uses this magazine and
the quarterly BSES quarterly magazine to disseminate key messages about industry R and D
and in particular climate change to a wide sugarcane audience. In particular, climate change
forecasting and diversification options are regularly featured in these magazines as a positive
feedback to growers about changing external forces on their business.
Finally, the sugarcane industry is well aware of the emissions trading scheme, which is likely
to have economic impacts and benefits on this industry. As with climate change there is
active dialogue with all sectors of the industry; this will continue on both issues as we move
forward.
59
6.2 Horticulture
Industry Overview
Queensland is Australia’s premier state for fruit and vegetable production, growing one-third
of the nation’s produce, including the majority of Australia’s bananas, pineapples, mandarins,
avocados, beetroot and fresh tomatoes. It includes emerging agricultural industries such as
olives, cocoa, coffee, Asian exotic tropical fruits, culinary herbs, bush foods, functional foods
and nutraceuticals. A relatively small proportion of product is exported, mostly to Asian and
Middle Eastern markets, including citrus, mangoes, chillies, melons and lychees.
Horticulture is Queensland’s second largest primary industry, worth more than $1.7 billion
per annum and employing around 25,000 people. It is an innovative and consumer-focused
provider of clean and green produce for domestic and world markets.
Queensland’s 2,800 farms operate in a variety of locations and climates and use a range of
production methods to produce more than 120 types of fruit and vegetables. There are 16
defined horticultural regions, from Stanthorpe in the south to the Atherton Tablelands in the
far north, with a total area under fruit and vegetable production of approximately 100,000
hectares. Horticulture is a high value and efficient user of water and other natural resources.
Around 95% of horticultural production is irrigated.
The nature of horticulture business is quite different to many other industries within the
agriculture sector. Horticulture is the most labour intensive of all agricultural industries; labour
represents as much as 50 per cent of the overall operating costs of horticultural enterprises.
The capital investment required for horticultural production is usually relatively high, while
profit margins are often tight. Growers operate in extremely competitive markets and the
domestic market for fresh produce is dominated by Australia’s two major supermarket
chains. The significant market power of these retailers along with escalating costs of
production limit the capacity of growers to absorb additional costs or manage industry
impacts, such as climate change.
Figure 2: Map indicating the location of grower areas.
60
Climate Change Impacts
Risks
Industry impacts of climate change are wide ranging. Changing temperature, rainfall and
water availability will mean that existing growing windows, production seasons and
conditions are likely to change in the future. In general, the cumulative impact of increased
temperature, reduced rainfall and increased carbon fertilisation will result in hotter, dryer
production conditions with reduced chilling and maturing times and increased threat of pest
and disease activity. These changes could combine to make certain commodities in existing
regions unviable in the future and further increase the cost of fruit and vegetables to the
consumer.
Beyond the physical impacts of climate change, the Australian Government’s proposed
policy on emissions trading also poses additional challenges to the maintenance of profitable
and productive horticulture enterprises in Queensland. At a minimum, the introduction of an
Emissions Trading Scheme will increase the cost of basic inputs such a fuel, fertilisers and
electricity. While it is often assumed that cost increases will passed onto consumers, the
highly competitive nature of the horticultural industry and the dominance of major
supermarket chains such as Coles and Woolworths mean that growers are price takers with
limited capacity to pass costs on.
Opportunities
Although climate change is likely to create significant impacts, opportunities will also exist.
With changing growing seasons and regions may come new opportunities to access market
windows or expand production into previously unfavourable or marginal areas. Increasing
temperatures and atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations will also mean that crops are
likely to mature more rapidly and may potentially be more water efficient. Similarly, projected
increase in summer rainfall may offer enhanced opportunities for water collection and
storage, if water harvesting regulations allow some flexibility.
At a policy level, while the commencement of an Emissions Trading Scheme poses
considerable challenges, potential does exist to explore opportunities in horticultural
production systems for capturing carbon in crops or soils and entering into the emerging
carbon offsets markets. Similarly, opportunities exist for the horticultural industry to promote
low carbon impact products to growing niche markets of carbon conscious consumers or
enhance “clean & green” or environmentally assured marketing initiatives in the broader
market place.
Issues Analysis
Queensland’s climate is likely to become warmer, with more hot days and fewer cold nights.
For example, the number of days above 35 degrees in 2030 in Brisbane could double. While
low to moderate warming may help plant growth in some frost sensitive species, more hot
days and a decline in rainfall or irrigation could reduce yields. Warmer winters are also likely
to reduce the yields as a result of heat stress and reduced winter chilling. Water resources
are also likely to be further stressed due to increasing demand yet decreasing precipitation.
A decline in annual rainfall with higher evaporation rates would lead to a tendency for
reduced run-off into rivers, with significant implications for security of irrigators’ water
entitlements. Finally, droughts and extreme weather events in Queensland are likely to
become more frequent and more severe.
61
Objectives
The objectives of the Queensland Horticulture Climate Change Response Strategy are to
1. Ensure horticulture industry members and stakeholders in Queensland are well
informed about climate change issues, particularly
a. current climate science,
b. best available regional climate projections
c. anticipated industry impacts and opportunities
d. government and industry policy settings and directions
2. Identify effective actions that can be taken by industry to respond to climate change
challenges and be well positioned
a. to minimise any impacts;
b. capitalise on any opportunities;
c. contribute to carbon emission reductions;
d. influence government policy development and
e. make smart investments in R&D, communication and business management.
3. Encourage collaboration on climate change actions between stakeholders.
4. Influence the development of government programs aimed at supporting industry
responses to climate change while optimising access to government programs.
5. Guide strategic investment in R&D that assists industry to respond to climate change.
Priorities
A. More detailed and specific information about how climate changes will affect the
horticulture industry and horticultural production regions is needed.
B. Growers need to be well informed about climate change issues and potential impacts
in order to make effective business management decisions and responses.
C. Growers need tools that can be used to:
a. better predict and manage seasonal climate variability,
b. assess the risks and opportunities posed by climate change to their
enterprise, and
c. plan how to adapt to projected climate changes.
D. Growers need access to information on management practices and responses that
are effective for climate change adaptation.
E. Growers need advice on how to minimise the carbon impact of their enterprises and
farming operations.
F. Growers need to be well informed about the emerging “carbon economy” and
equipped to assess the opportunities or impacts.
G. The horticulture industry needs to be able to influence national, state and regional
policies aimed at addressing climate change and carbon emission management.
H. The horticulture industry needs to influence water planning and management
arrangements to ensure they effectively incorporate climate change considerations
62
and protect the security of water entitlements.
I.
The horticulture industry needs to conduct its own detailed analyses (especially
agronomic issues) at commodity and regional scales, identify issues and invest in
solutions.
J. The horticulture industry needs to address changes to pest management issues
arising from climate change
Information sharing within and between industry, government, consumers and the general
public is vital to underpin sound management decisions.
Strategy
Growcom has developed a number of strategies that are included in their draft action plan
these are listed below in summary form, for more information see Attachment 2:
A1 Build a detailed understanding of how climate change will affect horticultural industries
and horticultural production regions.
B2 Deliver an industry information campaign to increase awareness and knowledge of
climate change amongst fruit and vegetable growers.
C3 Develop management tools that help growers assess the risks and opportunities of
climate variability and change, and plan responses in their business and farming operations.
D4 Develop and deliver information on management practices and responses that are
effective for climate change adaptation.
E5 Identify and promote practices that reduce the carbon emission and increase carbon
absorption in horticulture production systems.
F6 Equip growers to participate in the emerging “carbon economy”.
G8 Influence national, state and regional policies aimed at addressing climate change and
carbon emission management.
H9 Influence water planning and management arrangements.
I10 Encourage horticultural commodity and regional scale action and research investment in
climate change issues.
J11 Address changes to pest management issues arising from climate change.
K12 Develop communication plans to guide information sharing and flow within and
between industry, government, consumers and the general public regarding climate change
and horticulture issues.
63
Development of the Growcom climate change and climate variability FMS
module
Growcom has commenced development of the climate change and variability module for
inclusion in its Farm Management System (FMS) program. The Growcom FMS program
uses computer-based analysis tools developed to assist horticultural growers with managing
risks to the growth, durability and environmental sustainability of their agribusiness. The FMS
process recognises that providing a structured risk based approach to assist in decision
making can have long term benefits for increasing growers’ capacity to manage risk and
benchmark improvements. In this way, the Growcom’s FMS program does not replace other
forms of extension but makes them more targeted and effective.
The FMS is in modular format with each module focusing on the health and direction of the
grower’s management. The climate change and variability module complements the existing
water use efficiency and soil health and nutrient management FMS modules already widely
used by Growcom.
In each module growers are asked up to 25 questions about their current management
practices to identify potential risks and opportunities to improve current practice. Based on
growers’ responses, an action plan with target dates for each grower to work towards is
generated. The action plan also links growers with existing information sources to assist
them in implementing specific actions. The data is stored in an access database which can
produce reports on a number of scales, although a key principle is guaranteeing data
confidentiality to growers.
The Climate Change and Variability module has been developed through the identification of
key risks resulting from Queensland specific climate change projections in 2030. The 25
questions in the climate change and variability module have been informed by the
management of risks and opportunities associated with:
 existing climate variability;
 projected regional temperature and rainfall change;
 extreme events;
 increased carbon dioxide concentrations;
 carbon footprinting;
 emissions trading;
 soils and vegetation sequestration.
The new climate change and variability module will assist growers target specific areas of
weakness in risk management and understand the potential business impact of such risks.
This module will also enable growers to identify an appropriate course of action to overcome
identified risks associated with climate change on their property. The addition of the Climate
Change and Climate Variability module to Growcom’s FMS will be an important tool in
assisting growers manage risks associated with climate change in years to come.
64
Summary
Horticulture faces many challenges from climate change. In the past, growers have proven
their capacity to cope with change and remain viable in a highly viable climate. However, the
climatic changes projected to occur in future years are expected to be of a greater scale and
occur at a more rapid rate and will therefore require a new level of risk management and
adaption. Stakeholders at all levels need to be aware of the challenges that lay ahead for the
horticultural industry, especially in the context of the horticulture industry’s contribution to
Australia’s food supply.
In order to effectively respond to climate change, growers need to be well informed about
climate change issues, impacts and responses to increased temperature, decreased rainfall,
elevated carbon dioxide and increasing pest and disease activity. Growers also need to be
equipped to minimise (and document) the carbon impact of their enterprises and farming
operations and engage with the emerging carbon economy. This awareness will help reduce
emissions and address the root cause of climate change.
In areas where adaption and emission reductions are hindered by a lack of knowledge,
additional research and development needs to be undertaken by both industry and
government to further minimise the impact of climate change on the horticultural industry.
Combining information on adaption and mitigation with the support of appropriate decision
making tools such as the Growcom FMS will maximise the effectiveness of the climate
change response in the horticultural industry into the future.
6.3 Production Nursery
Industry Overview
The Queensland Nursery Industry is a significant horticultural sector with a combined supply
chain valued at more than half a billion dollars annually. The industry employs approximately
6500 people spread over more than 2700 businesses including production nurseries, retail
outlets and allied traders.
The economic value of the Queensland nursery production sector in 2008/2009 is forecast at
more than $400 million closely following Fruit & Vegetables and Sugar in contributing to the
value of Horticulture in Queensland. The total Queensland nursery value is expected to
exceed $550 million in 2008/2009 with the entire Lifestyle Horticulture sector generating over
$1.3 billion in turnover for the same period in Queensland. The Nursery Industry nationally
contributes more than $5.5 billion annually to the Australian economy.
The Queensland production sector of the industry is located predominantly along the
coastline, between the Tweed River in the south and Cairns in northern Queensland, with
pockets of producers situated in various inland locations including Toowoomba, Emerald and
the Atherton Tablelands. This wide distribution allows the industry to economically produce
the crops required at a local level plus target the interstate markets with a diverse product
range. The production nursery sector services a wide range of end users including domestic
gardens, commercial landscapers, developers, local government, fruit and vegetable
growers, revegetation providers and the forest industry.
65
Production nurseries are a unique commodity in Queensland Agriculture. Climate Change
and Climate Variability issues affect the nursery grower in a similar fashion to other
agricultural producers. However, since the product is sold ‘live’ and not harvested, the
industry must also combat a range of other challenges that confront the end users. Access to
water to establish and maintain trees and shrubs in the urban environment, as well as the
changing suitability of certain nursery crop species for different regions are obvious
examples. The issue of water security for fruit and vegetable producers and forestry
plantations will also have a major influence on the sustainability and profitability of production
nurseries servicing these sectors of horticulture. The recent drought has taken an enormous
toll on the industry with many business closures, financial difficulties and job losses, plus the
resultant skill drain that will need to be addressed in the future. The industry will rely on
partnerships with government that further support and assist growers with Climate
Change/Variability mitigation and adaptation strategies.
Climate Change Impacts
Risks
Whilst part of Agriculture, the production nursery sector requires recognition of its unique
status within the climate change discussion. It is widely accepted that plant-based industries
produce significantly lower emissions than those produced in livestock industries. Production
nurseries are also likely to be situated on much smaller landholdings than broad acre
systems and as such produce considerably lower emissions. Although the Nursery Industry
accepts that it is part of Agriculture, it is important that the aspects unique to this industry are
acknowledged when discussing climate change mitigation. In particular, these differences
need to be recognised in the development of the emissions trading scheme and the potential
involvement of Agriculture.
The greatest current and future challenge to the nursery industry is water security. Whilst the
industry employs irrigation best practice, water security is required at both the production and
end user level. Water storages will need to increase to accommodate the changed rainfall
patterns of ‘less frequent but more intense rainfall events’. End users in the urban
environment will need access to water to establish and maintain plantings (gardens and the
broader landscape).
Increases in input costs will be the most obvious and immediate result of climate change.
Energy and fuel costs have increased rapidly over the past few years and this trend will
continue to accelerate. This will place production nurseries under greater financial strain.
Currently growers are not equipped with appropriate information to assist them in making
‘low energy’ or ‘low emission’ decisions.
The incidence of pest and disease is likely to increase with the effects of Climate Change.
Rising temperatures will alter the distribution of a range of pest and disease species as well
as effecting potential incursions of new pests and diseases. Changes to pest and disease
lifecycles will occur as warmer temperatures prolong conditions suitable for more intense
infestations and additional generations. This will create greater pressures for on-farm pest
management and ongoing market access.
Increased temperatures are also likely to dramatically change the way nursery crops are
grown. Crops that are currently grown in ‘full sun’ growing areas will need greater protection
from increased temperature by the addition of costly shade structures. There is also likely to
be an increase in the range of crops which require ‘cooling’. Root ball temperatures within
containers may increase to levels where growth is either reduced or stops completely.
66
The imminent introduction of an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and the inclusion of
Agriculture from 2013 is an issue for production nurseries. There needs to be a consistent
approach from all levels of government and appropriate timelines established for adaptation
to new regulations. There will be enormous cost burdens associated with the introduction of
an Emissions Trading Scheme. A by-product of an ETS will be increased costs (energy, fuel,
fertilizer etc) either up or down the value chain. This ‘cost penalty’ will be borne by growers
who are historically ‘price takers’ and unable to effectively pass these costs on. Whilst
production nurseries are part of Agriculture it is important to recognise the unique nature of
these operations and the potential impacts that an ETS will have.
Opportunities
The Nursery Industry should position itself as part of the Climate Change solution. The
contribution of nursery crops to the urban landscape, fruit and vegetable, forestry and revegetation industries is significant.
Immediate investment should be made in research
which calculates the benefits of trees and shrubs as mitigating elements against climate
change. Ornamental trees and shrubs are not only aesthetically pleasing, they purify the air,
minimise noise, provide a habitat for native fauna, lower energy consumption, consume CO²,
produce Oxygen and sequester Carbon. There is established research which confirms that
well placed trees have a ‘summer cooling’ and ‘winter warming’ effect in the urban
environment. Studies in the USA confirm a reduction in temperature of 3-7°C under a canopy
of street trees.7 There is other research that evaluates the benefit of trees as mitigation of
urban run-off and erosion control. The industry needs to be able to quantify, through
appropriate research, the many benefits of the ‘urban forest’. These benefits need to be
delivered in a context that makes them relevant as part of the solution to climate change.
It is possible that the predicted increase in CO² levels may, at least in the short term,
increase the growth rate of some nursery crops. Whilst this may be an opportunity initially,
more research will need to be conducted into the effect increased temperature will have,
when combined with increased CO², on overall growth rates and species performance in
given regional areas.
A broad consumer education campaign will need to be established to promote the most
effective way to utilise nursery crops as part of climate change mitigation. The research
conducted into ‘green roofs’ and ‘green walls’ will need to be highlighted and expanded upon.
The many benefits of trees and shrubs are widely accepted; however adequate research will
need to be conducted to substantiate these claims. The retail sector of the nursery industry is
well positioned to become the ‘Climate Change shop-front’ providing broad consumer
education on urban Climate Change mitigation strategies, products and services.
The industry would like to explore the potential of solar power as a sustainable energy
source. With significant roof areas and vast expanses of outdoor growing areas the nursery
industry is well positioned to be a partner in cooperative research into renewable energy
solutions.
It is likely there will be an expansion of interstate and overseas export markets. The changing
climate dynamic presents an opportunity for the Queensland growers who adapt quickly. The
Nursery Industry will need to ensure that the current focus on export potential is further
developed to ensure full advantage is taken of this opportunity.
. Burden,D. 2006. Urban Street Trees, 22 Benefits. Specific applications. Glatting Jackson.
Walkable Communities Inc.
7
67
Issues Analysis
Most climate forecast models predict that Queensland will experience a ‘warmer’ and ‘drier’
scenario, with ‘less frequent but more intense rainfall events’. An increase in temperature will
obviously alter the growth patterns of many nursery crop species. Production nurseries
supplying either fruit and vegetable growers or forestry will also have to contend with climate
change affecting a range of traditional practices. These include species or cultivar selections,
growing seasons and growing locations.
There is constant and increasing ‘urbanisation’ pressure on traditional Agricultural land.
Production nurseries forced to relocate are faced with a range of new costs and challenges.
The initial costs of new land and capitalisation are substantial. New sites are always further
from traditional markets, the tyranny of distance increasing transport costs both on inputs
and outputs. Individual house lot sizes are diminishing therefore reducing urban greenspace, placing increased pressure on local government to provide the necessary parklands
and tree cover in the built environment.
Clearly there will be many on farm challenges; species grown will change, growing practices
will alter, more protective growing structures may be required, established growing regions
may move, water storages will need to be have increased capacity.
Importantly, the end user of our products will need unrestricted access to water to establish
these plants or products. Energy and fuel costs will continue to rise placing considerable
financial strain on primary producers. Pine bark is a major component of nursery growing
media. Access may be restricted in the future, placing the industry in an incredibly difficult
position. Research will need to be conducted into alternatives for pine bark. New pest and
disease species will emerge; new methods of combating these will need to be established,
including access to new pesticides.
Objectives
The Nursery Industry has an integral role to play in the mitigation of climate change. It has
linkages with some of the most critical primary industries in Queensland. The industry must
be supported as it adapts to climate change to ensure it continues to play an important and
productive role in the agricultural supply chain. Research on climate change issues that
confront the nursery industry directly must also extend to cover the food production and
forestry industries. The ability of production nurseries to continue to provide the most suitable
species and cultivars to these sectors must be maintained. A co-operative research
approach will ensure the most efficient outcome.
The Action Plan for the production nursery industry has five core objectives;
68

Government recognition – the industry has some unique challenges and requires all
levels of government to recognise these as we move through the climate change
debate. The industry plays a pivotal role in the food, forestry and urban landscape
industries, all critical in combating the effects of climate change. Public investment
will be crucial to ensure the industry can continue to effectively service these sectors.

Current Emissions - the industry must establish through reliable science, the minor
contribution it makes to green house gas emissions. Research will need to be
conducted to benchmark the energy consumed through existing practices and
equipment.

Mitigation/Lowering Emissions – the industry needs to further develop its best
management practice programs highlighting new technologies, equipment, growing
systems and strategies that will contribute to lowering emissions.

Adaptation Research – increases in temperature and reduction in rainfall will have a
major impact on traditional growing practices, growing regions, species selection,
pest and disease management and other nursery specific issues. Research will need
to be conducted and the results embedded into the current nursery industry Farm
Management System (FMS) and its three associated best management practice
programs.

The Nursery Industries role in Mitigation – as a provider of living green-life products
that make a major contribution to offsetting greenhouse gas emissions and lowering
temperatures in the built environment. The industry must establish and quantify the
many benefits of its products. The Nursery Industry is part of the solution to climate
change.
Priorities
The industry needs to understand the emissions created during the production process. This
will form the basis for all future decisions. The establishment of an emission trading scheme
(ETS) and the potential inclusion of agriculture from 2013 will create a need for accurate
calculation of on farm emissions (Carbon Footprint).
Growers will need a greater understanding of the energy consumption of typical production
nursery equipment and benchmarks must be established to assist in sound emissions
management. To enable informed decision making in the future a grower will need to
understand current energy usage and the options available for more efficient production
techniques and the potential for co-generation.
The industry will need to be able to calculate the carbon sequestered in a range of nursery
crop species, both in juvenile form in nursery containers and once established in a garden or
the ‘urban forest’. This will form the basis of the positive contribution the industry makes,
either lowering our emissions balance for the ETS or in providing long term mitigation as part
of the solution to climate change. Considerable research has been conducted in the USA on
the many benefits of the ‘urban forest’; this work needs to be expanded to analyse typical
Australian species and optimum planting densities.
Additional research will need to be conducted into the both existing and potential
varieties/cultivars provided to both the fruit and vegetable and forestry industries. The
production nursery sector must maintain and even improve its ability to respond to the
changing needs of these important linked industries.
Climate Change is likely to present a range of ‘on farm’ challenges. Traditional growing
practices will require considerable adjustment to accommodate issues such as rising
temperatures and decreases in rainfall. Research will need to be conducted to assist growers
in meeting these challenges.
69
Strategy
The Nursery Industry has an established Farm Management System (FMS). This
incorporates NIASA; Nursery Industry Accreditation Scheme Australia - Best Management
Practice, EcoHort®; which promotes best practice in environment and natural resource
management, and BioSecure HACCP; best practice in pest and disease management and
risk assessment. The Nursery Industry FMS has become an essential tool assisting growers
by providing a framework for sound decision making, under the umbrella of profitability,
sustainability and professionalism. Promotion and further development of this FMS is seen
as the most suitable way to prepare the industry for climate change. All levels of government
should embrace these best management practice programs as the industry benchmark and
aim public investment at the adoption and further development of the FMS. This will ensure
the capacity of the FMS to promote effective emissions management tools and provides the
best value in climate change mitigation expenditure.
The Nursery and Garden Industry (NGIQ) is well positioned to play a role in the partnership
between government and growers, raising grower awareness of climate change mitigation
strategies via the FMS and supporting government incentives for on farm action.
The Nursery Industry plans to expand the criteria within the FMS currently focused on energy
and waste management to cover the broader climate change issues. Growers require further
development of decision making tools such as;

Climate Forecasting Data – further develop climate forecasting data providing
growers with regional seasonal climate forecasts for a range of both growing regions
and market areas (e.g. Sydney and Melbourne)

Carbon Calculators – develop carbon calculators that allow growers to establish their
current ‘Carbon Footprint’

Current energy benchmarks – Current industry energy benchmarks need to be
established for common production nursery equipment and practices. There is a need
to include information on the most energy efficient options available

Water use efficiency – build on and expand research, development and adoption of
improved innovative irrigation practices and equipment. This is best achieved by
further development of ‘Waterwork’ (the nursery industry irrigation best practice
system) along with on-farm assistance in change management, incentive based
adoption programs and industry skilling.

Pests, Diseases and Weeds – research is required into the effect climate change will
have on the ‘on farm’ integrated pest management (IPM) of both existing and new
pests, diseases and weeds. Promotion and further development of the BioSecure
HACCP program is viewed as the most suitable method of preparing growers for
these changes.
In addition, broad industry research will need to be conducted into a range of areas
fundamental to the Industries ability to adapt to climate change. These research areas
include;
70

Plant varieties – research to discover species and cultivars most suited to the
changing climate with particular emphasis on fruit and vegetable, forestry, tree and
re-vegetation production

Growing practices – research is required to evaluate the effect increases in
temperature will have on the way nursery crops are grown. Areas to be explored
include container type, including biodegradable options, container design and colour,
production area design, new growing structure type and design, alternative growing
media components

Biosecurity – research is required into the effect climate change will have on the
lifecycles of existing pest and diseases. Pest and Disease modelling, using climate
forecast data, should confirm potential new pest and disease species and appropriate
control measures, including new pesticides and improved integrated pest
management (IPM) techniques.

Co-generation – research needs to be conducted into the potential areas where
production nurseries may be able to contribute to the co-generation of energy.
Particular emphasis should be placed in renewable options such as solar energy.

Urban Forest – Quantification of the many benefits of the ‘urban forest’ as mitigation
of climate change must be established, for the benefit of the industry, Queensland
and Australia.
Summary
The Nursery Industry has a history of adaptation to change. Whether these changes are
immediate such as those experienced in the recent drought or more long term it appears the
industry, with support, has the capacity to respond to the challenges of climate change. The
industry will continue to rely on partnerships with government to conduct appropriate
research to ensure production nursery owners possess the relevant knowledge and skills
required to make sound management decisions that consider climate change implications.
The Nursery Industry provides crops that directly contribute to air purification, lower energy
consumption through urban summer cooling and winter warming, increasing O² and reducing
CO². These are all significant factors in mitigation of climate change. Through the provision
of seedlings and root-stock to the vegetable and fruit growers the Nursery Industry is pivotal
in the food production supply chain. Production nurseries also supply the forestry industry,
another critical sector in combating climate change, with starter crops for both native and
exotic timber species. In addition, the industry provides crops utilised in re-vegetation
programs and mine site rehabilitation which will become far more prevalent in the future.
The Nursery Industry has a very important role to play in managing the Climate
Change/Variability effects on the environment. Production nurseries are well positioned to
provide a significant contribution to Climate Change solutions, through both adaptation and
mitigation strategies designed to promote greater utilisation of green-life. The retail sector will
provide a ‘shop-front’ for Climate Change information, providing relevant consumer
education, products and services aimed at offsetting the impacts of Climate
Change/Variability.
The Nursery and Garden Industry Queensland (NGIQ) looks forward to developing
partnerships with all levels of government aimed at ensuring the nursery industry
successfully adapts to the challenges presented by Climate Change/Variability. This will
ensure the industry continues to make a positive contribution to both the Queensland
economy and ongoing Climate Change adaptation and mitigation.
71
6.4 Dairy
Industry Overview
The northern dairy region incorporating Queensland and northern NSW supports
approximately 820 dairy farms producing around 680 million litres of milk annually. Within the
region there are seven major processing plants operated by four companies and more than
50 minor processing factories (refer to Figure 1 for location of farms and processing
factories). The northern dairy industry employs approximately 4600 people, incorporating
2700 on farm and the remainder in processing and distribution. On an annual basis, the
northern dairy industry is valued ex-factory at approximately $1billion (RAB Peake, 12th June,
2008).
Figure 1: Map indicating the location of northern dairy industry farms and processing plants.
The Northern dairy industry is a cohesive industry working together with a large support
network of private and Government service organisations and companies. The industry
collaborated to develop the Northern Dairy Industry Regional Strategic Plan in December
2005 which established a set of strategic objectives and priorities for the future sustainability
of the industry. The plan forms the platform for all industry activities and implementation is
managed in the context of existing industry organisations, partners and resources.
72
The collaborative approach of the industry encourages resource use efficiency to provide
support programs to producers to address difficult and unpredictable events (such as
Cyclone Larry). This model also supports the development and delivery of farmer based
capacity building programs to address industry priorities including farm and business
management and sustainability (Queensland Dairy farmers’ Organisation Ltd, 2005).
Climate concerns have over taken milk price as the number one issue for Australian dairy
farmers (National Dairy Farmer Survey, 2007). This Climate Change Project will provide
opportunities for the development of tools and processes to assist farmers answer the big
questions about climate change and implement flexible farming systems that utilise these
tools and information. This means that at the ground level, farmers will be making decisions
based on climate variability risks, in order to be responsive to climate change challenges and
to build resilience into their farm business. This project will provide practical options and
increase the capacity for producers to make changes to their farming system to address
these climate related challenges.
Climate Change Impacts
Risks
An industry coordination meeting was held at the end of 2007 with representatives from QDO
and Dairy Australia (Subtropical Dairy Program) to continue the dialogue regarding climate
risks and opportunities for the Queensland dairy sector. The draft CSIRO report “Climate
change in Australian dairy regions” (Kevin J. Hennessy, October 2007) was used as a
reference in this workshop session. An attempt was made to categorise the substantial risks
for Queensland as follows:
HEAT

Change in fodder production – growing and planting windows: shorter growing
season for cooler/winter crops

Pest and weed issues – cattle ticks, buffalo fly in areas not currently endemic

Heat stress – fertility and conception rates, calving patterns, milk quality (mastitis),
production/cow, stock water availability, requirements and quality.
RAINFALL and EVAPORATION

Forage selection

Conservation farming

Opportunity planting and harvesting

Nutrient management (effluent and fertilizer management)

Feed continuity

Water access and efficiency
NUTRITION MANAGEMENT and FEED AVAILABILITY

Intensification of rainfall event will reduce the opportunity for “top ups” on pasture due
to irregular and intense rainfall events

Competition from biofuel industries and other food industries

Resource competition (access to water, access to off-farm fodder sources)

Business management tools to manage fodder and grain purchase risks
73
RESOURCE USE EFFICIENCY - MITIGATION

Energy (fossil fuel based energy use)

Feed conversion efficiency and dietary management

Nutrient management and reuse

Milk supply patterns

Access and use of fertilizers and manures (future potential for greater use of nutrient
balance management plans)

Whole farm design and layout

Vegetation management

Water use efficiency
BUSINESS

Insurance

Collective bulk contracting/purchasing – feed, fertilizer, concentrates
Opportunities
A number of opportunities have been identified by the Queensland Dairy industry with
Climate Change:
74

Income from carbon credits, carbon sequestration, planting trees, etc

Creating better plant genetic mixes, e.g. combining the digestibility traits of C3
pasture and crop varieties with dry matter growth traits of C4 pasture and crop
varieties, etc;

Creating fodder systems that can also be used for carbon offsets;

Higher CO2, could lead to improved photosynthesis therefore higher production;

Improved market for QLD cattle genetics (heat tolerance);

Sale of tick vaccines to NSW;

Harvesting methane from manure and effluent;

Higher value in the reuse of effluent and manure to substitute the purchase
manufactured fertilizers;

Market recognition of Farm Management Systems;

Improving Resource Use Efficiency.
Issues Analysis
Impacts of climate change will be complex, both biophysically and socio-economically, and
will vary greatly at the local and regional scale. There is potential for some impacts to be
positive, such as increased photosynthesis plants as a result of higher atmospheric CO2.
However this interaction is complex and may be limited or offset by increased temperature
and decreased water availability. There are many other Natural Resource Management
(NRM) challenges associated with climate change that have been identified elsewhere in this
report, but their impacts on dairy farms may be greater because of the continuous integrated
production processes needed to produce milk.
Increasing the skills and knowledge through sharing information on sustainable practices will
build the capacity of Queensland dairy farmers to sustainably manage their operations into
the future and build resilience into their businesses and the industry. This activity will have a
substantial benefit for broader NRM issues at the local and catchments scales. The activities
undertaken as part of this project will address regional NRM priorities through the integrated
delivery approach involving landholders, industry, technical specialists and regional NRM
staff where appropriate. This approach recognises that the on-ground works and
management practices implemented by landholders will be tailored to meet the resilience
priorities from their business perspective and the NRM priorities of the local catchments area.
The Australian National Greenhouse Gas Inventory estimates that dairy farming activities
contribute 2% of overall greenhouse gas emissions. Methane is the dominant greenhouse
gas, contributing around 70-75% of a dairy farm’s greenhouse gas emissions. This project
will build on existing industry activities to address the community’s increasing expectation for
the dairy industry to demonstrate improved management and reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions. This project will provide support for Queensland producers to address these
concerns through reduced methane and nitrous oxide emissions, whilst also gaining
productivity benefits from improved feed conversion rates and through better nutrient and
fertilizer management. Under the Dairying for Tomorrow initiative through Dairy Australia
national surveys of farm practices are conducted periodically. These surveys already provide
some information as to adoption of improved farm practices for natural resource
management and it is expected that this will provide a useful means for determining where
Climate Change Action Plans might best be targeted.
Objectives

To investigate the potential impacts of Climate on northern dairy farming systems

To undertake research and investigation on information gaps and mitigation and
adaption options

To communicate up-to-date information to dairy farmers of the northern dairy
industry on what climate change means, potential impacts on dairy farming
systems and options for adaption, mitigation and risk management.

To provide regular updates to dairy farmers of the northern dairy industry on
climate change issues and developments.
Priorities

To ensure farmers have up to date information on climate change issues and
development to enable better informed decision making.

To identify risks and potential impact to northern dairy farming systems.

To identify mitigation, adaptation and risk management initiatives, to assist
farmers to adapt and manage climate change.
75
Strategy
An integrated development and research strategy has been developed by the Queensland
dairy industry that capitalises on existing initiatives and momentum and also builds on
identified gaps. Key themes within this strategy include:
1.
Updating DairySAT
We are currently undergoing a review of DairySAT (Dairy Self Assessment Tool) which
forms the basis to the Dairying Better N Better program. This review has utilised technical
information from a variety of specialists to enable the most accurate and timely
information to be included in the tool. Key issues associated with climate change that
have been addressed in this review include nutrient management (encompassing on farm
effluent management and imported natural and synthetic fertilizer application), soil health
(including carbon sequestration), water use efficiency on both dryland and irrigated farms
and farm waste. Given the timely review of the Queensland DairySAT, the Greenhouse
Gas component that has recently been developed by Dairy Australia will also be included.
2.
Communication & Extension
A series of farm extension advisory notes are being developed to better inform producers
and industry service providers on a range of key climate change issues, relative to the
dairy industry.
3.
Dairy industry supply chain engagement and involvement:
A forum was conducted in early March specifically tailored at the dairy industry supply
chain, particularly those representatives from the processing sector. These
representatives have daily contact with 75% of the Queensland industry and provide
significant on-farm advisory services. The forum provided a summary of the science
associated with climate change and particularly opportunities producers and milk
companies have with regard to adaptation and mitigation. It is expected these forums will
be conducted on a six-monthly basis, with a key component including the latest climate
change data relating to the forecasting information as well as adaptation and mitigation
opportunities.
4.
Managing climate variability extension module:
Negotiations are currently in place for the development of an extension module to address
the issue of managing for climate variability. This module will be specifically tailored to
Queensland dairy farmers and advisors requirements to address climate variability when
making business decisions. These business opportunities primarily relate to irrigation
options, crop and pasture species selection, planting opportunities, herd management and
forward contract purchasing. Key actions included in this module are:
Smarter soil-water conservation
76

Minimum tillage sowing – which retains soil moisture and organic matter, and
protects and improves soil structure and environment;

Retain surface stubble – which protects the soil surface from erosion and
provides a good sources of organic matter;

Opportunity cropping – plants crops to use excess water and reduce runoff and
evaporation;

Reduce compaction by growing deep rooted crops, controlling machinery access
(controlled traffic) and avoiding working the soil when wet;

Test soil fertility, Ph and condition to ensure soil are well balanced to support
beneficial microbiological populations and maximise water adsorption;

Cropping over contours which increases surface ponding and infiltration;

Correct tyre pressure in tractors can help reduce soil compaction and will use up
to 20% less fuel. Correct use of tractor ballast.
Maximise Water Use Efficiency and Productivity
5.

Match water application to crop/pasture needs: good irrigators produce 3000 kg
dry matter / ha of ryegrass per ML;

Replacing single jet sprinklers with double jet sprinklers on a side roll operating at
44psi (302 kPa) will increase distribution uniformity by 25%;

Installing a new rotator sprinkler package and removing end guns on a travelling
boom increases distribution uniformity by 14%;

Up to 30% water savings are possible when industry best management practice
scheduling tools are used;

Changing irrigation systems from a high to low pressure system can increase
water use efficiency and distribution uniformity while also reducing energy use;

Increase water use efficiency can also lead to improved crop and pasture
productivity and nutrient utilisation efficiency.
Managing heat stress module:
Negotiations are currently in place for the development of an extension module to address
the issue of managing heat stress. A literature review and gap analysis of information is
currently being undertaken to ensure this module adds value to any previous work.
Additionally, discussions have been held with Dairy Australia, who are in the process of
developing heat stress fact sheets to ensure the extension module not only utilises these
materials, but also sends the same message to the producers and industry service
providers Key actions included in this module will include:

Earlier and later milking times.

On days when the temperature humidity index is above 78°C use cooler then ambient
temperature water to spray the herd in the dairy yard prior to afternoon milking. This
can also be combined with forced air movement for example use of fans.

Total Mixed Ration should be fed under shade during the day to maximise cow
comfort and milk production. When temperatures rise above 26ºc there is a need to
provide cow cooling opportunities to compensate for increases in core body
temperature associated with the digestion of high concentrate feeding.

Cows have shown preferences for 100% shade shelter particularly when
temperatures rise above 30º.
77

Ensure easy access to cool high quality drinking water.
Progress towards the development of the climate risk management module of
the Farm Management Systems program
The Dairying Better N Better for Tomorrow program has been implemented throughout
Queensland since 2004 and is a structured industry led program to support the adoption of
better farm management practices. A supplementary component to the program was
developed in 2007 to build a cycle of continuous improvement to support group continuity, as
well as more regular on-farm assessment and recording of practices and actions. This
component is called “Dairying Better N Better: On the Moo’v”e and provides the ideal
framework for the delivery of the climate change extension and adoption support material.
There is strong evidence to indicate that this program forms an appropriate platform for
delivery of technical information that leads to significant adoption of new practices and onground change.
The dairy component of the “QFF-Improving the capacity of Queensland’s intensive
agriculture to manage the impacts of climate change” focuses on the development of a suite
of tools to address the priority climate change risks. This project will develop the appropriate
practical and technical extension material to support a variety of delivery opportunities. The
Queensland Dairy Self Assessment Tool (DairySAT) will also be amended to address climate
change and greenhouse gas issues and risks.
This project will also coordinate with and complement, but not duplicate, the activities
conducted under the Dairy Water for Profit program. This extension and incentive program
specifically focuses on opportunities associated with better on-farm water management. The
Dairy Water Use for Profit program will add value to the development and subsequent
delivery of this project.
Summary
The northern dairy industry has identified a number of risks as a result from the impacts of
climate change. With these risks also come opportunities. The northern dairy industry is
working together with key stakeholders to ensure that producers can manage these risks and
their impacts, and capitalise on the associated opportunities to ensure their enterprises are
sustainable in the future. The identified strategies and their implementation are pivotal to the
success of reducing the impacts of climate variability by the industry. In addition to this
ongoing research and investigation, along with communication within the industry will help
ensure producers are constantly aware of the issue of climate variability, the potential
impacts on climate and their own sustainability, and any available management strategies to
assist them to achieve this.
78
6.5 Cotton
Industry Overview
The Australian Cotton Industry
Although cotton was introduced to Australia with the First Fleet, it was not established even
as a minor commercial crop until the 1850’s. In the
1860’s cotton became an important dryland crop in
Queensland used to clear the way for dairying and
pasture renovation and was considered a low input,
low return crop. The completion of Keepit Dam on
the Namoi River and the subsequent introduction of
irrigation into northern New South Wales during the
1960’s and 1970’s was the major trigger for the
development of the Australian cotton industry.
Currently sixty per cent of Australia’s cotton is
grown in New South Wales (the Macquarie Valley,
the Namoi Valley, the Gwydir Valley, Bourke,
Hillston, Hay and Menindee districts) with the
remainder grown in Queensland (the Macintyre
Valley, Darling Downs, St George, Theodore,
Biloela, Emerald regions and Burdekin).
Depending on water availability about 400,000
hectares of irrigated cotton can be grown in
Australia. The area of dry land or rain grown cotton
varies considerably from year to year depending on
commodity prices, soil moisture levels and rain. The
area of dry land crop can vary from 5000 to 120,000
hectares.
Most Australian cotton farms are owned and
operated by family farmers, are typically between
500 to 2000 hectares, are highly mechanised,
capital intensive, technologically sophisticated and
require high levels of management expertise. About
80 per cent of cotton farms are irrigated and as part
of the enterprise they generally grow other crops
such as wheat and sorghum and/or graze sheep and cattle.
On a global scale Australia is a relatively small producer growing about 3 per cent of the
world’s cotton although the industry has a reputation for producing high quality cotton.
The climate and/or water availability are the most significant contributing factors to the
distribution and type of cotton grown in Australia and the rest of the world. Cotton can be
grown either as dryland (which means it relies on rainfall) or as irrigated cotton (requiring
supplemented water supply).
Dryland cotton requires:




regular and predictable rainfall
rainfall in summer
long periods of extreme heat with low humidity Irrigated cotton requires:
a reliable water supply available as needed
79
 irrigation water
 long periods of extreme heat with low humidity
The higher the average temperature and amount of direct sunlight during the growing
season, the faster the crop will grow and develop. The longer and hotter the growing season,
the higher the potential yield. Irrigated cotton grows with improved quality in low rainfall
environments because of the ability to control the level of moisture in the soil.
Climate Change Impacts
Risks
Temperature – What we know
Australia’s mean maximum temperature has risen 0.06°C per decade and mean
minimum temperature has increased 0.12°C per decade between 1910 and 2004
(Nicholls and Collins 2006). These trends vary regionally, but average temperatures
have risen across almost all of Australia.
The difference between day and night temperatures has also decreased in most areas
since 1910, with the trend particularly evident in Queensland and parts of New South
Wales.
The frequency of extreme hot events has also increased since the 1950s and the
frequency of extreme cold events has declined.
The Australian average for the 1957-2004 period shows an increase in the frequency of
days of 35°C or more by 1 day per decade and an increase in the number of nights of
20°C or more by 1.8 days per decade.
At the same time there has been a decrease in the number of days of 15°C or below by
1.4 days per decade and of nights 5°C or below by 1.5 nights per decade (Nicholls
2005).
Maximum summer temperatures also rose by up to 0.3°C per decade in many areas
over the same period. The number of hot days is also increasing in many centres, while
the incidence of cold nights is declining.
Simply, this means a higher incidence and increased severity of heatwaves and a
decline in the number of very cold nights.
Rainfall
Historically, rainfall across eastern Australia was relatively high in the late 1800’s
declining through to the mid 1940’s.
This period was followed by a general increase during the 1950’s through to the 1970’s
and 1980’s.
Since then much of eastern Australia (particularly Queensland) and south-west Western
80
Australia has seen a drying trend.
The increasing rainfall in northwest Western Australian and the decline in rainfall in
eastern Queensland has been associated with changes in the numbers of tropical
cyclones crossing both the Queensland and western Australian coastline
Opportunities
Cotton and temperature:
Climate change has the potential to impact on many facets of cotton growth and
development. The industry does not as yet understand:
 the inter-relationships of impacts of changes in rainfall, in carbon dioxide concentration,
reduced water availability, increased atmospheric evaporative demand (lower humidity),
and increases in temperature
 the relative degree of these impacts that may occur with growing cotton in different
regions.
On the face of it, an increase in CO2 could increase crop yields. However these increases
could be completely offset by a lack of available water for irrigation. Further, temperature
extremes that could deliver a longer growing season are counter balanced by extremes that
render the crop difficult to germinate or reluctant develop to maturity. These agronomic
impacts would also have dramatic flow on consequences in fibre quality decline.
The industry has some very well established cotton crop modelling programs. While they
work adequately to predict how crops behave in current growing conditions and regions, a lot
more work is required to run these models for outcomes under future climate scenarios. This
knowledge associated with climatic predictions at a much more relevant scale, eg. A
catchment scale, would make long term planning far more reliable.
Cotton and greenhouse gases:
Greenhouse gases emitted through cotton growing include:
 carbon dioxide (CO2) from soils through the decomposition of soil organic
matter especially after cultivation
 carbon dioxide (CO2) from fuel and energy use during cultivation, planting,
harvesting, pumping, transport and ginning
 nitrous oxide (N20) from fertilizer & organic N sources
 methane (CH4) from water logging
Existing industry research indicates that nitrous oxide released to the atmosphere from the
process of denitrification is the most significant greenhouse gas contributor from cotton
production. It is of greater significance in irrigated soils particularly when high rates of
nitrogen based fertilizers are used. The cotton industry has been measuring nitrous oxide
emissions through research trials and this work has resulted in a reduction in the IPCC
default benchmark for cotton production.
Cotton greenhouse gas calculators
The cotton industry funded work to develop a Cotton Greenhouse Gas Calculator. This tool
calculates an estimate of a farming enterprises greenhouse footprint by comparing the
relative contributions from fuel, soils and nitrogen for that operation. The industry has also
funded a separate energy calculator. This tool has been developed through series of on
farm audits to measure energy use in the cotton productions system.
81
Issues Analysis
Temperature Projections – What we think (CSIRO regional temperature projections)
Most of Australia to warm 0.4 to 2.0oC by 2030
Most of Australia to warm 1 to 6oC by 2070
Warming is expected to be higher inland
A higher rate of warming in spring and summer than autumn and winter
An increase in the average number of extreme hot days and decrease in the average
number of extreme cold days and frosts
Rainfall Projections – What we think (CSIRO regional rainfall projections)
A tendency towards a lower annual average rainfall in the south west (-20 to +5% by
2030, 60 to +10% by 2070), south east and parts of Queensland (-10 to +5% by 2030, 35 to +10% by 2070)
No distinct signal for annual average rainfall across the rest of Australia (-10 to +10% by
2030, -35 to +35% by 2070)
A tendency towards less rainfall across most of Australia (especially southern Australia)
during winter and spring: -20 to +5% by 2030, -60 to +10% by 2070
Projected rainfall changes during summer and autumn for most locations are -10% to
+10% by 2030 and -35% to +35% by 2070 or tend towards an increase. This excludes
the south east, south west and Tasmania where there is a tendency towards less rainfall
during summer and autumn: -10 to +5% by 2030, -60 to +10% 2070
Northern Australia tends to have more pronounced wet and dry seasons
Increases in extreme daily rainfall
Projections evaporation and moisture balance - (CSIRO regional evaporation
projections)
A tendency towards an increase in potential evaporation of 0 to 8% per degree of
warming throughout most of Australia with the larger tendency where there is a
corresponding decrease in rainfall
A tendency towards a decrease in the annual water balance throughout most of
82
Australia of 40 to 120 mm per degree of warming
This represents a decrease of 15 to 160 mm by 2030 and 40 to 500 mm by 2070 with
the largest impact in spring
Even if rainfall remains consistent with long term averages, the rise in overall
temperatures and potential decreases in water balance indicates greater moisture stress
throughout Australia. Therefore water use efficiency, access to water and soil water
management will remain dominate issues into the future.
Priorities
To support the future development of an industry wide plan to tackle climate change this
Queensland cotton industry action plan is designed to:
1. Identify our current knowledge of previous changes in climate change over the course
of the development of the Australian cotton growing industry
2. Identify our current understanding on projections for future climate changes
3. Identify knowledge gaps
4. Fill short term resource and knowledge gaps
5. Articulate strategies and processes that will assist the Queensland industry to
a. Engage in the policy debate associated with climate change
b. Inform cotton growers of our understanding of the potential impacts
c. Develop BMPs for managing climate change.
Strategy
The following strategies are being deployed to assist the Queensland portion of the cotton
industry:
Objectives
Identify our current knowledge
of previous changes in climate
change over the course for the
development of the Australian
cotton growing industry
Identify our current
understanding with respect
projections for future climate
changes at a relevant scale to
inform producers
Identify knowledge gaps
Fill short term resource and
knowledge gaps
Strategies
1. Gather historical data
2. Centralise accepted interpretations of
historical climatic data
1. Centralise current understanding
1. Liaise with industry researchers to identify and
articulate knowledge gaps
1. Commission work on completing energy and
carbon calculations into one audit process on
farm (7 sites)
2. Commission analysis of data to run models at
a relevant spatial scale
3. Commission work to draw out the links
between modeled changes in precipitation and
83
Articulate strategies and
processes that will assist the
industry to
 Engage in the policy
debate associated with
climate change
 Inform cotton growers of
our understanding of the
potential impact of
climate change
stream flow and water availability
1. Develop a policy engagement agenda to
ensure the industry engages in the discussion
at critical decision points
2. Develop a series of climate changes briefs for
cotton growers to keep them informed on
relevant issues
3. Facilitate the coordination of industry activities
on climate change to capture issues which
include development of BMP’s and the
completion of life-cycle analysis
Summary
Queensland cotton growers have already been successfully managing their businesses while
dealing with a highly variable climate. The industry has been funding activities and research
designed to arm cotton growers with knowledge and tools to deal with future climate
scenarios for many years.
This project was designed to assist the industry to move a step change forward to fill a
number of critical knowledge and resource gaps. Taking our learning’s from past
investments and reflecting on the need for a wider national industry approach, this project
was designed to support the future development of an industry wide plan to tackle climate
change. Therefore this Queensland, cotton industry action plan was designed to:
1.
Identify our current knowledge of previous changes in climate change over the course
for the development of the Australian cotton growing industry
2.
Identify our current understanding on projections for future climate changes
3.
Identify knowledge gaps
4.
Fill short term resource and knowledge gaps
5.
Articulate strategies and processes that will assist the Queensland industry to
a. Engage in the policy debate associated with climate change
b. Inform cotton growers of our understanding of the potential impacts
c. Develop BMPs for managing climate change.
84
6.6 Prawn Farmers
Industry Overview
Aquaculture prawn farming began in the 1980’s with most farms being located on flat
land adjacent to sea water sources, such as tidal rivers or creeks.
Prawn farms require temperatures above 25 C during production season, therefore 80%
of farms are located in Queensland, 15% in NSW and 5% shared between WA and NT.
Total land currently used for production is in excess of 900 hectares and clusters of the
farms can be found on the Logan River, Mackay, Townsville, Cairns and two farms
located in Yamba – NSW. The biggest farm is located above Cairns at Mossman and
produces prawns all year round. The other farms produce one crop per annum and
harvesting is usually completed by end of April each year.
It takes approximately 6 months for prawns to grow to harvesting size and most of the
prawns are sold domestically in Australia. Processing is carried out as soon as harvested
with most farms having their own production facilities that include grading, cooking and
freezing.
Prawn farming is Queensland’s largest aquaculture sector providing the equivalent of 300
full-time jobs, mostly in rural communities and produces in excess of 3,000 tonnes of
product for an annual value that exceeds$ 42.5 million per annum. (2006-07).
Likely Impacts of Climate Change
Risks
Main risks are reduced rainfall and/or sea water levels rising. This may affect the
distribution patterns of marine organisms.
Opportunities
Very real opportunity for prawn farms is offsetting carbon footprint with sequestration
from algae. For this to be achieved a scoping study needs to be carried out to measure
carbon emissions and how to measure offsets with algae produced.
Increased water and air temperatures could be favourable for prawn farmers as warmer
conditions suit prawn farming best.
Objectives
To engage with a research provider to measure farms carbon footprint and emissions
and to establish tool to measure offsets against outputs.
Issues Analysis
The issue is that issues are not known and have not been identified or measured.
Another issue is the plethora of associations and government departments all trying to
develop policy with regard to climate change but no-one has yet identified the tools
required for each industry to be able to measure their impacts.
Priorities
To conduct farm carbon audits and develop tool to measure outputs and offsets.
Strategies
85
Australian Prawn Farmers Association (APFA) have already identified that carbon audits
are necessary and have taken steps to address this issue their R & D Committee as well
as Executive level.
APFA have been working with QFF on the Climate Change Project. Through this avenue
APFA were offered the opportunity of a free farm visit to conduct an audit of energy
usage and to suggest improvement.
APFA EO also attended a one day workshop on Canberra titled – National Climate
Change and Fisheries Action Plan 2008-2012 Consultation Workshop held by DAFF.
Farms work closely with EPA, DPI when established to ensure that environment
concerns are complied with.
Most farms have HACCP in place.
Some farms have been ISO 14001 accredited.
APFA farms were awarded an Eco Efficiency Award promoting Environment and
Economic Performance – awarded by QLD DEH November 2005.
http://www.apfa.com.au/prawnfarmers2.cfm?inc=environment
The above link to the APFA web site – highlights the steps already undertaken by the
prawn farmers over the last 8 years. APFA take the initiative in improving what they do
and are always at the forefront with new technology, ideas and concepts. Climate
Change will be no different.
6.7 Chicken Meat
The Queensland chicken meat industry is a major part of agricultural activities in South East
Queensland and as such an important participant in climate change discussions, particularly
as they relate to water and energy use. The Queensland industry contributes over 20 percent
to the Australian chicken meat output or approximately $600 million of the estimated
Australian retail sales of $2.7 billion with chicken making up 34% of consumers’ meat diets in
2006.
Because the South East Queensland chicken industry operates in close proximity to major
urban and tourist centres it is an industry used to close scrutiny of its production processes,
and is one of the early adapters when it comes to implementing an Farm Management
System (FMS) approach to day-to-day on farm operations. The Queensland industry signed
on to the national EMS for Meat Chicken Farms: Environmental Management Plan (EMP) at
the first opportunity in 2005. However, the industry has been quick to realise that the shifting
emphases in the climate change debate means new challenges need to be researched and
addressed. No longer is the debate confined to odour, animal welfare, food safety and
health, and biosecurity and avian influenza matters, but rather the complete environment
footprint, or Life Cycle Analysis (LFA).
The Queensland chicken meat industry is an active player in the Australian Chicken Meat
Federation (ACMF) who works closely with the Poultry CRC to address issues such as
these. To create focus specifically on the how climate change could impact the industry the
ACMF commissioned a study “Environment, Climate Change and Food: Opportunities for the
Australian Chicken Meat Industry” (March, 2008) and this will no doubt guide industry
responses over the next few years.
86
Perhaps the most significant aspect of the ACMF approach is that it addresses the issue
form the consumer perspective rather than the farm perspective. This is unsurprising given
the highly competitive nature of meat retailing in Australia and the need for the food
production and processing sectors to address their own contribution to global warming and to
understand how shifting public opinion might ultimately impact consumer spending patterns.
The ACMF report identified three significant ways that increased awareness and changing
expectations surrounding climate change might impact chicken meat businesses:
1. Consumers will increasingly purchase environmentally-friendly products (and be willing to
pay a premium for the privilege), and/or boycott products seen as environmentally
damaging.
2. Retailers will favour products with low carbon emissions, and/or require all products to
provide carbon labelling, and/or require products to reduce their carbon emissions over
time.
3. Regulations will increase the costs (including energy) and/or regulatory barriers for
products not meeting ever higher environmental standards.
It follows that there are also opportunities for business to benefit from actively addressing
climate change through cost savings generated by increased efficiency, and increased
knowledge of what the carbon footprints actually are along the supply chain.
At present there is no quantifiable information available in Australia about how carbon
emissions influence buying decisions relating to food. All we at the moment is qualitative
public attitude surveys that indicate that while consumers like the idea of considering the
carbon footprint of food it is not yet a key driver of purchasing decisions. Quality,
convenience, nutritional value, taste and price continue to be key drivers of consumer
actions, but that is to say the “carbon miles” for instance might emerge as a driver of
purchasing actions in the future.
What this has led the ACMF to conclude is that a pro-active information gathering and
dissemination strategy is its preferred option. This follows from the unequivocal conclusion
that “all of these risks are far out-weighed by the risks of failing to communicate about the
sector’s commitment to address climate change”.
Within the scope and time of this project it is important to relate this back to possible actions
on the farm. In South East Queensland it is likely that the broiler farms will continue to be
highly mechanised and intensive operations and therefore need to address the following
important issues common to all intensive livestock operations:



Animal heat stress is linked to air temperature, relative humidity, wind and solar
radiation. When conditions are outside the “critical temperature ranges” for a species
the animal’s response quickly affects production efficiency. Therefore the warmer,
drier conditions for Queensland’s intensive livestock regions will create greater heat
stress management issues.
This will likewise impact on “energy budgets” and it is possible that on site power
generation may emerge as an adaption strategy.
Farm level adaptations need to be fully tested across all relevant policy options
(particularly if they are likely to change in an ever changing climate change
environment), but the FMS framework still provides the systematic approach to
evaluate the impacts on the business.
87


Intensive livestock farmers need to be cautious of partial solutions to the many
climate challenges ahead, especially those associated with water and energy use.
Mal-adaptive strategies could be detrimental at either or both the farm and consumer
end.
The overarching impact of climate change on feed ingredients is an ever present
issue that is likely to become much more significant as biofuels and direct foods
compete for land.
The Queensland chicken meat industry has positioned itself well in the consumers’ eye with
both sustainable on farm practices and the provision of a very affordable protein source with
“low food miles”. However, there is some urgency to more fully address the Life Cycle
Analysis to ensure the science drives the solutions rather than “perceptions” emerging from
public attitude surveys. The Queensland industry eagerly awaits the outcomes from the
ACMF national Carbon Footprint Project.
6.8 Irrigators
Climate change and water available for irrigation in Qld catchments
Introduction
Scientists have predicted moderate increases in annual average precipitation to 2040 over
most areas of the state during the summer months of January to March but then significant
reductions in precipitation for most of the state from autumn well into spring with below
average to average precipitation October to December. Increases in air temperature from
0.5 to 1% from coastal areas inland are also predicted. In addition it could be expected that
Qld’s climate would become more variable interseasonally with more frequent droughts and
intensive rainfall events.
The availability of water for irrigation will be affected if these predictions are confirmed over
the next 30 years. However, it is difficult to provide estimates of water availability from this
analysis of annual average precipitation at defined locations across the state. The CSIRO
analysis of the Murray Darling catchments shows the depth of analysis required on a
catchment-by-catchment basis to assess the impacts of climate change on water availability.
The studies also reveal the limitations faced in conducting the research. Apart from the
uncertainty about the climate change predictions used, there are a number of other
complexities that have to be addressed to produce estimates of water availability to
adequately support the preparation of a Basin Plan for the allocation of water for
environmental and consumptive purposes. For example, CSIRO recognizes that mean
annual runoffs in catchments (most of which are unguaged) are under or over estimated by
less than 20% in more than half the catchments and by less than 50% in almost all the
catchments. Runoff implications are propagated through river system models and inform
estimations of current and future water availability. Errors in runoff estimations significantly
impact on the certainty of results. In addition, the approach of assessing water availability as
the flow at the point of maximum average annual flow in the river under pre-development
conditions is of limited use across many Qld catchments. It is common in some rivers for
water available upstream of a gauge to be significantly greater than recorded at the gauge.
88
Factors such as evaporation, groundwater recharge, riparian vegetation or swamps will not
be reflected in main stream gauges. CSIRO’s assessment of predicted losses due to
groundwater use has also been questioned because there is insufficient data on the
connectivity of surface and groundwater systems.
In the absence of detailed analysis of the impact of climate change on water availability
across Queensland’s irrigation catchments, this section of the report will examine the
implications of drier and more variable climatic conditions into the future for the water
entitlements implemented under the water resource planning process and for the water
products made available by water providers. Areas for improvement in information on the
impacts of drier and more variable climate for the preparation and implementation of water
resource plans and the management and improvement of irrigation will also be listed.
Water resource planning and climate change
The Qld Water Act 2000 provides for a two stage planning process to define the availability
and security of water and the conversion of existing water entitlements to water allocations
that have a separate title to land and can be bought and sold. The water resource plans
(WRP) (first stage) are strategic plans which define catchment water resources and
determine how these resources will be shared to protect the environment and support
consumptive needs. These plans are enacted as subordinate legislation and operate for ten
years when they must be reviewed. Resource operations plans (ROP) (second stage) give
operational effect to WRPs and define how the provisions of the WRP are to be
implemented. ROPs may include conversion of identified existing water entitlements to
allocations, granting of new allocations, rules for operating water infrastructure and managing
water, trading rules, water sharing rules and monitoring and reporting.
The water resource plans are developed using historical rainfall and stream flow data and
modeling and other analysis to define environmental flow rules and water entitlements to be
secured for the term of the plan. Plan reviews every 10 years will update historical analysis
to deliver updated outcomes which should progressively take into account climate change
impacts. Climate change modeling and associated assessment of water availability are
currently too uncertain to be used in statutory plans to provide for water to protect the
environment and to support consumptive needs and tradable water entitlements. In
particular, improvements would be required in climate modeling to reduce uncertainties re
predictions. Catchment based monitoring would also have to be enhanced to provide greater
certainty about the impacts of climate change on river flows and the availability of water for
environmental and consumptive purposes.
Once the ROP takes effect, operations licences are granted to operators of water storage
infrastructure or water distribution infrastructure. Operators must manage their schemes in
accordance with the conditions of the ROP and their licence. Water entitlements that are to
be converted under the ROP for trading are expired and water allocations are granted to the
holders of these expired entitlements and are recorded on the water allocations register.
Entitlements that remain attached to land, such as overland flow licences, continue. The
holders of water allocations and tenancy arrangements are specified on the register together
with the attributes of the allocation such location, purpose, conditions required by NRW and
nominal volume for both supplemented allocations (delivered from water infrastructure by an
operator) and unsupplemented allocations (supply from natural flow). The register also
records the priority group for supplemented allocations and extraction rate, flow conditions,
volumetric limit and water allocation group for unsupplemented allocations.
89
The reviews of water resource plans every 10 years would be expected to take account of
reductions in water availability due to climate change by reducing nominal volumes for
tradable supplemented and unsupplemented allocations. For unsupplemented allocations
there could also be adjustments to extraction rates, flow conditions and volumetric limits.
Licenced entitlements that are attached to land would also be affected. These entitlements
will remain attached to land while there is insufficient definition to allow trading e.g. some
water harvesting and underground access. Also entitlements to overland flows in many
catchments are only works authorizations which have yet to be fully defined volumetrically
and metered. This lack of definition could disadvantage these entitlements as plans are
reviewed and any adjustments are made for climate change.
Trading of water allocations on either a temporary or permanent basis may allow for
adjustment to climate change impacts provided that well functioning water markets have
established. Dealings in water allocations that involve a change in the attributes of a water
allocation and subdivision or amalgamation of a water allocation require the NRW’s approval.
Trading of allocations on a permanent or temporary basis to help adjustment for climate
changes will most likely involve a change in location and the ROP change rules may set out
permitted and prohibited changes for this attribute. Prohibited changes are defined to ensure
that the environmental and water security objectives of the WRP are met. For example, a
change will not be permitted if it is to a location outside permitted trading zones where it
would adversely affect the reliability of the water shares of other entitlement holders and/or
the water shares to meet environmental needs. Also a change would not be permitted if it
increased an entitlement holder’s share of water available under an allocation. Impacts on
the availability of water as result of climate change may warrant changes in trading rules and
in particular improved specification of permitted and prohibited trading arrangements.
There are significant variations between and within ROPs about how changes to the
attributes of water allocations are treated, reflecting the environmental and water allocation
security objectives specific to each hydrological sub catchment. Climate change is likely to
increase this variability. In the existing ROPs where there is no specification whether a
particular change is permitted or not, provision is made in the Water Act 2000 for an
allocation holder to make application for a change with processes for the approval which
include public notice of the application and payment by the applicant of the costs of
investigations. Progressive improvements will need to be made in gauging and monitoring to
allow ROPs to provide improved specification of permitted and prohibited changes and so
promote trading as an adjustment mechanism to climate change.
The ROPs also outline rules for seasonal water assignments (i.e. temporary trading) for both
supplemented and unsupplemented allocations. This form of trading is increasing as it
allows irrigators to make adjustments for crop needs throughout the seasons. Temporary
trades within supplemented schemes are handled by the infrastructure operators who have
better information regarding water available in water accounts for trading. Temporary trading
of unsupplemented allocations is managed by NRW.
The ROPs define how supplemented water is to be shared on a seasonal basis between
high and medium reliability entitlements. Water providers are delegated responsibility for
managing their schemes to secure supply for urban and industrial and other priority needs
during periods of low supply. Water providers have to date developed their ‘critical water
90
supply arrangements’ based on historical scheme performance. Regional water supply
planning in South East Queensland has put in place a ‘levels of service approach’ for the
management of the urban supply system to achieve specified criteria (i.e. duration, frequency
and severity) for the imposition of restrictions on urban supply into the future to give urban
consumers greater reliability about supply and associated costs. These restrictions will have
to be accommodated in the ROPs for catchments in the region to achieve environmental and
consumptive objectives of the water resource plans for these catchments. Provision has
been made in water supply development in the region (i.e. new water storages and
alternative supply of recycled and desalinated water) to provide ‘contingency supplies’ to
facilitate the implementation of this approach. Rural water users in SEQ are concerned that
urban development will increasingly impact on their reliability of access despite these
contingency arrangements. Preparation of the ROPs will be closely monitored in this regard.
As in SEQ there is a need to plan now to provide for high priority needs to accommodate the
impacts of climate change. Most coastal catchments still have unallocated water provided
for in the water resource plans and portions of these should be reserved to accommodate
high reliability needs. For catchments without water reserves, planning needs to consider
alternative arrangements that do not result in rural users losing access rights relative to
urban users without due compensation e.g. via market based trading.
Planning for the impact of climate change must also take into account economic and social
impacts. Water resource plan reviews will take account of environmental requirements but it
is not clear how the plans would address economic and social impacts.
Water supply schemes and climate change
SunWater operates a significant component of the irrigation schemes throughout Qld. SEQ
Water is taking responsibility for SunWater schemes in south east Qld and the Mary valley.
There are a range of other water providers who operate supply and water management
schemes involving irrigation supply in specific locations. These include Border Rivers
Commission - Border Rivers area, Fitzroy Water – Rockhampton area, Pioneer Valley Water
Board, North and South Burdekin Water Boards and a number of other smaller water boards.
While Qld irrigation schemes are each quite different there are a number of important
characteristics that will affect their capacity to cope with drier and more variable climatic
conditions.
In the first instance there are two fundamental types of schemes - schemes where storages
supply channel and pipeline systems compared with those where the storages supplement
natural flows in the stream for the purposes of downstream irrigation. In the latter case
storages may have been built on a headwater tributary stream but irrigators and other users
downstream still benefit from natural flows from other tributaries. Many of the schemes in
Qld are river based as shown in the attached table. The Mary valley and the Logan valley
schemes are good examples. Availability of water for irrigation in these schemes is heavily
dependent on stream flow so these schemes are more at risk under drier and more variable
climate conditions. There are also limited opportunities to make adjustments to cope with
changes in water availability compared with channel schemes.
91
There are other characteristics of river and channel schemes that will affect the supply of
water for irrigation purposes under more variable climate conditions. These characteristics
are summarized for the schemes operated for SunWater and SEQWater in Table 1 and
include:
1. Schemes, particularly river based schemes, which supply a significant or growing
urban and industrial demand for high reliability water. These schemes are expected
to have difficulty maintaining supply for irrigation at current levels of reliability under
increasingly variable climate conditions because progressive adjustments will be
necessary to secure high reliability supply for urban and industrial customers and
guarantee supply for critical human needs in times of prolonged drought. Examples
of river based schemes that face this risk include the Boyne irrigation scheme which
takes supply from Boondooma Dam. Two thirds of the supply capacity of this dam is
committed to Tarong Power station. Adjustments have been made recently in the
Logan and Mary valley schemes to secure urban supplies during recent drought
conditions. Establishment of the supply grid in south east Queensland with added
supply of recycled water and desalinated water will provide reserves to buffer the
impact of urban and industrial demand growth on rural supplies under more variable
climate conditions.
2. Limitations on scheme water supply storages. Factors such as the size and average
depth of storages, catchment capacity and location and provision of downstream
regulating structures will be important in managing a scheme to adjust for greater
variability in water availability. Under hotter and drier conditions losses due to
evaporation will be greater and particularly in storages such as Leslie Dam which are
shallow and have a greater surface area relative to dams in coastal or headwater
locations with deeper profiles and less surface area. Dams in tropical and coastal
locations drawing from large catchments will also have better prospects of managing
for variable water supply conditions. Schemes relying on multiple smaller weirs may
not have the capacity to store and more variable flow conditions in rivers such as the
Dawson. However, weirs used in conjunction with upstream dams are better able to
regulate supplies for irrigation. A more detailed analysis of scheme storages would
be necessary to better identify limitation and opportunities to better manage for more
variable inflow conditions.
3. Limitations on access arrangements in river and channel systems. In river schemes
water ordering arrangements provide some indication of difficulties that may be faced
in supplying water downstream for irrigation under drier conditions. Water ordering
arrangements are put in place by providers to minimize losses in meeting
downstream irrigation needs from releases from storages. The table identifies those
schemes with river supply arrangements that have lengthy advanced water ordering
arrangements such the Bowen Broken with a requirement of 14 days notice and
Upper Condamine which has 4 zones requiring 4, 8, 14 and 18 days advanced notice
of orders. Channel systems also have arrangements to limit access during peak
seasonal demand periods to manage the irrigation supply to accommodate channel
supply restrictions. Under drier and more variable conditions these restrictions may
increasingly affect irrigation production capacity during peak seasonal demand
periods.
4. Other scheme characteristics at risk from climate change. Some schemes such as
Three Moon Creek, Central and Lower Lockyer and Callide Valley have been
developed to recharge groundwater irrigation supply. Availability of water from these
sources is highly dependent on local aquifer characteristics in each of these
schemes. Drier conditions will limit water that can be made available for example
from dams such Cania Dam supplying the Three Moon Creek groundwater reserves.
The Table identifies schemes where water harvesting is permitted. In most cases
92
water harvesting access will be managed by Department of Natural Resources and
Water. Water harvesting will provide opportunities for irrigators that have this
entitlement to better manage through drier times. For example, irrigators in the
Boyne scheme with water harvesting to on-farm storages have been able to maintain
their orchards during recent supply cutoffs of in excess of 18 months duration. The
table also shows those river schemes with credit water arrangements. In these
schemes customers can take streamflows that result from natural flows generated
down-stream of storages (i.e. flows that would not contribute to storage in the
scheme). Access to these flows is provided in lieu of announced allocations under
certain conditions but the combined use of credit water and allocation water can’t
exceed water allocations. These supply arrangements are valued by irrigators but
availability of credit water is likely to be affected under more variable climate
conditions. The development of on-farm storage facilitates the take of credit water.
Areas for improvement of information on the impacts of climate change
Under current water planning arrangements, the full impact of climate change on irrigation
entitlements will be felt at the review of water resource plans every 10 years. However, as
outlined in the introduction to this section, there is a need for improved climate prediction and
more detailed analysis of the impact of climate change on water availability across
Queensland’s irrigation catchments to plan and implement measures to help adjust for the
impacts on irrigation entitlements when water resource plans are reviewed. Scientists have
shown in this project that climate change models are being progressively improved, however
data deficiencies at catchment and sub catchment scales make the use of this modeling to
predict the impacts of climate on water availability very uncertain. In particular, predictions
from this modeling would not have the certainty required to define and implement water
entitlement security objectives and environmental flow objectives through the water resource
planning process. Ten year plan reviews using actual data on the impact of climate change
during this period provide a better basis for water resource planning.
The focus of effort must be on improving information on the impacts of drier and more
variable climate for the preparation and implementation of water resource plans and the
management and improvement of irrigation schemes.
Areas for improvement in information for water resource planning are as follows:
 Monitoring of runoff under different catchment conditions (eg evaporation,
groundwater recharge, riparian vegetation or swamps) and the upgrading of
hydrology modeling to take account of the data. The recent article by Professor Mike
Young highlights the importance of focusing on inflow rules and the role of the market
in optimizing storage rather than on setting a volumetric limit on diversions. (Droplet
12 – A sustainable cap: What it might look like? Mike Young University of Adelaide
and Jim McColl CSIRO Land and Water 15/6/2008)
 Improved data on risks to catchment health to allow better prioritization of planning
effort e.g. the take of water for irrigation may not be a significant risk to catchment
health in an irrigation area as say salinity and rising groundwater.
 Improved data on entitlements (e.g. conversion of authorized works to volumetric
entitlements) to ensure that the impacts of climate change on all entitlements defined
through the water resource planning process can be adequately addressed and
conversion to tradable or at transferable water entitlements can be facilitated.
93




Improvements in the monitoring and annual reporting of water resource plans to
provide assessments of the performance of plans regarding environmental water
security objectives and trading outcomes
Improvements to monitoring in unsupplemented systems to assess flow conditions,
contributions needed for supplemented requirements, management of caps on
unsupplemented take of water during different flow conditions to allow improved
advice an access to flows and trading arrangements.
Data gathering and analysis to address connectivity between surface and
groundwater use.
Data gathering and analysis at localized scales are required to identify measures that
will help to improve sharing of water between high and medium reliability use.
Areas for improvement in information for management and improvement of irrigation
schemes to cope with drier and more variable climate conditions are as follows:



Data gathering and analysis aimed at improving the distribution efficiency of schemes
including such issues as reducing scheme transmission losses, improving water
ordering, improving system monitoring and metered use.
Implementing quarterly reporting on scheme performance using a ‘levels of service’
approach that provides performance indicators on long-term supply and reliability,
seasonal water availability and water shortage severity.
Implementing, as part of the water resource planning process, self managed systems
such as continuous sharing arrangements that allow irrigation users more flexibility to
individually decide on their water use performance on an ongoing basis from season
to season.
6.9 Agribusiness, Banks and Insurance
A feature of the intensive agriculture sector in Queensland is the evolving structure of supply
chains with increasing linkages, both contractual and more loosely, between family farm
businesses and the major retailers at the final consumer end of the supply chain. These
linkages can vary from fully formal as is the case with the chicken meat industry where the
entire chain is contractually linked, to the more traditional structures to the first round
processing stage as is the case for cotton, dairy and sugar, to the very loose arrangements
that remain for some fruit and vegetable products where central wholesale markets act as
the “clearing house” for farm produce. As these supply chain arrangements have developed
there have also been cross linkages developed with the farm supply sector (inputs), the
professional services sector (science, accounting, planning, etc) and the financial sector.
Among other things these supply change arrangements have become a means for some risk
sharing and transfer along the supply chain and a means to deal commercially with potential
farm output fluctuations that can be brought on by climate variability.
94
It follows that these market structures and supply change arrangements may be
challenged by the impacts of climate change on the agribusiness itself as well as the
farms it services. These important inter-connected business relationships are
beginning to be recognised by both the corporate sector and governments, especially
during the exceptional drought between 2002 and 2008, and some extreme natural
disasters (those that become known as Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery
Arrangements (NDRRA) events), especially Cyclone Larry in 2006. For instance,
since 2005 the Exceptional Circumstances assistance measures are no longer limited
to bona fide primary producers, but rather now extend to any small business that
generates 70% or more of its business from the farm sector. While this is only a small
recognition of the important linkages between family farms and regional
agribusinesses it does help define an important consideration when it comes to
climate change.
The QFF Steering Committee recognised the importance of these auxiliary services
to the farm sector and sought engagement at the earliest opportunity in the life of this
project. This led to the identification of some important business initiatives, especially
the Australian Business Leaders Roundtable on Climate Change (October 2007) and
its link to the United Nations Education Program – Finance Initiative (UNEP FI). The
vital message coming from these perspectives is that climate change is real and
significant, but manageable provided individuals and businesses have the right
information and knowledge “to identify and manage the risks and opportunities”.
This message is consistent with that which emerged from a special Climate Change
Forum held during Primary Industries Week in Queensland (April 2007). In one
presentation agribusiness and insurance expert, Dr George Walker identified the two
principle sources of variations in Annual Net Farm Income as variable climate and
variable markets. While noting that globally there is still a problem with “catastrophe”
risk management, he said Australia has a very good track record in coping with
climate variability. He concluded that because “climate variability is already high in
Australia” he thought that future impacts of climate change can be accommodated in
insurance markets. Other speakers noted that risk management becomes more
difficult for conditions that are “unknown”, so it remains to be seen if climate change
will manifest itself with new weather conditions beyond what has already been
experienced. This is clearly an area for more research, not just for risk managers,
investors and underwriters, but any business that is climate-dependent.
As this project progressed it became clear that there were other sectors of the
economy and the broader community that had an interest in how Australia’s
agriculture sector might cope with climate change. While time did not permit any
further investigations in this direction it is recorded that at least four other linked
sectors need to be engaged as further Climate Change strategies are developed
within Queensland’s intensive agriculture industries.
95
7. Opportunities to Enhance Energy Efficiency and
Minimise GHG in Queensland’s Intensive
Agricultural Sector
On-farm energy efficiency is becoming increasingly important in the context of rising energy
costs and concerns over greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Energy inputs represent a major
and rapidly increasing cost to the producers in Queensland.
QFF contracted the National Centre for Engineering and Agriculture (NCEA) at the University
of Southern Queensland to develop energy efficiency guidelines and toolboxes for intensive
industry.
NCEA developed a report see Attachment 1 that presents a scoping study of opportunities to
enhance energy efficiency and minimise GHG emissions in Queensland’s intensive
agricultural sector. The aims of the research were to:



Review and assess available tools and technologies for conducting on-farm
operational energy assessments/audits
Assess current practices in terms of energy efficiency
Identify opportunities to reduce operational energy inputs and impacts on greenhouse
gas emissions
A significant literature review was conducted. It was found that a number of energy and
greenhouse calculators have already been developed in Australia and overseas to estimate
the energy uses and greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural systems. These include:
USDA Energy Calculator, Alliant Energy Calculator, and EnergyCalc developed by NCEA.
These softwares will need further development and will be very useful for conducting both
level 2 and level 3 energy audits.
To complement the energy calculation software, various hardware/technologies were also
identified for undertaking field measurements. These include fuel flow meters, electricity
power meters, data logging and monitoring equipment and various sensors for measuring
temperature, pressure, torque, travel speed, and draft load etc. Because of the wide variety
of agricultural machinery being used across the intensive agricultural sector, it may be
difficult to prescribe a universal set of tools that will cover all the different operations.
However, it is suggested that fuel flow meters, electricity power meters, and data loggers will
be essential for all cases. A set of basic measurement tools may cost around
$15,000~$20,000.
For level 3 on-farm energy audits, it was found that pump efficiency can be relatively easily
measured, with suitable standard protocols. As a result, a number of specialist companies
have been set up to offer commercial consulting services in this area, particularly in the USA.
In comparison, measuring tractor and engine performance for a level 3 audit is much more
complicated, and will require substantial set-up and instrumentation. Because of this,
performance measurement for tractors (i.e. the coupled tractor-implement systems) has not
commonly been undertaken. Recently, commercial Tractor Performance Monitors (TPM) are
becoming available. They are able to provide key energy and operation information such as
engine speed, tractor forward speed, wheelslip, and fuel consumption rate etc. This can
greatly assist tractor operators to monitor their fuel use and improve their operation, and
therefore has the potential to significantly improve the operational fuel efficiency of many
tractors.
96
In the project, the previous version of EnergyCalc software is upgraded to include an
additional higher order level above the current Cotton and Grains framework. The inclusion
of this additional level has accommodated other industries included in this project and will
also be extendable for future work. Other improvements to EnergyCalc included the
refinements in user friendliness and increased data management capacities.
Nine on-farm energy audits are conducted in this project, which include:





Cotton  2
Sugar  2
Horticulture  2
Nursery  2
Prawn farm  1
Two of these sites were upgraded to detailed level 3 audits, investigating specified processes
of energy efficiency in water pumping and tractor operation.
Analysis of data obtained from these case studies was undertaken to determine energy use
and opportunities for improved energy efficiency. For these sites, energy uses were broken
into different production processes. It was shown that energy uses vary significantly between
different farms and different industries, ranging from $20.2/ha for sorghum production to
$1305/ha for avocado production. The energy input cost for growing prawn was about $1525
per tonne of production.
For the nursery industry, it was identified that heating is the most important energy user.
Energy for irrigation/pumping was also found to be very important for all industries. This is
particularly the case when complex multiple pumping is involved. For field work, the energy
use by harvesters appeared to be very significant. When minimum tillage and controlled
traffic are practiced, energy usage can be reduced by approximately 20 per cent.
It was demonstrated that considerable opportunities exist for the improvement of energy
efficiency. It was shown that with suitable design improvement and engine speed
adjustments, up to 10~50 per cent of pumping energy can be realistically saved. Correct
operation of tractors may also save up to 30 per cent of fuel.
It was suggested that any energy audit in agriculture in the future would best start from
irrigation, as it consumes considerable proportion of on-farm energy cost. There is also
relatively mature technology and successful examples available. Irrigation energy audits may
also be combined with water efficiency audits using recently developed tools (eg, Irrigation
Performance Audit and Reporting Tool) so that a combined service can be provided to
interested farmers.
It was identified that significant further research is required to conduct whole-farm energy
audits. In addition to the practical difficulty in measuring tractor performance, there is
currently a lack of systematic research for energy use in agriculture. As a result, there is
currently a lack of quantified “rules of thumb” guides to estimate energy performance and
return of energy improvement for different agricultural machinery. This is particularly
important to reduce the costs of energy audits and ensure the quality of service. There is also
a strong need to develop a detailed model report/manual so that effective and widespread
energy audits in agriculture can take place.
97
Significant work and case studies are also required in the individual industry so that sufficient
data can be collected for the establishment of benchmarking energy use and the possible
establishment of farm energy star-rating scheme in the future. From the current field work, it
was found that some of the energy use data published previously may over estimate energy
use by up to over 100 per cent.
8. Climate Communication Strategy
8.1 Masters of Climate – Land and Water Australia
Australia enjoys a high level of community awareness of and interest in climate change.
However, that interest is yet to translate into widespread understanding of an agreement
about causes and solutions – which in part reflects the real and considerable uncertainties
about the magnitude and timing of climate change impacts.
A key component of this project was Climate Communication with QFF developing climate
change resources for Queensland’s intensive agriculture sector. The project design included
linkages to the Land and Water Australia led ‘Masters of Climate’ project where appropriate.
It was anticipated that a number of fact sheets were to be developed but due to available
information only two fact sheets were developed. This involved collation of existing
information concerning climate change and weather, and implications of change for farm
businesses and natural resource management covering the titles below:

How will climate change affect regional drivers in Queensland

Climate change projections, including extremes in Queensland
The above fact sheets will be available from QFF and the Land and Water Australia website
in July.
8.2 QLD Regional Climate Drivers and Scenarios
It is suggested the key Queensland regional climate drivers are as follows:

98
El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO). This is the key climate driver responsible for
year-to-year variability in Queensland rainfall and temperature. IPCC output and
subsequent scientific advice (e.g. Conference on Global Circulation Systems,
Ascona, June 2008) suggests a ‘weakened Walker Circulation’ as the most likely
outcome for ENSO under climate change. This outcome can be translated into more
’El Nino-like’ activity for the future rather than ‘more El Nino events’. It also suggests
less (potentially beneficial) impacts from La Nina events which could be translated
into less input for water recharge from La Nina events into the future. This type of
pattern is already taking place. However, it should be strongly noted that this area
needs further investigation and be updated as more scientific input is provided over
the coming years. It also appears to be the case that the scenarios provided in this
document support the general contention of ‘weakened Walker Circulation’ (which
would generally support the notion of reduced rainfall). El Nino return periods have
certainly increased since the 1970s but it is not certain how much of this increase is
due to climate change at this stage.



Latitude of the sub-tropical ridge. This feature is related to the global Hadley
Circulation which is shown to generally become more enhanced under climate
change scenarios. It currently tends to impact on Queensland climate on a roughly
10-11 year cycle and is an important component in driving Queensland rainfall and
drought patterns. Links to the Southern Annular Mode would also be important. In this
respect considerably more research needs to be undertaken in any subsequent
outputs of this kind. Considered opinion on this issue suggests southern Australia, in
particular, is already suffering from this aspect in terms of generally decreased rainfall
under a more enhanced sub-tropical ridge. It may be the case that this type of effect
would increase wind flow (stronger winter south-easterly winds) across Queensland
which may have implications for fishing and other intensive industries reliant on
effective wind flow regimes. The result may impact on fishing activity along the
Queensland coast. It may also slight ameliorate otherwise detrimental impacts from a
‘weakened Walker Circulation’.
The Quasi-biennal oscillation (QBO). It is suggested some urgent research is
required into both current impacts for this system and future changes under climate
change. The QBO has potential impact on Queensland rainfall on a two-year cycle
basis.
The Madden Julian Oscillation (MJO). A current research project funded by the
Managing Climate Variability Program for northern Australia together with another
relevant for eastern Australia will address the issue of potential changes to the MJO
under climate change scenarios. The MJO currently has return periods of 30-50 days
with varying impacts on the regions under question. The MJO has importance for
more tactical decision-making in agriculture (on a 30-50 day timescale). A more
substantial project may help uncover important aspects associated with changes to
the MJO under climate change impacts. Recent literature on this important subject
emphasise the lack of capability of current general circulation models in being able to
model this system under climate change.
99
9. Recommendations
The Queensland Farmers’ Federation recognises that changes in Queensland’s climate
are happening and will continue to do so. Responding to and managing for a changing
climate is fundamentally a responsibility of growers and rural industries but coherent
government policy and targeted responsive scientific research is needed to support rural
industries and growers address and respond to risks arising from a changing climate,
while at the same time reducing their greenhouse gas production. QFF strongly believes
that further Research and Development and adaptation program design needs to be
specifically designed to promote direct interaction between researchers and farmers to
improve communication as this process was unique to the project design and is critical in
future research. To build on the investment and achievements, future recommendations
include: QFF has developed the following recommendations from this project:
9.1 Climate Data
Of necessity the QFF Climate Change Project had to conduct its activities in a brief
eight-month window that often limited investigations and assessments. Nonetheless
utilizing the unique Expert Panel and industry workshops, considerable progress has
been made in identifying what is being done to help Queensland’s intensive agricultural
industries manage the effects of climate variability and the impacts of climate change.
In progressing investigations into climate risks in the future, it became clear that this type
of work is very much a “work-in-progress” and it is vital that the underlying climate
science research, where possible should be more closely aligned to the decision-making
needs of farm families and agribusinesses. A major “sticking point” in the industry
workshops conducted during this project was the clear need for more disaggregated
climate data and more climate parameters to match those on-ground weather events
that may impact the output of intensive farming operations.
While some examples of specific climate information required by industry groups are
reported elsewhere in Section 6, as a group the intensive agriculture industries
developed a wish list of climate parameters that need to be disaggregated to the
regional Queensland level and updated periodically as the climate science capability is
further refined. This is the detailed climate data that is required to assist farm decisionmaking;
 Rainfall – annual and seasonal in percentage change and mm amounts
 Rainfall incidences and intensities, e.g. number of consecutive dry days (<2 mm),
number of rain days (>10mm), annual number of electrical storms, cyclonic lows,
 Temperature – annual and seasonal average change percentage and degrees
 Temperature – monthly minimums and maximums % change and degrees
 Frosts – average number frost free days, average timing first & last frost
(<2 deg)
 Evaporation – annual and seasonal percentage change and mm amounts
 Heat stress days – average number days + 30 and + 35 degrees
 Stream flow, runoff yields, modelled water allocations.
The industry project participants acknowledged that there may be an accuracy trade-off
with some of these climate scenarios but felt an effort should be made to bring the data
into a mode where it could be used. It is therefore a strong recommendation of this
project that the science effort be continued in this direction.
100
9.2 Climate Change Data
Aside from the discussion above, project participants also made some observations that
might help climate scientists develop more useful analyses and presentation of climate
change information in the future. In particular, a number of participants noted that graphic
presentations on their own are often difficult to interpret, or at least obtain the proper
perspective. So it is always useful to present tabular summary data (statistical) as well. We
thank the USQ researchers for attempting to accommodate this request in the Experimental
presentations in Section 3.
Associated with this argument, industry participants also noted their desire to have both %
change and the absolute change presented. This then led to discussion on “% change from
what?” as a major issue in interpreting climate change data. Many industry participants noted
that if climate change is already happening and trends are already evident, then shouldn’t
meteorological and climate data be compared to trend, rather than “averages”? QFF believes
this is a particularly important issue when it comes to annual rainfall, given the inter decadal
decline for much of coastal Queensland is already happening at a significant rate of
50mm/decade or more.
There was also some debate about the usefulness or otherwise of climate change modelling
scenarios being against the thirty year average between 1961 and 1990. QFF believes that
climate scientists should review the relevance of this baseline, especially as industry
practitioners try to relate future scenarios to recent experiences, rather than distant past
events. While there are undoubtedly sound statistical reasons for presenting GCM outputs in
this way, farmers certainly are one interest group that like to see how models track current
climate factors before placing a strong interpretation on what they “predict” 20, 40 and 60
years hence.
9.3 Future Modelling Research
While climate change modelling output is now showing indicative shifts in rainfall on a
seasonal or, in some circumstances, monthly rainfall, a key aspect still required is provision
of daily precipitation and temperature values (maximum and minimum) that can be provided
as input into agricultural production models. These types of outputs extend to daily
evaporation rates and solar radiation rates that are critical in development of more accurate
projections for intensive agricultural production. A key aspect of developments of seasonal
climate outputs relevant to agricultural production has been the capability of the provision of
daily time-steps in rainfall/temperature radiation forecasts. However, this type of output under
climate change modelling scenarios that will actually be capable of being integrated into
agricultural systems models and decision support systems remains to be done.
Another key important aspect in climate change modelling is to determine ways of
understanding reasons for some model disagreements, especially at critical times of the year
for intensive agricultural production. In this respect, interaction with those major climate
modelling centres that have produced useful climate change scenarios under various
emission scenarios is important in order to find ways of overcoming model disagreements
(although these disagreements are being reduced in extent) in order to provide even
greater cohesiveness in climate model scenarios for Queensland intensive agriculture.
101
9.3 Research and Development Agenda and CCRSPI process
It is recommended that:

Improve national research coordination across climate variability and climate
change research at all levels of government and across all agricultural sectors
(and ideally also fisheries and forestry).

Build research capacity through targeted, research scholarships and dedicated
academic positions to undertake an increasing research agenda on agriculture
and climate change.

Further research and development into improved technologies and management
practices that reduce emissions and increase adaptation options in agriculture.

This project approach be repeated for other agricultural industries, and for other
agricultural regions of Australia.

Additional resources be provided to assist the key intensive industries in
Queensland to develop and enhance adaptation strategies and effectively
communicate these to all key stakeholders.

Additional resources be provided to assist with the capacity-building, education
and communication strategies required to help key stakeholders in the various
industries effectively and efficiently adopt climate adaptation strategies in a timely
manner.

This project report be provided to Land and Water Australia as part of the CCRSPI
process, as an outstanding example of approaches to linking policy, industry and
science in addressing the challenges of climate change.

Presentations on the project be made to key stakeholders in government
(Queensland and Federal), to AgForce and to the NFF executive focussing on the
approach taken and the results obtained.
9.4 Decision Support Tools
As a result of the USQ work and feedback at workshops, it has become clear that a new set
of decision-support tools (sometimes referred to as ‘discussion-support tool’ where the
farming community engages in discussions with advisers and scientists) be developed for
intensive industries in Queensland. Such tools need to be developed as much to assist the
scientific community in assessing the relevant decision-systems and processes needed for
these industry sectors, as for understanding within the industries themselves. A useful
reference for these aspects includes Risbey et al. (2004).
Industry Farm Management Systems also need to be constantly updated to take into
account ongoing research. This will require close and ongoing relationships between
industry bodies and rural R & D corporations, as well as continuing investment into updating
FMS programs.
As a foundation activity, this project has helped position QFF and its members to strategically
respond to climate change. It has resourced the horticulture, cane, dairy, cotton and
production nursery industries to incorporate additional climate risk management tools into
their Farm Management Systems (FMS) programs. The project has raised the opportunity of
102
analysing the climate change science and policy as it relates to Queensland’s intensive
agricultural industries, investigate industry awareness and attitudes, enhanced
communication and networking and started the preparation of strategic action plans.
10. Project References
10.1 Meetings
QFF established the Climate Change Project Steering Committee and Expert Panel to guide
the project activities.
Steering Committee Meetings
A project Steering Committee was formed at the commencement of the project. This
committee consisted of representatives from QFF’s member organisations and DAFF. Its
role was to oversee the overall project including budgets, milestones, coordination of
activities and communication to/from member organisations. The project steering committee
provided advice as appropriate to the Expert Panel.
The QFF Climate Change Steering Committee met monthly through the life of the project.
The Steering Committee was fundamental in developing the agendas for the Expert Panel
meetings and facilitating the project outcomes.
Expert Panel Meetings
The Expert Panel met four times since the commencement of the project. The meetings
were very successful and there was a lot of interest and goodwill in making the process work.
The USQ team worked with Panel members to collate relevant information into the risk
assessment analysis. The Expert Panel meeting’s minutes are attached as Attachment 5.
The membership of the Expert Panel is included below. Key dates and process for the Expert
Panel were agreed at the commencement of the project:






December 6 2007 -First Expert Panel meeting to determine information needs
February 5 - Second Expert Panel meeting to discuss collated background analysis
February 20 -Expert Panel and Industry Workshop to refine collated background
analysis and determine methodology for risk/opportunities assessment
April 30 - Expert Panel and Industry Workshop to conduct risk/opportunities
assessment
May 24 - Draft report including Expert Panel peer review comments
June 30 2008 - Final report.
103
Expert Panel membership
Name
Professor Timothy Reeves
Mr Gary Sansom
Professor Roger Stone
Professor Peter Grace
Colin Creighton
Dr Neil White
Dave McRae
Dr Daniel Rodriguez
Peter Deuter
Dr Craig Miller
Mr Stephen Carroll
Dr Sarah Park
Dr Mark Silburn
Title
Facilitator, Deakin University
Chair; President QFF
Director Australian Centre for Sustainable Catchments,
University of Southern Qld Toowoomba
Director, Institute for Sustainable Resources,
Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane
Program Coordinator, Managing Climate Variability,
Land and Water Australia
Senior Scientist (Former)
Queensland Climate Change Centre of Excellence
Senior Scientist
Queensland Climate Change Centre of Excellence
Principal Scientist, A/Focus Team Leader Agricultural
Systems Modelling, DPI&F, (APSRU)
Senior Principal Horticulturist
Horticulture and Forestry Science, DPI&F
Interim Science Director, Climate Adaptation Flagship
CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Brisbane
Australian Bankers Association
Cropping Systems Scientist, Tropical Landscapes Production Systems, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems,
Toowoomba
Hydrologist, DNR&W, Toowoomba Queensland
10.2 Useful Websites
QFF has compiled a list of useful websites that may be of benefit to those engaging in
Climate Change.
www.nams.gov.au
www.bom.gov.au/watl
www.climatechange.qld.gov.au
www.daff.gov.au/brs/climate-impact
www.greenhouse.gov.au
www.managingclimate.gov.au
www.climatechange.gov.au
www.climatechangeinaustralia.gov.au
www.climatechange.gov.au/impacts/index.html
www.ipcc.ch
104
10.2 Literature References
Burdekin Dry Topics NRM 2005, Burdekin Dry Topics natural resource management plan
(2005-2010),
Burdekin
Dry
Topics
NRM,
viewed
8th
April
2008,
<http://www.bdtnrm.org.au/downloads/NRM_Report.PDf>.
Burnett Mary Regional Group 2006, Strategic direction 2006-2016, Burnett Mary Regional
Group.
Climate change centre of excellence 2007, Climate smart adaption 2007-12: an action plan
for managing the impacts of climate change, Queensland Government, Brisbane.
Climate Institute 2008, Climate of the nation: Australian attitudes to climate change and its
solutions, Climate Institute.
Commonwealth of Australia 2006a, Climate change impacts and risk management: a guide
for business and government, Department of the Environment and Heritage
Australian Greenhouse Office, Canberra.
---- 2006b, Climate change scenarios for initial assessment of risk in accordance with risk
management guidance, CSIRO.
---- 2007, Detecting, understanding and attributing climate change, Australian Greenhouse
Office, Department of the Environment and Water Resources, Canberra.
Condamine Alliance 2004, Natural Resource Management Plan, Condamine Alliance,
viewed 9th April 2008.
<http://www.condaminealliance.com.au/images/stories/downloads/NRM%20Plan%2026-804.pdf>
CSIRO & Australian Bureau of Meteorology 2007, Climate change in Australia: summary
brochure, Australian Government: Bureau of Meteorology, Department of the
Environment and Water Resources Australia Greenhouse Office, viewed 23 January
2008, <http://www.climatechangeinaustralia.gov.au/resources.php>.
Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry 2006, National agriculture and climate
change action plan, Commonwealth of Australia, viewed 10th April 2008,
<http://www.daff.gov.au/natural-resources/climate>.
Department of Climate Change 2008, National inventory report 2005 (revised): the Australian
Government submission to the UN framework convention on climate change
February 2008, Australian Government, Canberra.
Growcom 2008, Submission to the Garnaut Climate Change Review: land management,
agriculture and forestry, Growcom, Brisbane.
Mackay Whitsunday NRM 2005, Mackay Whitsunday Regional Plan, Mackay Whitsunday
NRM,
viewed
9th
April
2008,
<http://www.mwnrm.org.au/publications/regionalplans.htmL>.
Meinke, H. and Stone, R.C., (2005). Seasonal and inter-annual climate forecasting: the new
tool for increasing preparedness to climate variability and change in agricultural planning and
operations. Climatic Change, 70, 221-253.
Northern Gulf Resource Management Group 2004, Northern gulf region: natural resource
management plan, Northern Gulf Resource Management Group, viewed 9th April
2008, <http://www.northerngulf.com.au/all.pdf>.
Queensland Government 2007, Climate smart 2050: Queensland climate change strategy
2007 a low-carbon future, Queensland Government, viewed April 8 2008,
<http://www.thepremier.qld.gov.au/news/initiatives/climate/index.shtm>.
Queensland Murray Darling Committee 2006, Target review report: regional natural resource
management plan, Queensland Murray Darling Committee.
Risbey, J., Kandlikar, M., Dowlatibadi, H., Graetz, D (2004). Scale, context, and decisionmaking in agricultural adaptation to climate variability and change. Mitigation and Adaptation
Strategies for Global Change, 4 (2), 137-165.
SEQ Catchments 2004, Healthy Land - Our Future Plan, SEQ catchments, viewed 2nd April
2008, <http://www.seqcatchments.com.au/plans.html>.
105
Terrain Natural Resource Management 2007, Carbon to cash conversion, Terrain Natural
Resource
Management,
viewed
7th
April
2008,
<http://www.terrain.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=74&Itemid=
52>.
Woolworths 2007, Sustainability Strategy 2007–2015, Woolworths Pty Ltd, 6th March 2008.
Literature Cited
Abbs, D. E. 2002. Climate change and Australia's coastal communities. CSIRO,
Atmospheric, Aspendale.
AgForce. 2008. Climate change: land use- agriculture and forestry.
Aksnes, D. L., K. B. Ulvestad, B. M. Balino, J. Berntsen, J. K. Egge, and E. Svendsen. 1995.
Ecological modelling in coastal water: towards predictive physical-chemical-biological
simulation models. Ophelia 41:5-36.
Alber, M. 2002. A conceptual model of estuarine freshwater inflow management. Estuaries
25:1246-1261.
Allen, T. E., and S. M. Donegan. 1974. Bos indicus and Bos taurus crossbred dairy cattle in
Australia. III A climate room test of heat tolerance used in the selection of young sires
for progeny testing. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 25:1023-1035.
Anonymous. Australian farmers managing climate change: impacts and adaptations. Land
and Water Australia, Canberra.
Anonymous. Outbreaks of clinical mastitis in summer. Countdown downunder.
Anonymous. Projected impacts of climate changes on fishing and aquaculture. NSW
Department of Primary Industries.
Anonymous. Summer milking routines for good udder health. Countdown Downunder.
Anonymous. Sunsmart for cows’ teats. Countdown Downunder.
Ash, A., P. McIntosh, B. Cullen, P. Carberry, and M. Smith. 2007. Constraints and
opportunities in applying seasonal climate forecasts in agriculture. Australian Journal
of Agricultural Research 58:952-965.
Aurambout, J.-P., F. Constable, K. Finlay, J. Luck, and V. Sposito. 2006. The impacts of
climate change on plant biosecurity.
Australian Greenhouse Office. Climate change impacts on Australia's agriculture. in.
Australian Greenhouse Office. 2002. Developing a strategic framework for greenhouse and
agriculture, an issues paper.
Australian Greenhouse Office. 2005. Opportunities for Australian agricultural industries to
adapt to climate change: Intensive livestock. in Department of the Environment and
Heritage, editor. Commonwealth of Australia.
Badinga, L., R. J. Collier, W. W. Thatcher, and C. J. Wilcox. 1985. Effects of climatic and
management factors on the conception rate of dairy cattle in subtropical environment.
Journal of Dairy Science 68:78-85.
Beaugrand, G., and P. C. Reid. 2003. Long- term changes in phytoplankton, zooplankton
and salmon related to climate. Global Change Biology 9:801-817.
Berman, A. 1967. Diurnal and seasonal changes in bovine respiratory functions in a
subtropical climate. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 18:849-860.
Berman, A. 2005. Estimates of heat stress relief needs for Holstein dairy cows. Journal of
Animal Science 83:1377-1384.
Berman, A., Y. Folman, M. Kaim, M. Mamen, Z. Herz, D. Wolfenson, A. Arieli, and Y. Graber.
1985. Upper critical temperatures and forced ventilation effects for high yielding dairy
cows in a subtropical climate. Journal of Dairy Science 68:1488-1495.
Berman, A., and M. Morag. 1971. Nychthemeral patterns of thermoregulation in high-yielding
dairy cows in a hot dry near-natural climate. Australian Journal of Agricultural
Research 22:671-680.
106
Boag, S., D. H. White, and S. M. Howden. 1994. Modelling and reducing greenhouse gases
in agriculture. in D. H. White and S. M. Howden, editors. Climate Change:
Significance for agriculture and forestry - System approaches arising from an IPCC
meeting. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Browder, J. A., Z. P. Zein-Eldin, M. Crailes, M. B. Robblee, S. Wong, T. L. Jackson, and D.
Johnson. 2002. Dynamics of pink shrimp (Farfantepenaeus duorarum) recruitment
potential in relation to salinity and temperature in Florida Bay. Estuaries 25:13551371.
C.A.N.A and QCC. Heat on the land, climate change and what it means for Australian
farmers. in.
Carter, J. 2007. Managing pests under climate change. in CSIRO News and Events.
Carter, T. R., M. L. Parry, S. Nishioka, and H. Harasawa. 1995. Technical guidelines for
assessing climate change impacts and adaptations. University College
London/Centre for Global Environmental Research (Tsukuba), London/Tsukuba,
Japan
Chakraborty, S., G. Murray, and N. White. 2002. Impact of climate change on important plant
diseases in Australia.
Chakraborty, S., G. M. Murray, P. A. Magarey, T. Yonow, R. G. O'Brien, B. J. Croft, M. J.
Barbetti, K. Sivasithamparam, K. M. Old, M. J. Dudzinski, R. W. Sutherst, L. J.
Penrose, C. Archer, and R. W. Emmett. 1998. Potential impact of climate change on
plant diseases of economic significance to Australia. Australasian Plant Pathology
27:15-35.
Chakraborty, S., A. V. Tiedemann, and P. S. Teng. 2000. Climate change: potential impact
on plant diseases. Environmental Pollution 108:317-326.
Clarke, A. 2003. Costs and consequences of evolutionary temperature adaptation. Trends in
Ecological Evolution 18:573-581.
Cobon, D. 2006. The season ahead- for graziers and agribusiness in western Queensland. in
Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, editor.
Cotton Australia. 2006. Cotton Australia Policy Position as at March 2006. Cotton Australia.
Crean, J. 2006. Farmers applying seasonal climate forecasting for profitable and sustainable
resource use. Managing Climate Variability R&D Program
Land and Water Australia, Canberra.
Crimp, S., and M. Howden. 2007. Dealing with global warming may simply become an
extension of the strategies that grain growers are already beginning to use to cope
with 'natural' seasonal variations. Groundcover 67.
CSIRO. 2007. Climate change in Australia, a technical report. CSIRO.
Currie, D. R., and K. J. Small. 2005. Macrobenthic community responses to long-term
environmental change in an east Australian sub-tropical estuary. Estuarine, Coastal
and Shelf Science 63:315-331.
Darwin, R. 2004. Effects of greenhouse gas emissions on world agriculture, food
consumption and economic welfare. Climatic Change 66:191-238.
Darwin, R., and D. Kennedy. 2000. Economic effects of C02 fertilization of crops:
transforming changes in yield into changes in supply. Environmental Modeling and
Assessment 5:157-168.
Department of Environment and Heritage, A. G. O. 2005. Assessing and mapping Australia’s
coastal vulnerability to climate change: Expert technical workshop. Australian
Government, Canberra.
Department of Natural Resources and Water. 2006. Impacts: biophysical impacts of climate
change on Queensland. in Climate Changes.
Department of Natural Resources and Water. 2006. The potential impact of climate change
on the distribution of pests in Australia. in Climate changes impacts: pests.
Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries. 2007. Outlook- wheat (shire/state level) July
2007. in.
107
Department of the Environment and Heritage Australian Greenhouse Office. 2005. Climate
change in rural and regional Australia. in. Australian Greenhouse Office.
Department of the Environment and Heritage Australian Greenhouse Office. 2006.
Agriculture industry partnerships- climate change actions for multiple benefits. in.
Australian Greenhouse Office.
Department of the Environment and Heritage Australian Greenhouse Office. 2006. Climate
change impacts & risk management. A guide for business and government. in.
Australian Greenhouse Office.
Department of the Environment and Heritage Australian Greenhouse Office. 2006. Reducing
greenhouse gas emissions from Australian agriculture: The role of benchmarking in
driving best management practice. in.
Department of the Environment and Water Resources Australian Greenhouse Office. 2007.
Australia's agriculture- Impacts of climate change. in.
Deuter, P. 2006. Scoping study into climate change and climate variability. QLD Department
of Primary Industries and Fisheries.
Easterling, W. E., P. E. Aggarwal, P. Batima, K. M. Brander, L. Erda, M. Howden, A.
Kirilenko, J. Morton, J. F. Soussana, J. Schmidhuber, and F. N. Tubiello. 2007. Food,
fiber and forest products. Pages 273-313 in M. L. Parry, O. F. Canziani, J. P.
Palutikof, P. J. van der Linden, and C. D. Hanson, editors. Climate change 2007:
Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of working group II to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Econet Communication. 2008. Seasonal climate forecast tools and information on the
internet. Final Draft 01.
Evans, C. R., L. J. Opnai, and B. D. Kare. 1997. Fishery ecology and oceanography of the
prawn Penaeus merguiensis (de Man) in the Gulf of Papua: estimation of maximum
sustainable yield and modelling of yield, effort and rainfall. Marine and Freshwater
Research 48:219-228.
Everingham, Y. L., A. J. Clarke, and S. Van Gorder. 2008. Long lead rainfall forecasts for the
Australian sugar industry. International Journal of Climatology 28:111-117.
FarmBis. 2007. Ignoring climate is a risky business says Farmbis. in Media Release.
Flaherty, P. 2007. Farmers face dramatic climate change woes. in HeraldSun.
Flamenbaum, I., D. Wolfenson, and A. Berman. 1986. Cooling dairy cattle by a combination
of sprinkling and forced ventilation and its implementation in the shelter system.
Journal of Dairy Science 69:3140.
Ford, B., and N. Forrester. Impact of rainfall variability. Deltapine Australia and Deltapine
International.
Galindo-Bect, M. S., E. P. Glenn, H. M. Page, K. Fitzsimmons, L. A. Galindo-Bect, J. M.
Hernandez-Ayon, J. Garcia-Hernandez, and D. Moore. 2000. Penaeid shrimp
landings in the upper gulf of California in relation to Colorado River freshwater
discharge. Fisheries Bulletin 98:222-225.
Gammelsrod, T. 1992. Variation in shrimp abundance on the Sofala Bank, Mozambique and
its relation to the Zambezi River runoff. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 35:91103.
Garnaut, R. 2007. Issues paper 1. Climate change: land use- agriculture and forestry. in
Garnaut Climate Change Review.
Garnaut, R. 2007. Will climate change bring and end to the platinum age? in Paper
presented at the inaugural S.T. Lee Lecture on Asia & The Pacific, Australian
National University.
George, D. A., C. Birch, D. Buckley, I. J. Partridge, and J. F. Clewett. 2008. Assessing
climate risk to improve farm business management. Extension Farming Systems
Journal 1:71-78.
108
Gillanders, B. M., and M. J. Kingsford. 2002. Impact of changes in freshwater on estuarine
and open coastal habitats and the associated organisms. Oceanography and Marine
Biology: An Annual Review 40:233-309.
Ginnivan, M. 2007. Strategic plan for adaptation to climate change within the Australian dairy
industry. in. Dairy Australia.
Glaister, J. P. 1978. The impact of river discharge on distribution and production of the
school prawn Metapenaeus macleayi (Haswell)(Crustacea: Penaeidia) in the
Clarence River region, northern New South Wales. Australian Journal of Marine and
Freshwater Research 28:311-323.
Goldie, N., and M. van Wensveen. 2003. Agriculture: adapting to climate change. in
ECOFutures.
Granzin, B. C. 2006. Cooling and forage supplementation of grass-fed Holstein cows during
hot conditions Tropical Animal Health and Production 38:141-150.
Greenhouse Accounting. 1999. Cotton.
Growcom. Climate change adaptability - public discussion paper.
Growcom. 2008. Submission to the Garnaut Climate Change Review: land management,
agriculture and forestry.
Gunasekera, D., K. Yeon, C. Tulloh, and M. Ford. 2007. Climate change impacts on
Australian agriculture. ABARE, Commonwealth of Australia.
Hacker, R., A. Bowman, H. Fairweather, D. Hailstones, R. Hegarty, B. Holzapfel, K. Sinclair,
and B. Williamson. Climate change impacts and priority actions in the agriculture
sector: Background paper.
Hahn, G. L. 1999. Dynamic responses of cattle to thermal heat loads. Journal of Animal
Science 77:10-20.
Hales, J. R. S., and J. D. Findlay. 1968. Respiration in the ox: Normal values and the effects
of exposure to hot environments. Respiration Physiology 4:333-352.
Hammer, G. L., D. P. Holzworth, and R. Stone. 1996. The value of skill in seasonal climate
forecasting to wheat crop management in a region with high climatic variability.
Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 47:717-737.
Hammer, G. L., D. R. Woodruff, and J. B. Robinson. 1987 Effects of climatic variability and
possible climatic change on reliability of wheat cropping - A modelling approach.
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 41:123-142.
Hansen, P. J., and C. F. Are´chiga. 1999. Strategies for managing reproduction in the heatstressed dairy cow. Journal of Animal Science 77:36-50.
Hayman, P. Climate change and Australian farming: Overview of impacts and adaptation. in
Managing climate variability: R&D program. Australian Government.
Hennessy, K., B. Fitzharris, B. C. Bates, N. Harvey, S. M. Howden, L. Hughes, J. Salinger,
and R. Warrick. 2007. Australia and New Zealand. in M. L. Parry, O. F. Canziani, J.
P. Palutikof, P. J. van der Linden, and C. D. Hanson, editors. Climate change 2007:
Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Hennessy, K., P. Whetten, J. Katzfey, J. McGregor, C. Page, and K. Nguyen. 1998. Fine
resolution climate change scenarios for New South Wales. Annual report for the New
South Wales Protection Authority. CSIRO Atmospheric Research.
Hennessy, K. J. 2007. Climate change in Australian dairy regions. CSIRO Marine and
Atmospheric Research, Aspendale, Victoria.
Hertzler, G. 2007. Adapting to climate change and managing climate risks by using real
options. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 58:985-992.
Heyhoe, E., Y. Kim, P. Kokic, C. Levantis, H. Ahammad, K. Schneider, S. Crimp, R. Nelson,
N. Flood, and J. Carter. 2007. Adapting to climate change, issues and challenges in
the agricultural sector. Abare.
109
Hobday, A. J., T. A. Okey, E. S. Poloczanska, T. J. Kunz, and A. Richardson, editors. 2006.
Impacts of climate change on Australian marine life. Australian Greenhouse Office,
Canberra.
Horticulture Australia Council. 2007. Meeting the crisis in the Murray-Darling Basin.
Horticulture Australia Limited. 2006. Horticulture water initiative: Ensuring access to water for
responsible and profitable horticulture.
Horticulture Australia Limited. 2007. Environment vision by 2010. Climate change. in.
Howden, M., A. Ash, S. Barlow, T. Booth, S. Charles, R. Cechet, S. Crimp, R. Gifford, K.
Hennessy, R. Jones, M. Kirschbaum, G. McKeon, H. Meinke, S. Park, R. Sutherst, L.
Webb, and P. Whetton. 2003. An overview of the adaptive capacity of the Australian
agricultural sector to climate change - options, costs and benefits. CSIRO
Sustainable Ecosystems, Canberra.
Howden, S. M., S. Crimp, and et al. 2007. Climate change: farming in an even more sunburnt
country. in CSIRO, editor. NSW DPI Climate Meeting. CSIRO.
Howden, S. M., and R. Jones. 2001. Costs and benefits of C02 increase and climate change
on the Australian wheat industry.
Howden, S. M., G. McKeon, and P. J. Reyenga. 1999. Global change impacts on Australian
rangelands.
Howden, S. M., G. McKeon, L. Walker, J. Carter, J. P. Conroy, K. A. Day, W. B. A. Hall, A.J,
and O. Ghannoum. 1999. Impacts on native pastures in south-east Queensland,
Australia.
Howden, S. M., P. J. Reyenga, and H. Meinke. 1999. Fertiliser management of wheat crops
under global change.
Howden, S. M., P. J. Reyenga, and H. Meinke. 1999. Global change impacts on Australian
wheat cropping: Report to the Australian Greenhouse Office. Working Paper 99/04,
CSIRO Wildlife and Ecology, Canberra.
Howden, S. M., P. J. Reyenga, and H. Meinke. 1999. Global change impacts on the
hydrology of soils under Australian wheat crops: a preliminary assessment.
Howden, S. M., P. J. Reyenga, and H. Meinke. 1999. Mixed wheat-sorghum cropping
systems in eastern Australia under global change.
Howden, S. M., J. Soussana, F. Tubiello, N. Chhetri, M. Dunlop, and H. Meinke. 2007.
Adapting agriculture to climate change. in Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences of the USA.
Howden, S. M., J. R. Turnpenny, W. B. Hall, and D. Bruget. 1999. Climate change impacts
on heat stress and water requirements of cattle in Australia.
Hughes, L. 2000. Biological consequences of global warming: is the signal already apparent?
Trends in Ecological Evolution 15:56-61.
Hughes, L. 2003. Climate Change and Australia: trends, projections and impacts. Austral
Ecology 28:423-443.
Hulme, M., and D. Viner. 1998. A climate change scenario for the tropics. Climatic Change
39:145-176.
Igono, M. O., H. D. Johnson, B. J. Steevens, G. F. Krause, and M. D. Shanklin. 1987.
Physiological, productive and economic benefits of shade,spray and fan system
versus shade for Holstein cows during summer heat. Journal of Dairy Science
70:1069-1079.
Jarvis, S. C., and B. F. Pain. 1994. Greenhouse as emissions from intensive livestock
systems: their estimates and technologies for reduction. in D. H. White and S. M.
Howden, editors. Climate Change: Significant for agriculture and forestry. System
approaches arising from an IPCC meeting. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Jarwal, S., A.-M. Boland, D. Stevens, and R. Faggian. 2006. Using recycled water in
horticulture. A grower's guide. Victorian Government Department of Primary
Industries.
Jones, G. V. Climate change: observations, projections and general implications for
viticulture and wine production.
110
Jones, G. V. 2006. Climate change and wine: observations, impacts and future implications.
Wine Industry Journal 21:21-26.
Jones, R. N., and K. J. Hennessy. 2000. Climate Change impacts in the Hunter Valley: A
Risk Assessment of Heat Stress Affected Dairy Cattle. CSIRO Atmospheric
Research, Aspendale, Victoria.
Kandlikar, M., and J. Risbey. 2000. Agricultural impacts of climate change: If adaptation is
the answer, what is the question? Climatic Change 45:529-539.
Kennedy, V. S. 1990. Anticipated effects of climate change on estuarine and coastal
fisheries. Fisheries.
Kingwell, R. 2006. Climate change in Australia: agricultural impacts and adaptation.
Australasian Agribusiness Review 14.
Klyashtorin, L. B. 1998. Long term climate changes and main commercial fish production in
the Atlantic and Pacific. Fisheries Research 37:115-125.
Knox, G., M. Harris, A. McGregor, D. Ugalde, B. Slattery, M. Kaebemick, and P. Ryan. 2005.
Landcare Australia: meeting the greenhouse challenge. in Department of the
Environment and Heritage Australian Greenhouse Office, editor. Australian
Greenhouse Office.
Kokic, P., R. Nelson, H. Meinke, A. Potgieter, and J. Carter. 2007. From rainfall to farm
incomes- transforming advice for Australian drought policy. I. Development and
testing of a bioeconomic modelling system. Australian Journal of Agricultural
Research 58:993-1003.
Loneragan, N. R., and S. E. Bunn. 1999. River flows and estuarine ecosystems: implications
for coastal fisheries from a review and a case study of the Logan River, southeast
Queensland. Australian Journal of Ecology 24:431-440.
Macaulay, C. 2006. Wine industry 'winners and losers' from climate change. in CSIRO Media
Centre.
Mader, T. L. 2003. Environmental stress in confined beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science
81:110-119.
Mahon, R. 2002. Adaptation of fisheries and fishing communities to the impacts of climate
change in the CARICOM region: Issues paper. Mainstreaming Adaptation to Climate
Change (MACC) of the Caribbean Centre for Climate Change (CCCC), Belize City,
Belize.
McGovern, R. E., and J. M. Bruce. 2000. A model of the thermal balance for cattle in hot
conditions. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 77:81-92.
McGregor, A., L. Adcock, D. Ugalde, P. Hyde, and M. Wiener. 2006. Australian rice growers:
Meeting the greenhouse challenge. in Department of the Environment and Heritage
Australian Greenhouse Office, editor. Department of Environment and Heritage.
McRae, D., G. Roth, and M. Bange. 2007. Climate change in cotton catchment communities
- A scoping study. Cotton Catchment Communities CRC.
Meinke, H., M. V. K. Sivakumar, R. P. Motha, and R. Nelson. 2007. Preface: climate
predictions for better agricultural risk management. Australian Journal of Agricultural
Research 58:935-938.
Meynecke, J. O., and S. Y. Lee. 2006. Effect of rainfall as a component of climate change on
estuarine fish production in Queensland, Australia. Estuarine Coast Shelf Science
69:491-504.
Motha, R. P. 2007. Implications of climate change on long-lead forecasting and global
agriculture. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 58:939-944.
Motha, R. P., and W. Bajier. Impacts of present future climatic change and climate variability
on agriculture in the temperate regions: North America.
National Agricultural Monitoring System. 2008. Climate and agricultural update national
report. in.
National Association of Forest Industries. 2007. Submission to The Garnaut Climate Change
Review.
111
Nelson, R., D. P. Holzworth, G. L. Hammer, and P. T. Hayman. 2002. Infusing the use of
seasonal climate forecasting into crop management practice in North East Australia
using discussion support software. Agricultural Systems 74:393-414.
Nelson, R., P. Kokic, and H. Meinke. 2007. From rainfall to farm incomes- transforming
advice for Australian drought policy. II. Forecasting farm incomes. Australian Journal
of Agricultural Research 58:1004-1012.
Olesen, J. E. 2006. Reconciling adaptation and mitigation to climate change in agriculture.
Journal of Physique IV 139:403-411.
Panitz, M. 2008. Workshopping climate change. Pages pp8 in Rural Weekly Insert,
Toowoomba.
Park, S., C. Creighton, and M. Howden. 2007. Climate change and the Australian sugarcane
industry, impacts, adaptation and R&D opportunities. Sugar Research and
Development Corporation.
Pittcock, B. E. 2003. Climate change: An Australian guide to the science and potential
impacts. in Australian Greenhouse Office, editor.
Polkinghorne, J., B. Clark, M. Kaebemick, B. White, K. Russell, B. Slattery, and D. Ugalde.
2004. Riverina Food Group: meeting the greenhouse challenge. in A. G. Office,
editor. Australian Greenhouse Office.
Potgieter, A., G. L. Hammer, and A. Doherty. 2006. Oz-Wheat, a regional- scale crop yield
simulation model for Australian wheat.
Pyke, C. R., B. G. Bierwagen, and et al. 2007. A decision inventory approach for improving
decision support for climate change impact assessment and adaptation.
Environmental Science Policy 10:610-621.
Queensland Fruit and Vegetable Growers. 2004. Submission: National drought policy review.
Reddy, R. K., H. F. Hodges, and J. M. McKinion. 1997. A comparison of scenarios for the
effect of global climate change on cotton growth and yield. Australian Journal of Plant
Physiology 24:707-717.
Reyenga, P. J., M. Howden, H. Meinke, and W. B. Hall. 1999. Global change impacts on
wheat production along two environmental gradients in Australia. in Climate change
impacts: wheat production.
Richards, D., and M. Bange. 2005-06 seasonal climate analysis. CSIRO Plant Industry,
Narrabi, NSW.
Rivington, M., K. B. Matthews, and et al. 2007. An integrated assessment approach to
conduct analyses of climate change impacts on whole-farm systems. Environmental
Modelling and Software 22:202-210.
Robins, J. B., I. A. Halliday, J. Staunton-Smith, D. G. Mayer, and M. J. Sellin. 2005.
Freshwater-flow requirements of estuarine fisheries in tropical Australia: a review of
the state of knowledge and application of a suggested approach. Marine and
Freshwater Research 56:343-360.
Ron, H., A. Bowman, H. Fairweather, D. Hailstones, R. Hegarty, B. Holzapfel, K. Sinclair,
and W. Williamson. Climate change impacts and priority actions in the agricultural
sector: Background paper.
Rosenzweig, C., and D. Hillel. 1998. Climate change and the global harvest: Potential
impacts of the greenhouse effect on agriculture, New York.
Roth, G. 2007. Climate change in cotton communities. CRC.
Ruello, N. 1973. The influence of rainfall on the distribution and abundance of the school
prawn in the Hunter River region (Australia). Marine Biology 23:221-228.
Savoini, G., V. M. Moretti, and e. al. 2006. Quality of primary food products as affected by
climate change. VET RES COMMUN 30:99-103.
Sirohi, S., A. Michaelowa, and et al. 2007. Sufferer and cause: Indian livestock and climate
change. Climatic Change 85:285-298.
SMEC Australia. 2007. Climate change adaptation actions for local government. Australian
Greenhouse Office, Department of the Environment and Water Resources.
112
Soto, C. G. 2002. The potential impacts of global climate change on marine protected areas.
Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 11 181-195.
South Australian Department of Natural Resources and Management. 2006. Horticulture, the
South Australian State Natural Resources (NRM) Management Plan- What it means
for horticulture. in Department of Natural Resources and Management, editor.
Steffen, W., and P. Canadell. 2005. Carbon dioxide fertilisation and climate change policy. in
Department of the Environment and Heritage Australian Greenhouse Office, editor.
Australian Greenhouse Office.
Stern, N. 2007. Executive summary. in The economics of climate change.
Stone, R., N. Nicholls, and G. L. Hammer. 1996. Frost in northeast Australia: Trends and
influences of phases of the Southern Oscillation. Journal of Climate 9:1896-1909.
Stone, R., and S. Park. 2007. The climate is changing- Issues for the sugar industry. in
International Sugar Conference, editor.
Sutherst, R. W., B. S. Collyer, and T. Yonow. 2000. The vulnerability of Australian
horticulture to the Queensland fruit fly Bactrocera (Dacus) tryoni, under climate
change. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 51:467-480.
System, N. A. M. 2008. Climate and agricultural update national report. in.
Tasmanian Government. 2006. Draft climate change strategy for Tasmania: Climate change
acting now. in. Department of Primary Industries and Water, Tasmania.
Thomas, S., P. Reyenga, D. Rossiter, and E. W. R. Barlow. 1999. Research and
development priorities for greenhouse science in the primary industries and energy
sectors. in Australian Greenhouse Office, editor. Commonwealth of Australia.
Torok, S. 2007. Climate adaptation flagship. in CSIRO National Research Flagships.
Tout, E. 2007. 005 Climate- a hot topic for cotton. in Spotlight.
Turnbull, A. 2007. Horticulture natural resource management strategy. Managing the
environmental agenda for horticulture. in.
Valtorta, S. E., and M. R. Gallardo. 2004. Evaporative cooling for Holstein dairy cows under
grazing conditions International Journal of Biometeorology 48:213-217.
Webb, L., S. Barlow, and P. Whetten. 2007. Climate change raises the heat on wineries.
Australasian Science 28:20.
Webb, L., I. G. Watterson, P. Whetten, and E. W. R. Barlow. 2007. Some adaptive
challenges for the Australian wine Industry. in CSIRO Publishing, Sydney NSW.
Webb, L., P. Whetten, and E. W. R. Barlow. 2005. Impact on Australian viticulture from
greenhouse induced temperature change. Pages 1504-1510 in MODSIM 2005
International Congress on Modelling and Simulation. Modelling and Simulation
Society of Australia and New Zealand, Melbourne.
Webb, L., P. Whetten, and S. Barlow. 2006. Potential impacts of projected greenhouse gas
induced climate change on Australian viticulture. Wine Industry Journal 21:16-20.
White, D. H., and S. M. Howden, editors. 1994. Climate change: Significance for agriculture
and forestry. System approaches arising from an IPCC meeting. Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Dordrecht.
White, D. H., G. Tupper, and H. S. Mavi. 1999. Climate variability and drought research in
relation to Australian Agriculture. Commonwealth of Australia.
Wozniczka, L. Facing climate change: Issues and opportunities for business. in Australian
Israeli Chamber of Commerce, editor. FutureIS Corporation Limited.
Zhao, Y. X., C. Y. Wang, S. L. Wang, and et al. 2005. Impacts of present and future climate
variability on agriculture and forestry in the humid and sub-humid tropics. Climatic
Change 70:73-116.
113
11. Appendices
Attachment 1: Energy Efficiency Report
Contact QFF for Attachment.
Attachment 2: Industry Action Plans
Contact QFF for Attachment.
Attachment 3: Fact Sheets
The fact sheets developed under this project by the Bureau of Meteorology will be available
in August by contacting QFF on (07) 3837 4747.
Attachment 4: Literature Review
Contact QFF for Attachment.
Attachment 5: Expert Panel Minutes
Contact QFF for Attachment.
Attachment 6: Climate Adaption for Intensive Agriculture
Historical Weather Data and Trends
Contact QFF for Attachment.
114
QFF Climate Change Project – Final Report
ATTACHMENT 2a. Climate Data Matrix for Queensland’s Intensive Agriculture Regions, history and scenarios.
Regions
Mean
Temperatures
Trend
Temperatures
Mean
Rainfall
Trend
Rainfall
Frosts
Heat
Stress
Wet Seasons
Other
Average date
of the onset of
summer rains,
and the ending
date of the "wet
season".
(northern
4
localities only).
For
11
southern
locations,
average
number
of
storms (> 10
mm)
per
summer
season.
1. Annual and seasonal
evaporation.
2.
Any
suitable
measures of severe
storms,
cyclones,
floods.
3.
Any
suitable
measures of humidity,
wind anomalies.
4. Suitable measures of
"drought severity" accumulated moisture
deficits.
5. Sea level rise and
storm surge extremes.
1.Athertonn (FNQ)
2.Ingham (FNQ)
3.Bowen
4.Mackay
5.Rockhampton
6.Emerald
7.Bundaberg
8.Kingaroy
9.Dalby
10.Gympie
11.Caboulture
12.Gatton
13.Stanthorpe
14.St George
Average annual
mean
temperature,
average of daily
maximums
&
minimums, 1950
to 2007.
Trend
(regression)
of
mean
and
maximum
and
minimum
temperatures to
2030. Also 10
and
20
year
rolling averages
of max and min
temps.
10 and 20
year rolling
averages
of annual
and
seasonal
rainfalls in
mm 1900
to 2007.
Trend
(simple
regression
line)
of
annual
rainfalls to
2030.
Number
of
frost
days per
year (< 2
C)
and
average
date
of
first and
last frost.
Number
of days
with
temperat
ures
above 30
C and 35
C.
15.Lismore
Developed from discussions with industry and experts, plus Nicholls, N. "Detecting and attributing Australian climate change: a review", and Australian Met. Mag. 55 (2006), and Alexander, Lisa V.
et al., "Trends in Australia's climate means and extremes: a global context". Australian Met. Mag. 56 (2007) Table 1.