Economic and social assessment for Bundaberg groundwater

Document Sample
Economic and social assessment for Bundaberg groundwater Powered By Docstoc
					                         Burnett Basin
        water resource plan amendment
economic assessment for Bundaberg groundwater

                               February 2005
ECONOMIC AND
SOCIAL ASSESSMENT
FOR BUNDABERG
GROUNDWATER

FINAL REPORT



Prepared for:

Department of Natural Resources & Mines

Level 6, Mineral House
41 George Street, Brisbane, Qld, 4000

Prepared by:

Economic Associates Pty Ltd
ACN 085 445 610
PO Box 541 Spring Hill QLD 4004
February 2005

04021 Rev 0
             ECONOMIC                                      Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



                                      TABLE OF CONTENTS


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1       INTRODUCTION                                                                                         1

2       ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT                                                                                  3
2.1     RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF GROUNDWATER COMPARED TO SURFACE WATER       3
2.2     UTILISATION OF GROUNDWATER ENTITLEMENTS                            5
2.3     CONTRIBUTION OF GROUNDWATER IRRIGATION                             5
2.4     CONTRIBUTION OF GROUNDWATER IRRIGATION TO GROSS STUDY AREA PRODUCT 8
2.5     URBAN USE OF GROUNDWATER                                           8
2.5.1   BUNDABERG CITY COUNCIL                                             8
2.5.2   BURNETT SHIRE                                                     10
2.6     FUTURE TRENDS IN GROUNDWATER DEMANDS                              12
2.6.1   SUGAR CANE PRODUCTION                                             12
2.6.2   HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION                                           16
2.6.3   URBAN RETICULATED WATER                                           17
2.6.4   INDUSTRIAL WATER                                                  17
2.7     IMPACT OF SALINITY                                                17
2.8     SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS                                           19


3       SOCIAL AND CULTURAL VALUES                                                                         20
3.1     DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE                                                                                 20
3.1.1   AGE STRUCTURE IN THE AGRICULTURE SECTOR                                                             22
3.2     CHANGES IN URBANISATION                                                                             23
3.3     PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH                                                                         24
3.4     EMPLOYMENT BY ECONOMIC SECTOR                                                                       24
3.5     INDIGENOUS CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUES                                                                 27
3.6     SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS                                                                             28


4       REFERENCES                                                                                         29

A       APPENDICES – DATA                                                                                  31
A.1     GROUNDWATER ENTITLEMENTS                                                                            31
A.2     SUGAR CANE PRODUCTION DATA                                                                          32
A.3     HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION DATA                                                                        33



                                              List of Tables
TABLE 1 USE OF GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER: BUNDABERG STUDY AREA        4
TABLE 2 USAGE OF GROUNDWATER BY CROP TYPE IN STUDY AREA (INDICATIVE
        ESTIMATES) 2001                                                   7
TABLE 3 GROUNDWATER EXTRACTION CONTRIBUTION TO VALUE OF CROP PRODUCTION
        (INDICATIVE ESTIMATES) 2001                                       7
TABLE 4 RETICULATED WATER DEMAND: BUNDABERG CITY, ML/YR, 1980 TO 2003    10
TABLE 5 RETICULATED WATER DEMAND BY LOCATION, BURNETT SHIRE: ML/YR, 2003 11
TABLE 6 RETICULATED WATER DEMAND, BURNETT SHIRE, ML/YR 1997-2003         11
TABLE 7 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE: BUNDABERG STUDY AREA, 2001                  21

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                 iii
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                      Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD


TABLE 8 CHANGING AGE STRUCTURE IN AGRICULTURE                                23
TABLE 9 CHANGES IN URBANISATION IN BUNDABERG STUDY AREA                      24
TABLE 10 PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH: 2001 TO 2016                           24
TABLE 11 EMPLOYMENT BY ECONOMIC SECTOR: BUNDABERG STUDY AREA – 1991-01       26
TABLE 12 GROUNDWATER ENTITLEMENTS BY LICENCE TYPE: JULY 2004                 31
TABLE 13 CURRENT INDUSTRIAL LICENCES BY INDUSTRIAL GROUPINGS: JULY 2004      31
TABLE 14 SUGAR CANE PRODUCTION: BUNDABERG SUGAR COMPANY AND ISIS CENTRAL
        MILL DISTRICTS- 1980 TO 2003                                         32
TABLE 15 BUNDABERG DISTRICT: HORTICULTURE - AREA OF PRODUCTION (HA), 1997 TO
        2002                                                                 33
TABLE 16 BUNDABERG DISTRICT: HORTICULTURE - PRODUCTION (TONNES), 1997 TO 200234
TABLE 17 BUNDABERG DISTRICT: HORTICULTURE - VALUE OF PRODUCTION ($M), 1997 TO
        2002                                                                 35



                                             List of Figures
FIGURE 1 STUDY AREA                                                       2
FIGURE 2 BUNDABERG CITY WATER CONSUMPTION                                 9
FIGURE 3 BURNETT SHIRE WATER CONSUMPTION                                 12
FIGURE 4 SUGAR CANE AREAS HARVESTED: BUNDABERG AND ISIS DISTRICTS        13
FIGURE 5 CANE PRODUCTION AREAS: BUNDABERG AND ISIS DISTRICTS             13
FIGURE 6 PROPORTION OF CANE PRODUCTION AREAS HARVESTED: BUNDABERG AND ISIS
        DISTRICTS                                                        14
FIGURE 7 AREA OF HORTICULTURAL PRODUCTION: GREATER BUNDABERG DISTRICT    16




04021 Rev 0                                                                                                  iv
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                         Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD




                         EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

An economic and social assessment was undertaken as part of a first phase analysis for
including the groundwater resources of the Bundaberg Aquifer System in a water resource
plan. Research was undertaken in the latter part of 2004.

The Bundaberg Aquifer System incorporates the declared Bundaberg Subartesian Area as
well as areas which are currently not regulated. The land overlaying these groundwater
resources constitutes the study area, which is approximately 152,000 hectares. It supports a
population of 65,000 residents. It includes Bundaberg City, a large part of Burnett Shire
including coastal areas, and the northern part of Isis Shire. Irrigated sugar cane farming is
the main agricultural activity. There is also significant production of irrigated horticulture
crops.

Relative importance of groundwater as a water resource. Groundwater is a major
contributor (41%) to the total water supply across all the user types in the area. Nearly 38%
of the irrigation supplies are derived from groundwater while more than half of the town
water supplies are also sourced from groundwater.

Significance of unregulated groundwater.                   Approximately 30 percent of groundwater
extraction is not regulated.

Conjunctive use of groundwater and surface water. In areas where there is unregulated use
of groundwater, there is scope for conjunctive use of groundwater and surface water.
Approximately 82 percent of the cropping land within these areas is serviced by surface
water.

Contribution of groundwater irrigation to production. In 2001, the total value of irrigated
crops in the study area was approximately $174 million, which included $73 million based
on groundwater irrigation. The contributions to gross study area product (total value added
at factor cost) were about 7 percent from irrigated cropping and 3 percent from the
groundwater irrigated component.

Future demand for groundwater. Additional demands for water resources in the study area
are expected to be largely serviced by surface water supplies from the new Burnett River
Dam. Principal demands would be for supplementary irrigation of sugar cane, development
of new cropping areas for horticulture, and provision of additional reticulated water in
urban areas, particularly coastal areas of Burnett Shire and Bundaberg City. There is scope
to reduce the demands on groundwater resources by extending surface water infrastructure.
This is especially important in areas affected by groundwater salinity and sea water
intrusion.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                     v
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                      Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



Key socio-economic linkages to groundwater resources. The most direct linkage of
groundwater to the local population is through irrigated farming and sugar cane milling.
These sectors employ about 20 percent of the study area working population. In recent
years, the sugar industry has been depressed which has impacted on the study area
economy. As at March 2004, unemployment was above 10 percent, compared to 6.5
percent for the State average. Indirectly, groundwater underwrites a high proportion of
economic activity in the study area. In 2003, it represented 70 percent of reticulated water
supplies in Bundaberg City and 42 percent in Burnett Shire.

Demographic changes in the study area. The farming population component is relatively
small at less than 3,000 in the labourforce, and it has not grown significantly since 1991.
The average age of farmers is about 53 years which is higher than the population average of
40 years. There are demographic changes which are occurring independently of the rural
sector. There has been strong population growth in the coastal areas, reflecting a growing
demand by Australians for coastal properties. The growth of coastal populations in the
study area has had important impacts on water management, and has placed greater
pressure on the peak demands for groundwater. Burnett Shire has implemented surface
water programs to reduce its dependency on groundwater. The projected population growth
rate for the Shire to 2016 is 3.2 percent per annum compared to 1.7 percent per annum for
the Bundaberg region (incorporating Bundaberg City, Burnett Shire and Isis Shire).

Cultural and heritage significance of groundwater. Specific sites such as wells, soaks and
springs may be of significance for Indigenous culture and heritage. Knowledge of these
sites would be vested with the Gooreng Gooreng peoples, whose country included the study
area at the time of European settlement.




04021 Rev 0                                                                                                  vi
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                      Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD




1 INTRODUCTION

It is proposed to amend the Water Resource Plan (WRP) for the Burnett Basin to include
groundwater resources of the Bundaberg Aquifer System which incorporates the declared
Bundaberg Subartesian Area as well as areas which are not regulated. The study area,
which is also the current Moratorium Area, is 151,746 hectares. The declared Bundaberg
Subartesian Area is 78,472 hectares, and the undeclared area, 73,274 hectares.

The study area (refer Figure 1) includes Bundaberg City, a large part of the Burnett Shire
and the northern part of Isis Shire. It is overlayed in parts by a channel network for the
Bundaberg Water Supply Scheme. Most crops in the study area are irrigated. The main
crop is sugar cane. Tree farming and small crops (some as inter-rotation with sugar cane)
are also important in specific locations.

The objectives of the economic and social assessment are to assess:

•   Current economic and social conditions and trends for the study area;
•   Economic, social and cultural values associated with groundwater resources in the study
    area; and
•   Current and future demands for, use of, and reliance on groundwater resources.
Economic Associates Pty Ltd were engaged by the Department of Natural Resources and
Mines to conduct this study. Research was undertaken in the latter part of 2004.




04021 Rev 0                                                                                                  1
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                      Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD




***********insert

Figure 1 Study Area




04021 Rev 0                                                                                                  2
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                        Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD




2 ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT


2.1    RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF GROUNDWATER COMPARED TO
       SURFACE WATER

Table 1 provides an overview of the relative importance of groundwater for economic and
urban use in the study area. It shows that groundwater is of major importance for irrigated
agriculture, reticulated town water and stock and domestic use. Overall, it provides
approximately 41 percent of water supplies in the study area.

The largest user of total surface water and groundwater in the study area is the sugar cane
industry. In the study area, the industry accounted for about 84 percent of total water usage,
and 76 percent of groundwater extraction. This includes relatively small quantities used by
the sugar mills1. Usage of groundwater by the other sectors was as follows: reticulated
town water (10%); small crops (5%); stock and domestic use (5%); and tree crops (3%). A
similar usage profile applied for regulated and unregulated groundwater. However, almost
all unregulated groundwater (90%) was used for irrigating sugar cane.




1
  Bundaberg Sugar Company advised that Milliquin Mill has a dedicated bore which supplies the refinery
mainly for potable process water. A small allocation is retained at the site of the closed Qunaba Mill which is
now used for warehousing and as a transport depot. Fairymead Mill is supplied principally with surface water
from the SunWater channel, but groundwater is used when the channel is closed for maintenance.
Groundwater is supplied from a bore on the Fairymead plantation. The total groundwater allocation for the
three sites is approximately 1,110 ML/yr. Groundwater is not used by the Bingera Mill which is serviced
directly from the Burnett River.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                    3
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
                  ECONOMIC                                           Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
                  ASSOCIATES PTY LTD


Table 1 Use of groundwater and surface water: Bundaberg Study Area
    Sugar cane                          Regulated          Unregulated            Total           %
                                                      i                  ii
    Groundwater ML/yr                      35,108              19,540           54,649          37%
    Surface Water ML/yr                    74,196i             17,936vi         92,132          63%
    Subtotal                              109,305               37,476         146,781         100%
    Small crops                         Regulated          Unregulated           Total            %
    Groundwater ML/yr                        3,242i                617ii          3,859         52%
                                                      i                  vi
    Surface Water ML/yr                      2,706                 800            3,506         48%
    Subtotal                                5,948                1,417            7,365        100%
    Tree Crops                          Regulated          Unregulated            Total           %
    Groundwater ML/yr                        2,008i                462ii          2,469         42%
                                                      i                  vi
    Surface Water ML/yr                      2,951                 479            3,430         58%
    Subtotal                                4,959                  941            5,899        100%
    Reticulated Town Water              Regulated          Unregulated            Total           %
    Groundwater ML/yr                       7,501iii      not applicable          7,501         63%
    Surface Water ML/yr                     4,200vii              159viii         4,359         37%
    Subtotal                               11,701                  159          11,860         100%
    Stock & Domestic                    Regulated          Unregulated           Total            %
    Groundwater ML/yr                       2,370iv              1,147v           3,517         96%
                                                     ix                  ix
    Surface Water ML/yr                         54                  80              134          4%
    Subtotal                                2,424                1,227            3,651        100%
    Total supplies                      Regulated          Unregulated            Total           %
    Groundwater ML/yr                       50,229               21,766         71,995          41%
    Surface Water ML/yr                     84,107               19,454        103,561          59%
    Total                                  134,336               41,220        175,556        100%
Notes:

               All estimates rounded to the nearest ML. Totals rounded separately.
i              Average metered usage 1987-2001 from DNR&M Water Entitlements Registration Database (WERD)
               apportioned by 2001 Landuse classification within Water Use Zones. All industrial use of water which is
               mainly for sugar cane milling is included in this category.
ii             DNR&M Notice of Works 2003 validated usage apportioned by 2001 Landuse classification within
               Water Use Zones.
iii            Average metered usage 1987-2001 of Bundaberg City Council & Burnett Shire Council.
iv             DNR&M Water Entitlements Registration Database (WERD) Allocations at November 2003.
v              DNR&M Notice of Works 2003 based on 0.5 ML/yr for Woodgate & 1.0 ML/yr elsewhere.
vi             DNR&M Water Entitlements Registration Database (WERD) Area based Allocations at November 2002
               based on 3.0 ML/ha apportioned by 2001 Landuse classification within Water Use Zones.
vii            Approximate average usage of Bundaberg City Council & Burnett Shire Counci.l
viii           Average recorded usage 2000-2003 by Isis Shire Council for township of Woodgate.
ix             DNR&M Water Entitlements Registration Database (WERD) Area based Allocations at November 2002
               based on 2.0 ML/ha.
Source:        estimated and compiled by DNR&M (Bundaberg Office)




04021 Rev 0                                                                                                              4
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
              ECONOMIC                                         Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
              ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



2.2    UTILISATION OF GROUNDWATER ENTITLEMENTS

At July 2004, the Department administered 2,566 water licences in the declared area. The
total nominal allocation for these licences was 66,171 ML/yr. An announced allocation
system2 is used to bring the groundwater extracted on a season by season basis to levels that
the aquifers can sustain. Current annual use of groundwater from the study area is of the
order of 66,000 ML of which approximately 48,000 is from the declared area.

2.3    CONTRIBUTION OF GROUNDWATER IRRIGATION

Estimates of water usage by supply source in 2001 were provided by DNR&M (Bundaberg
Office), which were used to develop indicative assessments of the contribution of
groundwater to agricultural and horticultural production in the study area. District sugar
cane statistics were drawn from data provided by CANEGROWERS. Horticulture statistics
were provided by the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries (Kalkie Research
Station). The analysis is reported in Tables 2 and 3.

The crop areas reported in Tables 2 and 3 refer to approximate areas harvested in the same
year3. District small crop areas may be overstated as it was not possible to account for
multiple cropping on the same land. It was assumed that production levels from
groundwater and surface water irrigation were approximately equal. However, it should be
noted that the costs of using groundwater and surface water differ to varying degrees across
the study area4.

The Department’s estimates of the usage of water by specific crop types (sugar cane, small
crops and tree crops) were derived by applying crop area proportions to the total use of
water within specific water-use zones. The average water use was about 4.5 ML/ha. Most
water-use zones have a cross-section of crops. Also, there could be a variation in the usage
of water between the regulated and unregulated areas. Estimates of irrigation applications



2
  ‘An announced allocation specifies the percentage of the nominal volume of water entitlement that may be
supplied during a water year.’ Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2003) Water Act 2000
Information Brochure.
3
  In 2001, the proportion of Cane Production Areas (formerly termed ‘assigned’ land) harvested for sugar cane
across the Bundaberg Sugar Company and Isis Central Mill districts was about 69%. Some of the residual
land would have been in fallow, but most would have been used for other cropping, and would have been
partially accounted for in land harvested for small crops and tree crops.
4
  There is scope for conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater in the unregulated groundwater area.
The unregulated cropping area is approximately 11,300 ha. Currently, 82% of this area is serviced by surface
water (DNR&M Bundaberg Office correspondence). In these areas, some farmers prefer to use surface water
first. The costs of utilising groundwater can be relatively high if it is necessary to double pump water (from
bores and again from a central storage on the farm). The ‘residual head’ of surface water can lower pumping
costs. In other cases, there is a preference to use groundwater, particularly for microjet irrigation, as there can
be less need for fine filtration.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                           5
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
               ECONOMIC                                       Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
               ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



were prepared for the Burnett Region in 2000 by Sinclair Knight Merz5 which indicated
average irrigation applications in the Burnett region ranged from about 1.25 ML/ha for
beans to 8 ML/ha for citrus. The average application for sugar cane was 3.6 ML/ha.

The main observations from this analysis are as follows:

•      In 2001, total groundwater extraction for cropping was about 61,000 ML, which
       represented approximately 38 percent of total water supplies for irrigation.
•      Small crops were the most dependent sector on groundwater for irrigation. About half
       the water used for irrigation by this sector was sourced from groundwater supplies.
       This compared to approximately 40 percent for tree crops and sugar cane.
•      Most of the groundwater for cropping was extracted from regulated supplies. About
       one third was extracted from unregulated sources. The most dependent sector on
       unregulated groundwater was sugar cane. Dependency ranged from about 30-50
       percent in this sector. Dependency on unregulated groundwater was less than 20
       percent for small crops and tree crops.
•      The proportion of unregulated groundwater for total irrigation water supplies varied
       from about 8 percent (for small crops and tree crops) to approximately 13 percent for
       sugar cane production.
The contribution of groundwater extraction to the value of crop production in the study area
was derived by apportioning district crop values by the associated land proportion in the
study area and applying the proportions of groundwater extracted by crop type in the study
area. Total values represent the summation by crop type. The same qualifications
regarding water usage also apply to this analysis. The indicative estimates were as follows:

•      In 2001, the total value of crop production based on irrigation using groundwater was
       about $73 million, comprising approximately $53 million based on regulated
       groundwater sources and $20 million on unregulated sources.
•      The value of sugar cane production irrigated from groundwater was about $42 million,
       compared to $25 million for small crops, and $6 million for tree crops.
Since 2001, the ratios would have swung more in favour of small crops and tree crops,
because sugar cane production and sugar prices declined in the 2002 and 2003 seasons.




5
    Sinclair Knight Merz (2000) The Efficiency of Water Use in the Burnett Region, p.112.




04021 Rev 0                                                                                                     6
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
               ECONOMIC                                                                                                                    Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
               ASSOCIATES PTY LTD


Table 2 Usage of groundwater by crop type in Study Area (indicative estimates) 2001
                             Crop        Regulated                   Unregulated                                                   Total
                             area          GW             %             GW               %           Total GW        %            GW+SW
 Crops                       (ha)         ML/yr          Total         ML/yr            Total         ML/yr         Total          ML/yr
  Bundaberg Sugar            24,761        29,186        26%            14,505          13%           43,691         39%           112,483
  Isis Central Mill          7,576         5,922         17%            5,035           15%           10,958         32%           34,298
 Sugar cane subtotal         32,338        35,108        24%            19,540          13%           54,649         37%           146,781
 Small crops                  1,620         3,242        44%             617             8%            3,859         52%            7,365
 Tree crops                   1,332        2,008         34%             462             8%            2,469         42%            5,899
 Total                       35,289        40,358        25%            20,619          13%           60,977         38%           160,044
Source: DNR&M (Bundaberg Office)

Table 3 Groundwater extraction contribution to value of crop production (indicative estimates) 2001
                                                                  Total
                             Total        Crop       Study        crop        Study       % in SA                 % in SA                                Total
                             crop        areas in     Area/       value       Area       Irrigated                Irrigated               % in SA         SA
                            areas in      Study      District      in         crop           by         Crop         by          Crop     Irrigated      Crop
                            District      Area        Area       District     value      Regulated      value      Unreg         value       by          value
 Crops                       (ha)*         (ha)        %         ($m)**       ($m)         GW           ($m)        GW           ($m)       GW           ($m)
  Bundaberg Sugar            37,003       24,761       67%       $127.31      $85.19        26%         $22.11       13%        $10.99       39%        $33.09
  Isis Central Mill          13,786       7,576        55%        $47.97      $26.37        17%          $4.55       15%         $3.87       32%         $8.42
 Sugar cane subtotal         50,789       32,338       64%       $175.29     $111.61        24%         $26.70       13%        $14.86       37%        $41.55
 Small crops                 4,616        1,620        35%       $137.41      $48.22        44%         $21.23        8%        $4.04        52%        $25.27
 Tree crops                  3,735        1,332        36%        $40.74      $14.52        34%         $4.94         8%        $1.14        42%         $6.08
                                                            #                                    #                         #                      #
 Total                       59,140       35,289       49%       $353.43     $174.36        30%         $52.87       12%        $20.03       42%        $72.90
Areas and ML estimates rounded. Totals rounded separately.
* Harvested areas for sugar cane in 2001 ** Total sugar cane value based on raw sugar production in 2001 at $332/t. Bundaberg Sugar 383,474 t; Isis Central Mill 144,501 t
Total small crop and tree crop values based on DPI&F estimates for 2001. Crop areas not fully defined. Small crop area may be overstated because of multiple cropping
# Total proportions reflect variations in value per hectare and ML by crop type. They differ from arithmetic averages for land area and water usage.
Source: CANEGROWERS; Queensland Sugar Limited; DNR&M (Bundaberg Office)

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                                                                                                  7
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
               ECONOMIC                                     Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
               ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



2.4      CONTRIBUTION OF GROUNDWATER IRRIGATION TO GROSS STUDY
         AREA PRODUCT

The Gross Study Area Product (GSAP is the difference between the gross value of
production and the costs of inputs purchased in the production process for all sectors in the
local economy. It can be aggregated to provide a measure of the contribution to Gross
Regional Product (GRP), and Gross State Product (GSP). The contribution of groundwater
irrigation to GSAP is difficult to estimate as a measure of GSAP is not available. A GRP
estimate has been prepared for the Wide Bay Burnett Statistical Division, which is a much
broader area and incorporates other major centres such as Maryborough, Hervey Bay, and
Gympie. Only very indicative inferences can be drawn from the regional GRP.

In 2001-02, the GRP of the Wide Bay Burnett Statistical Division was approximately $4.5
billion6, or about 4.2 percent of the Queensland GSP7. The region’s population as a
proportion of the Queensland population at the 2001 census was approximately 6.5 percent.
By using these ratios, it is possible to provide a broadly indicative estimate of the GSAP in
2001-02 of approximately $1.3 billion8. The value added (or GSAP) component of the
irrigated production value would have been approximately 50 percent9 of its gross value,
giving a GSAP contribution in the study area from all irrigated crops of about 7 percent,
and 3 percent for irrigated crops using groundwater.

2.5      URBAN USE OF GROUNDWATER

Bundaberg City Council and Burnett Shire Council extract groundwater from within the
study area. Isis Shire Council uses only surface water from a weir on the Gregory River to
service the townships of Woodgate and Childers.

2.5.1      BUNDABERG CITY COUNCIL

Bundaberg City Council’s allocation of groundwater is 6,170 ML/yr which has been almost
fully utilised in recent years. Groundwater is sourced from about 20 bores in the city area.
Council has closed two bores to the north of the Burnett River and an additional two bores
immediately to the south due to rising salinity in these areas. However, most of the




6
    cited in AEC (2003) Bundaberg & The Coral Coast Facts & Figures Ed.1 March Quarter 2003, p.2.
7
  GSP at factor cost in 2001-02 was $106.7 billion. OESR (2004) Gross state product at factor cost by
industry and main components, Queensland, 1993-94 to 2003-04. p.3. A factor of 0.65 has been applied to
apportion Queensland GSP by population to the study area.
8
    Based on Office of the Government Statistician (2002) Queensland Input-Output Tables 1996-97, p.26.
9
    Based on estimated GSAP contributions of $87m and $33m, respectively.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                   8
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
                      ECONOMIC                                                  Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
                      ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



groundwater is drawn from bores to the south east of the city which is of good water
quality10.

Surface water is pumped from the Burnett River, upstream of the Ben Anderson Barrage.
The surface water allocation is 4,820 ML/yr, which includes a recent addition of 400 ML/yr
to ensure adequate supplies for the future. However, Council aims to maintain utilisation of
surface water at about 3,000 ML/yr for as long as practicable, because of its inherent risks
when compared with groundwater. The risks include the variability of source water from
within the Burnett River catchment and the potential for algal blooms during certain months
of the year, which have led to higher treatment costs. Council advised that in 2003-04, the
comparative operating costs for treatment (including pumping to a treatment station) were
$287/ML for surface water and $19/ML for groundwater.

Statistics for groundwater and surface water demand are provided in Table 4. Over the last
ten years, water demand has fluctuated significantly, but without showing a positive trend.
Full cost pricing for water has been phased in over the last five years, which has probably
constrained demand in the latter part of this period. As displayed in Figure 2, Bundaberg
City’s water demand showed a positive trend until about 1993, before plateauing in the last
decade. The relative dependence on groundwater has fluctuated between about 60-90
percent. It represented approximately 70 percent of total water supplies in 2002/03.
Additional demand will be largely accommodated from surface water supplies in future
years, as the groundwater allocation is almost fully utilised.

Figure 2 Bundaberg City water consumption

                    10,000

                     9,000

                     8,000

                     7,000
       Megalitres




                     6,000
                                                                                                               Groundwater
                     5,000                                                                                     Surface
                                                                                                               Total
                     4,000

                     3,000

                     2,000

                     1,000

                        0
                         80




                                                            90

                                                                   92




                                                                                               00

                                                                                                      02
                                82

                                       84

                                              86




                                                                          94

                                                                                 96
                                                     88




                                                                                        98
                       19




                                                          19

                                                                 19




                                                                                             20

                                                                                                    20
                              19

                                     19

                                            19




                                                                        19

                                                                               19
                                                   19




                                                                                      19




                                                           Financial years



10
  Bundaberg City Council reported that the quality of the groundwater is of low to moderate hardness, with
low turbidity, colour and pH. All bore water is treated prior to distribution by aerating water using spray
nozzles over a bed of limestone.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                                       9
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                         Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD


Table 4 Reticulated water demand: Bundaberg City, ML/yr, 1980 to 2003
 Financial        Ground          Surface                          GW/Total
 Year              water           water            Total            %
     1980               5,684          1,816               7,500     75.8%
     1981               5,592          1,428               7,019     79.7%
     1982               5,414          2,207               7,621     71.0%
     1983               6,455          1,423               7,879     81.9%
     1984               5,795          1,444               7,239     80.1%
     1985               6,622            868               7,490     88.4%
     1986               7,004            824               7,828     89.5%
     1987               6,891            912               7,804     88.3%
     1988               7,287            902               8,189     89.0%
     1989               5,981          1,652               7,632     78.4%
     1990               6,899          1,399               8,298     83.1%
     1991               7,301          1,681               8,982     81.3%
     1992               5,735          2,581               8,315     69.0%
     1993               6,805          1,350               8,155     83.4%
     1994               6,257          1,044               7,301     85.7%
     1995               7,315          2,085               9,400     77.8%
     1996               6,093          2,891               8,984     67.8%
     1997               5,860          3,034               8,894     65.9%
     1998               5,725          3,616               9,341     61.3%
     1999               4,973          2,345               7,318     68.0%
     2000               5,298          2,610               7,908     67.0%
     2001               5,674          3,424               9,098     62.4%
     2002               5,775          3,085               8,860     65.2%
     2003               5,715          2,474               8,189     69.8%
Source: Bundaberg City Council


2.5.2    BURNETT SHIRE

Water demands at specific locations in the Shire are shown in Table 5.

In 2002/03, Burnett Shire urban water consumption within the study area was 2,262 ML,
comprising 858 ML of groundwater, 1,287 ML of surface water and 116 ML purchased
from Bundaberg City Council. Approximately 38 percent of water supplies were drawn
from groundwater sources from within the study area11.

The main water treatment plant is at Kalkie. The plant has a groundwater allocation of
1,573 ML/yr and a surface water allocation of 2,312 ML/yr. There is an additional
groundwater allocation of 245 ML/yr for the Moore Park town water supply, and
approximately 180 ML/yr of surface water allocation for other minor centres in the Shire.

11
  Approximately 70% of the water provided by Bundaberg City Council probably originated from
groundwater sources which raised the shire’ dependency on groundwater to about 42%.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                    10
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
              ECONOMIC                                          Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
              ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



Surface water is drawn from the Bundaberg Water Supply Scheme channel system.
Groundwater allocations are approximately 42 percent of total water allocations.

Table 5 Reticulated water demand by location, Burnett Shire: ML/yr, 2003
Treatment plant/ source            Ground            Surface          Other              Total        Ground
                                    water             water          sources                          water %
Kalkie Treatment Plant                  614             1,209              0             1,823           34%
River Park                                0                29              0                29            0%
Moore Park                             2401                 0              0               240          100%
Burnett Downs                             0                49              0                49            0%
Tanthita/Fairymead Road                                                 1162               116            0%
Zorzan                                    4                 0              0                 4          100%
Total in study area3                    858             1,287            116             2,262           38%
1.To be replaced by a surface water system in December 2004.
2. Purchased from Bundaberg City Council. Would include approximately 70% groundwater.
3. Excludes Rocky Point (3.74 ML/yr groundwater) which lies to the north of the study area.
Source: Burnett Shire Council

Council aims to establish a 25%/75% groundwater/surface water blend at the Kalkie plant
to provide suitable water quality after treatment. The groundwater allocation was recently
reduced to 1,573 ML/yr after Council agreed to relinquish approximately 450 ML/yr. State
Government is funding a 60 ML surface water storage which can be used during periods
when the channel system is shut down for maintenance (or periods of higher than expected
peak demand). Previously during these periods, there has been more intensive pumping of
groundwater which has caused deterioration of water quality in the aquifer. Similar
problems (on a smaller scale) have been experienced at Moore Park.

Changes in urban water demand since the Shire was formed in 1996 are shown in Table 6
and Figure 3. The proportion of groundwater has reduced from about 59 percent in 1997 to
30-40 percent in recent years.

Table 6 Reticulated water demand, Burnett Shire, ML/yr 1997-2003
                                    Surface          Ground           Other                   Total     Ground
 Financial years                     water            water         sources*                            water %
 1997                                   911             1,349              26             2,277             59%
 1998                                 1,321               730             113             2,152             34%
 1999                                   840               759             110             1,700             45%
 2000                                   955               769             111             1,825             42%
 2001                                 1,056               805             128             1,976             41%
 2002                                 1,398               710             124             2,219             32%
 2003                                 1,287               858             116             2,262             38%
* Water supplied by Bundaberg City Council.
Source: Burnett Shire Council

Demand fell initially due to the introduction of water metering and more stringent water
restrictions. However, since 1999 there has been strong growth of about 7 percent per

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                       11
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
                       ECONOMIC                                  Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
                       ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



annum, which is increasing the dependence on surface water supplies. The main driver for
water demand has been property development in the coastal settlements. There has also
been more intensive subdivision in areas surrounding Bundaberg City, particularly between
the city and Bargara12.

Figure 3 Burnett Shire water consumption

                     2,500



                     2,000



                     1,500
        Megalitres




                                                                                                Surface
                                                                                                Groundwater
                                                                                                Total
                     1,000



                      500



                        0
                             1997   1998    1999    2000     2001        2002      2003
                                               Financial years




2.6     FUTURE TRENDS IN GROUNDWATER DEMANDS

Key factors which will influence the demand for groundwater in the study area will be
changes in cultivation areas in the sugar cane and horticulture industries, and population
growth in Bundaberg City and Burnett Shire.

2.6.1            SUGAR CANE PRODUCTION

Over the period 1980-2003, the area harvested for sugar cane fluctuated between 42,000
and 52,000 hectares, without showing a positive trend. Since 1999, harvested areas have
fallen to levels similar to those in the early 1980s. The trends are shown in Figure 4.




12
  Groundwater allocations have been granted by DNR&M for approved land sub-divisions, but it has been the
responsibility of Council to consider water availability before granting sub-division approvals.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                       12
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
                    ECONOMIC                                                 Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
                    ASSOCIATES PTY LTD


Figure 4 Sugar cane areas harvested: Bundaberg and Isis Districts

                  60,000


                  50,000


                  40,000
       Hectares




                                                                                                              Bundaberg
                  30,000                                                                                      ISIS
                                                                                                              Total

                  20,000


                  10,000


                      0
                       80

                              82

                                     84

                                            86

                                                   88

                                                          90

                                                                 92

                                                                        94

                                                                               96

                                                                                      98

                                                                                             00

                                                                                                    02
                     19

                            19

                                   19

                                          19

                                                 19

                                                        19

                                                               19

                                                                      19

                                                                             19

                                                                                    19

                                                                                           20

                                                                                                  20
                                                                Year


There has been no long term growth in areas harvested despite a strong increase during
most of the period in the assignment of land for sugar cane production (Cane Production
Areas) as illustrated in Figure 5.

Figure 5 Cane Production Areas: Bundaberg and Isis Districts

                  80,000

                  70,000

                  60,000

                  50,000
       Hectares




                                                                                                              Bundaberg
                  40,000                                                                                      ISIS
                                                                                                              Total
                  30,000

                  20,000

                  10,000

                      0
                                                                        94

                                                                               96

                                                                                      98

                                                                                             00

                                                                                                    02
                       80

                              82

                                     84

                                            86

                                                   88

                                                          90

                                                                 92
                                                                      19

                                                                             19

                                                                                    19

                                                                                           20

                                                                                                  20
                     19

                            19

                                   19

                                          19

                                                 19

                                                        19

                                                               19




                                                                Year

Figure 6 shows how the utilisation rate of Cane Production Areas has declined over the
period.



04021 Rev 0                                                                                                                   13
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
                    ECONOMIC                                                 Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
                    ASSOCIATES PTY LTD


Figure 6 Proportion of cane production areas harvested: Bundaberg and Isis Districts

                  100.0%

                  90.0%

                  80.0%

                  70.0%

                  60.0%
       % of CPA




                                                                                                              Bundaberg
                  50.0%                                                                                       ISIS
                                                                                                              Total
                  40.0%

                  30.0%

                  20.0%

                  10.0%

                   0.0%
                              82

                                     84




                                                                                             00
                       80




                                                                        94

                                                                               96

                                                                                      98
                                            86

                                                   88

                                                          90

                                                                 92




                                                                                                    02
                            19

                                   19




                                                                                           20
                     19




                                                                      19

                                                                             19

                                                                                    19
                                          19

                                                 19

                                                        19

                                                               19




                                                                                                  20
                                                                Year



From 2000 onwards, the utilization rate has fallen by about 10 percent from 70 percent to
60 percent. The decline in the utilization rate has been driven mainly by very poor market
and growing conditions in the sugar industry, including sustained low sugar prices, severe
drought and variety failure (caused by an outbreak of orange rust).

There has been diversification of farming into small crops (some in rotation with sugar
cane) and also tree crops. Also, in recent years, programs have been introduced to reduce
the dependence on sugar cane mono-culture, with the introduction ‘break crops’ such as
soybeans and peanuts, in order to increase sugar cane productivity. These changes have
resulted largely in a substitution of land uses without significantly impacting on the
aggregate demand for irrigation water.

An extrapolation of past trends would suggest further declines in the areas harvested for
sugar cane and in demands for irrigation water for sugar cane cultivation. However, future
world sugar prices will have a strong bearing on the sustainability of the local sugar cane
industry. Key underlying factors include the impact or otherwise of subsidized exports of
sugar from the EU, and the growth of sugar exports from Brazil. The World Bank has
projected prices of US 8.62 c/lb in 2010 and US 9.53 c/lb in 2015, which are comparable to
current prices. Most forecasts in recent years have been revised downwards, because of
rising sugar stocks13. In the medium term, there is a prospect of removing subsidized sugar
exports from the EU. Brazil, Thailand and Australia have challenged the EU’s export
subsidies for sugar before the World Trade Organisation (WTO). The WTO has found that


13
  World Bank forecasts in October 2001 were as follows: US 9.98 c/lb (2005), 10.89 c/lb (2010) and US
11.79 c/lb (2015). Most forecasts at ABARE outlook conferences have also been revised down.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                                   14
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
               ECONOMIC                                      Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
               ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



the subsidies contravene international rules. This should ultimately benefit Australian
producers, provided the EU does not successfully appeal14.

Against this, Brazilian sugar exports could continue to dampen the market outlook. Brazil’s
rapid expansion of sugar cane production in the last decade caused its sugar exports to rise
from about 2 mt per annum in the early 1990s to over 14 mt per annum in 2002-03. This
has been a key factor depressing world prices. Brazil also produces substantial volumes of
ethanol as a partial substitute for petrol for use in its domestic vehicle fleet and for export.
Future exports of sugar from Brazil will be influenced by its strategies to boost ethanol
production. ANZ Bank15 research reported some resurgence in the demand for hydrous
ethanol which had been declining in the 1990s. Also, with the introduction of flex-fuel
technology, which allows variable proportions of ethanol and petrol to be used in engines,
the demand for anhydrous ethanol is expected to rise in Brazil and also in major export
markets such as Japan and China. These factors could have an impact, by partly diverting
sugar cane production to the production of ethanol. However, Brazil can produce sugar at
very low cost and has substantial capacity for further expansion. If this occurs, upward
movements in sugar prices will be constrained.

If sugar cane production expands in the study area, it is likely to be a result of
supplementary irrigation rather than development of new areas. With the increased
availability of water from the Burnett River Dam, the application of irrigated water on
developed land could rise from about 2.2-4.5 ML/ha to approximately 6-7 ML/ha16. In the
supporting analysis for the Burnett River Dam Environmental Impact Statement, sugar cane
production was projected to rise by about 710,000 tonnes per annum in the lower Burnett
region, due to supplementary irrigation17. The Department of Natural Resources and
Mines18 also estimated that there remain about 32,000 ha of undeveloped suitable soils in
the Bundaberg Water Supply Scheme area, which would require surface water allocations
to be developed. It was assumed that this expansion would occur with prices of about
$30.50 per tonne for sugar cane, implying a sugar price of approximately US 10 cents per
pound. The use of additional surface water for supplementation and development of new
land will depend on its affordability for sugar cane farmers19.


14
     Fraser, A (2004) ‘EU dump ban sweetens sugar’ in The Australian, 6 August, p.2.
15
     ANZ (2003) Industry Brief: The world sugar market – focus on Brazil, pp.1-3.
16
  Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2001) Burnett River Catchment Appraisal Study Technical
Report, pp.7-5 to 7-7.
17
   NECG (2001) Indicative economic impacts of additional water storage infrastructure in the Burnett Region,
p. 43.
18
  Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2001) Burnett River Catchment Appraisal Study Technical
Report, p.6-16.
19
  In Sinclair Knight Merz (2001) Burnett Catchment Water Infrastructure – Burnett River Dam
Environmental Impact Statement, p.17-15, it was assumed that the annual sale price for medium priority water
would be approximately $1,200/ML.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                   15
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
                       ECONOMIC                                  Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
                       ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



2.6.2            HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION

The areas cultivated for small crops and tree crops have grown consistently in the greater
Bundaberg area during the period 1997 to 2002 (Figure 7). This will continue while the
relative returns to horticulture remain substantially higher than the returns for sugar cane
production. Small crop production tends to complement sugar cane production and trends
can change as relative returns vary. But the development of tree crop areas is largely
irreversible in the short to medium term.

Figure 7 Area of Horticultural Production: Greater Bundaberg District

                     12,000


                     10,000


                      8,000
          Hectares




                                                                                                 Tree crops
                      6,000                                                                      Small crops
                                                                                                 Total

                      4,000


                      2,000


                         0
                              1997   1998   1999          2000         2001        2002
                                                   Year


A number of sugar cane farms have been purchased for development of tree crops,
particularly for macadamia orchards. Over the period 1993-2003, about 3,500 ha of cane
production areas were diverted to tree crops.

The Environmental Impact Statement for the Burnett River Dam predicted that there would
be a substantial increase in horticulture production in the lower Burnett region as a result of
the take-up of water from the Burnett River Dam. The additional water availability would
ultimately lead to an increase in vegetable production of about 633,000 tonnes, and tree
crop production of about 35,000 tonnes20. This compares to production in 2002 in the
Bundaberg District of approximately 131,000 tonnes for vegetables and 19,000 tonnes of
tree crop produce. There would need to be significant market development to realise these
predictions.




20
     ibid, p.43.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                       16
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                      Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



Further horticulture development is likely to result mainly from conversion of sugar cane
land, rather than development of new land. This will be constrained by market limitations.
There is limited scope to introduce other broad acre crops to replace sugar cane.

2.6.3    URBAN RETICULATED WATER

The demand for reticulated water in Bundaberg City and Burnett Shire will continue to
expand as population grows. Population projections are provided in section 3.3. The
Department of Natural Resources and Mines projected Bundaberg City would require an
additional 2,410 ML/yr by 2020. They noted that this increase would need to be met from
surface water supplies. In Bundaberg City, groundwater allocations are almost fully
utilised.

The Department projected Burnett Shire’s additional water demand to be 3,025 ML/yr by
2020. Owing to water salinity problems with groundwater, the additional demand would
need to be met from surface water supplies.

The Department21 projected the additional demand for Isis Shire to be 973 ML/yr. The
Shire draws water from a weir on the Gregory River. Future demands would be
accommodated by augmentation works on the Gregory River or by accessing surface water
from the Bundaberg Water Supply Scheme. The Department did not envisage the Shire
using groundwater.

2.6.4    INDUSTRIAL WATER

About 94 percent of industrial water groundwater allocations are for use by sugar mills in
the Bundaberg Sugar Company district. The Department of State Development22 in 2000
had previously identified the Bundaberg 2000+ project as a significant potential user of
water. However, plans to develop the project have been abandoned. There could also be
additional demand for water for value adding of food products in the Bundaberg Food Park.

2.7     IMPACT OF SALINITY

The groundwater resources have been significantly impacted by sea water intrusion of the
deeper Fairymead Beds and the overlaying shallower Elliott Formation. Considerable
damage occurred in the 1960s when the groundwater resources were over exploited. This
led to a proposal to develop the Bundaberg Irrigation Scheme in 1969, which was
committed by the Queensland Government in 1970.


21
  Estimates are provided in Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2001) Burnett River Catchment
Appraisal Study Technical Report, pp.6-12, 6-14.
22
  Queensland Department of State Development (2000) Social and Economic Information for Draft Water
Allocation Scenarios – Draft Burnett Basin WAMP, p.18.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                 17
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
              ECONOMIC                                     Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
              ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



Water management programs were introduced in 1972, which incorporated measures to
control further sea water intrusion in the aquifers. These programs have been largely
successful, but there has been further extension of intrusion zones in both aquifer systems.
In addition, there is a large area of land between The Hummock and Elliott Heads which is
influenced by high magnesium chloride (MgCl) content in the groundwater which has
leached from the basalts of the area.

The announced groundwater allocations are calibrated by the Department to arrest further
sea water intrusion and manage salinity levels. In some areas, such as Burnett Heads, the
channel system was extended to replace groundwater with surface water and maintain crop
productivity. In other areas, such as Elliott Heads, farmers have developed their own
surface water schemes to overcome the problem.

In areas with high MgCl, there are very complex management problems. As concluded by
Skilton et al23 (2000):

          ‘As the Ca:Mg ratios of the groundwater irrigated Ferrosol and Vertosol are
          both below one the sustainability of cropping under continued irrigation
          with groundwater is questionable. The raised soil EC1:.5 due to groundwater
          irrigation in both soil types is also a concern for electrolyte accumulation
          and ultimate salinity problems.’

They noted, however, that lowering the EC by the application of surface water could lead to
a structural breakdown of the soils and subsequent surface crusting and erosion.

Currently, a groundwater rescue project is under consideration by the Queensland
Government. The project would provide surface water to farms which are solely dependent
on groundwater for irrigation and where groundwater is seriously affected by rising salinity
and/or high MgCl. Areas of high quality agricultural land which are affected include 889
hectares to the north of the Burnett River (23 landholders), and 3,160 hectares to the south
of the river (93 landholders).24

It is evident that the rising salinity levels in groundwater have impacted agricultural and
horticultural production both directly through declining yields, and indirectly via the
impacts of lower announced allocations for groundwater in specific areas. Projects have
been implemented to substitute surface water for groundwater in selected severely impacted
areas. Estimates of the impacts on production of rising salinity were not available for the
study area.




23
   Skilton, J.A., Kingston, G., Aitken, R.L. (2000) ‘Bundaberg Groundwater: What are the impacts of long
term use?’, p.5.
24
     DNR&M (Bundaberg Office) correspondence.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                 18
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                      Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



2.8     SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Groundwater is an important resource in the study area. Groundwater contributes:

•     41 percent of total water supplies;
•     38 percent of irrigation water for crops;
•     37 percent of irrigation water for sugar cane;
•     70 percent (in 2003) of Bundaberg City’s reticulated water supplies; and
•     42 percent of Burnett Shire’s reticulated water supplies (in 2003 including groundwater
      reticulated from Bundaberg City).
The total value of irrigated crops (taking into account the value of sugar produced) in the
study area in 2001 was approximately $174 million, which included $73 million based on
groundwater irrigation. The contributions to Gross Study Area Product (total value added
at factor cost) were about 7 percent from irrigated cropping and 3 percent from the
groundwater irrigated component.

The total irrigated areas have remained largely unchanged, due to restrictions on total water
supplies. There has been conversion of sugar cane land at the margin for tree cropping.
Most small cropping is still conducted in rotation with sugar cane cultivation. There is
likely to be continued conversion of sugar cane land for other cropping, as the relative
returns for horticulture have been higher than those for sugar cane. The outlook for sugar
cane remains uncertain, despite a favourable decision by the WTO regarding EU export
subsidies.

There are in excess of 30,000 ha of suitable soils in the Bundaberg Water Supply Scheme
area which could be developed if irrigation water were available. It is expected that the
increased availability of surface water would not create commensurate increases in
groundwater demands, and, in some cases, it would allow groundwater to be replaced by
surface water. Extension of surface water infrastructure will be a key factor for increasing
crop production, and addressing specific groundwater salinity and sea water intrusion
problems.

In urban areas, the demand for water is linked to population growth and property
development. In Bundaberg City, the projected additional requirements by 2020 are
approximately 2,410 ML/yr, and in Burnett Shire, 3,025 ML/yr. Due to differences in
water quality, Bundaberg City has a strong demand for groundwater, as it can be treated at
relatively low cost. In contrast, in Burnett Shire, programs are being implemented to reduce
its reliance on groundwater because of salinity problems. Bundaberg City’s groundwater
allocation is almost fully utilized, while Burnett Shire has relinquished part of its allocation.
In both cases, additional water demand will be accommodated mainly from surface water
supplies. However, in the case of Bundaberg City, there would be greater use made of
groundwater, if allocations were increased.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                 19
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                      Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD




3 SOCIAL AND CULTURAL VALUES

This section provides an overview of social values based on a demographic analysis of the
main parameters of the study area. The analysis has been based mainly on data drawn from
the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) 2001 Census of Population and Housing and
selected previous census years. A statistical area has been specially created by combining
ABS Collector Districts on a ‘best-fit’ basis. These Districts are the lowest geographic
level for which census data are available. The cultural significance of water resources for
Indigenous communities is also addressed.

3.1     DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE

Demographic statistics for the study area have been compared with those for regional
Queensland (all areas in the State excepting South East Queensland) and the State as a
whole in Table 7. Comparative ratios are provided in the right-hand columns to identify
specific measures where the demographic profile of the study area is at significant variance
with regional Queensland or State averages. The main observations are as follows:

•     Total population, indigenous population and ethnicity. At the 2001 census, the
      population of the study area was approximately 65,000. The average household size
      was 2.5 persons, which was comparable to household size in the remainder of the State.
      Approximately 1,700 indigenous persons resided in the study area, representing 2.7
      percent of the population. Their representation was substantially lower than in regional
      Queensland and also lower than the State average. About 90 percent of the population
      had been born in Australia and spoke only English in the home, which broadly reflected
      patterns across Queensland.
•     Age, family type and dwellings. There was a higher proportion of older persons (60+
      years) in the study area population, and a lower proportion of persons in the household
      formation years (20-39 years), and families with children. As in regional Queensland
      and across the State, most people owned or were purchasing their own homes.
•     Labourforce participation and unemployment. The labourforce participation rate in the
      study area was lower than the regional Queensland and State averages, which reflected
      to a certain degree the higher proportion of retired persons in the population, but also
      the poorer employment opportunities. In 2001, the unemployment rate was 12.3
      percent, which was about 4 percent above the regional and State averages. By March
      2004, the unemployment rate had declined in line with State trends, but remained
      relatively high.



04021 Rev 0                                                                                                 20
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
               ECONOMIC                                      Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
               ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



•   Household incomes. The average household income of the study area was about
    $40,000 per annum, which was substantially below the regional and State averages.
    Household incomes were strongly skewed toward the incomes of less than $26,000 per
    annum.
•   Tertiary education. About 6 percent of the adult population had tertiary qualifications.
    This was lower than the regional and State averages.
The demographic profile highlights specific characteristics of the study area. Firstly, the
study area has a relatively high proportion of retired persons. Secondly, it has been
experiencing greater economic hardships and poorer work opportunities. The Bundaberg
economy remains strongly driven by rural enterprises, particularly the sugar industry which
has been depressed for some years.

Table 7 Demographic profile: Bundaberg Study Area, 2001
                                                             Regional                     Study Area/      Study Area/
                                         Bundaberg
 Category:                                                     Qld            Qld           Reg Qld            Qld
                                         Study Area
                                                           (excl SEQ)1                       ratio            ratio
 Age
 0-19                                       28.6%            29.5%           28.4%             1.0              1.0
 20-39                                      22.9%            27.2%           28.3%             0.8              0.8
 40-59                                      26.4%            26.5%           26.5%             1.0              1.0
 60+                                        22.1%            16.8%           16.7%             1.3              1.3
 Employment
 In labour force                            53.6%            62.7%           63.1%             0.9              0.8
 White collar occupations                   64.2%            63.1%           68.3%             1.0              0.9
 Employed per household                       0.9              1.1             1.2             0.8              0.8
 Unemployed
 At 2001 Census                             12.3%             8.0%            8.2%             1.5              1.5
                                                                     3
 At March 2004                              10.9%            6.8%             6.5%             1.6              1.7
 Household Income
 $0-$26,000                                 46.0%            36.7%           33.7%             1.3              1.4
 $26,001-$52,000                            32.5%            32.0%           31.2%             1.0              1.0
 $52,000+                                   21.5%            31.4%           35.1%             0.7              0.6
 Average ($2004 values)                    $40,229          $48,016         $51,396            0.8              0.8
 Dwellings
 Detached/semi-detached                     88.4%            84.7%           84.6%             1.0              1.0
 Flats/units                                 6.7%             9.2%           12.2%             0.7              0.5
 Caravan/other                               4.8%             6.1%            3.1%             0.8              1.5
 Owned/purchasing                           68.7%            64.2%           65.3%             1.1              1.1
 Education (Aged 15+)
 Tertiary Qualifications                     6.3%             8.0%           10.8%             0.8              0.6




04021 Rev 0                                                                                                   21
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                         Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD


                                                              Regional                      Study Area/      Study Area/
                                           Bundaberg
 Category:                                                      Qld             Qld           Reg Qld            Qld
                                           Study Area
                                                            (excl SEQ)1                        ratio            ratio
 Family Type
 Couples with Children                        29.9%            33.0%           32.5%             0.9                0.9
 Couples without Children                     30.8%            27.9%           27.2%             1.1                1.1
 One Parent Household                         11.8%            11.1%           11.6%             1.1                1.0
 Lone Person Household                        23.9%            23.2%           23.0%             1.0                1.0
 Group/Other Household                        3.6%              4.8%            5.8%             0.8                0.6
 Ethnicity
 Australian Born                              88.7%            86.9%           81.9%             1.0                1.1
 Only English spoken at home                  92.5%            88.7%           86.8%             1.0                1.1
 Indigenous Population
 Total indigenous persons                     1,734            77,576         112,772            na                 na
 Proportion of total population               2.7%              6.4%           3.2%              0.4                0.8
 Population
 Persons in Occupied Dwellings                64,850         1,207,285       3,511,352           na                 na
 Occupied Private Dwellings                   25,796          465,850        1,355,613           na                 na
 Average Household Size                         2.5             2.6             2.6              1.0                1.0
1. Queensland less Brisbane and Moreton Statistical Divisions.
2. Bundaberg City, Burnett Shire and Isis Shire combined.
3. Queensland less Brisbane Statistical Division only.
Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics, CData 2001; Australian Government Department of Employment and Workforce
Relations, Small Area Labour Markets Australia March quarter 2004


3.1.1    AGE STRUCTURE IN THE AGRICULTURE SECTOR

As a subset to the demographic profile, the age structure of persons employed in agriculture
was analysed to determine if there was a significant difference to the age structure for the
study area. Data for persons employed in agriculture, forestry and fishing were used as a
proxy measure25. A weighted average age was calculated based on the numbers employed
in each age category. The profile for all persons employed in the study area is provided for
comparative purposes. The results are summarised in Table 8.

The data indicate the average age of persons employed in the agriculture sector increased
from about 41 years in 1991 to 43 years in 2001, which was marginally above the averages
for the study area of 38 years and 40 years, respectively. A survey of sugar cane farmers in
the Bundaberg District by Windle and Rolfe in 2003 found that their average age was
considerably higher at 53 years26.


25
   The CRC Reef Research Centre (2001) found that there were approximately 829 persons employed in the
fishing industry in 2001, suggesting that about one third of the sector’s work force was in the fishing industry.
The mean age of owner-operators was 43 years, and crew, 32 years.
26
 Windle, J., Rolfe, J. (2003) Regional Perspectives on the Viability of Sugarcane Farming Systems in Central
Queensland, December, unpublished, p.4.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                     22
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
              ECONOMIC                                           Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
              ASSOCIATES PTY LTD


Table 8 Changing age structure in agriculture
 Agriculture, forestry
 and fishing                     1991            %         1996            %          2001          %
 15-19 years                      138          5%            132          5%           125         5%
 20-24 years                      258         10%            227          9%           215         8%
 25-34 years                      529         20%            540         21%           522        19%
 35-54 years                    1,247         48%          1,183         46%         1,269        47%
 55 years and over                452         17%            509         20%           568        21%
 Total agriculture              2,624        100%          2,591        100%         2,699       100%
 Average age*                    41.3                       42.0                      42.8
 Total employed                  1991            %         1996            %          2001          %
 15-19 years                    1,617          8%         1,817           8%         2,019         9%
 20-24 years                    2,167         11%         2,321          10%         1,969         8%
 25-34 years                    4,663         24%         5,098          22%         4,680        20%
 35-54 years                    9,178         47%        11,063          49%        11,660        50%
 55 years and over              2,031         10%         2,438          11%         3,118        13%
 Total                         19,656        100%        22,737         100%        23,446       100%
 Average age*                    38.3                      38.8                       40.0
* Weighted average age based on mid point estimates and 65 years for 55 + years category.
Source: ABS CData, 1991, 1996, 2001


3.2    CHANGES IN URBANISATION

An analysis was undertaken to identify the main urban settlements in the study area.
Because of boundary changes in earlier years, it was only possible to compare changes for
the 1996 to 2001 period. Changes in urbanisation are shown in Table 9.

The statistics show that population growth in Bundaberg City has been relatively low at 0.5
percent per annum. The strongest urban growth has been in Burnett Shire Part A (3.1%
p.a.), which incorporates an area between Bundaberg City and the coast. The growth in
dwellings in this area was about 4.2 percent per annum.




04021 Rev 0                                                                                                       23
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
              ECONOMIC                                              Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
              ASSOCIATES PTY LTD


Table 9 Changes in urbanisation in Bundaberg Study Area
 Occupied dwellings                           1996              %          2001             %        Av Growth % p.a.
 Bundaberg ( C ) SLA                       15,638          67.3%         16,718        65.2%               1.3%
 Burnett (S) - Pt A SLA                     4,008          17.2%          4,920        19.2%               4.2%
 Subtotal urban                            19,646          84.5%         21,638        84.4%               2.0%
 Bundaberg Study Area                      23,237         100.0%         25,632       100.0%               2.0%
 Persons in occupied dwellings
 Bundaberg ( C ) SLA                       40,260          66.2%         41,377        64.4%               0.5%
 Burnett (S) - Pt A SLA                    10,374          17.1%         12,074        18.8%               3.1%
 Subtotal urban                            50,634          83.2%         53,451        83.2%               1.1%
 Bundaberg Study Area                      60,834         100.0%         64,277       100.0%               1.1%
Burnett Part A area to the east of Bundaberg City taking most of the main coastal settlements.
SLA Statistical Local Area.
Source: ABS CData, 1996, 2001


3.3     PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH

The projected population growth rates for Local Government Areas which overlap the study
area are provided in Table 10. There is expected to be a decline in population growth for
Burnett Shire (4.3% to 3.2% p.a.) and Isis Shire (2.1% to 1% p.a), but a modest increase for
Bundaberg City (0.6% to 1.3% p.a.).

Since 2001, there has been further significant development in the coastal settlements
reflecting major ‘seachange’ investment along the east coast of Australia, which may have
been masked by the broader statistics. Burnett Shire Council advised that the projected
population growth of these settlements for the next ten years is expected to be in the range
of 3-6 percent per annum.

Table 10 Projected population growth: 2001 to 2016
 Occupied dwellings                                   1991-01                                    2001-16
 Bundaberg City                                         0.6%                                      1.3%
 Burnett Shire                                          4.3%                                      3.2%
 Isis Shire                                             2.1%                                      1.0%
 Total three LGAs                                       1.9%                                      1.7%
Sources: Queensland Government Department of Local Government and Planning, Queensland's Future Population, 2003
Edition, December; Australian Bureau of Statistics Regional Population Growth 1991 to 2001Cat.No.3218.0, 25 July 2002
Australian Bureau of Statistics Regional Population Growth 2001-02 Cat.No.3218.0, 3 April 2003


3.4     EMPLOYMENT BY ECONOMIC SECTOR

Employment statistics have been drawn from the ABS 1991 to 2001 census data to outline
sectoral changes in economic structure and sector growth in the study area economy27. The

27
  This assessment should also be accompanied by an analysis of sectoral contributions to GRP, but the only
available GRP data are for the Wide Bay Burnett region, which is too broad to provide a meaningful analysis.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                          24
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                      Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



analysis is summarised in Table 11. Growth rates have been based on normalised
employment statistics for each sector, after re-assigning the ‘non-classifiable’ and ‘not
stated’ statistics. The main observations are as follows:

•    Over the period 1991 to 2001, total employment grew by about 1.8 percent per annum
     which was broadly in line with population growth.
•    The largest employment sectors in 2001 were Wholesale & Retail, Accommodation,
     Cafes and Restaurants (28%), Health and Community Services (20%), Agriculture,
     Forestry and Fishing (12%) and Manufacturing (12%).
•    The traditional ‘base’ of the local economy has been farming and sugar milling which
     form a large part of the Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing, and Manufacturing sectors,
     respectively. There has been no employment growth in these sectors over the 1991 to
     2001 period, and as a consequence their shares in total employment have declined. This
     occurred despite an increase in production over the period. Key factors underlining the
     poor employment performance appear to have been a substantial decline in sugar
     industry incomes caused by falling sugar prices, and continued rationalisation of
     employment in the sugar industry in response to the deteriorating economic climate and
     a need to increase efficiency28.
It is not possible to estimate with any accuracy employment attributable to the use of
groundwater. However, the analysis shows that the impact has been significant. About 25
percent of the value of irrigated farming production in the study area is dependent on the
use of groundwater. This impact would amplify in sugar milling, as its viability is
dependent on the throughput of sugar cane to achieve economies of scale. Without
production from the groundwater irrigated areas, the viability of the sugar mills would be
significantly reduced. All other industries are indirectly impacted by groundwater, as they
draw on reticulated water supplies. About 70-80 percent of reticulated water in Bundaberg
City and 30-60 percent in Burnett Shire have been drawn from groundwater sources.




28
  In the Bundaberg Sugar Company and Isis Central Mill districts, sugar production increased from 0.43 mt in
1991 to 0.53 mt in 2001. Horticulture production increased from 0.12 mt in 1997 to 0.13 mt in 2001. Data
from CANEGROWERS and DPI&F (Kalkie Office).




04021 Rev 0                                                                                                 25
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                                                                                                    Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD


Table 11 Employment by economic sector: Bundaberg Study Area – 1991-01
 Sector:                                                                     1991                 %             1996                 %              2001                   %    Av growth
                                                                                                                                                                                    % p.a.
 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing                                             2,624            14.5%             2,591            11.8%              2,699           11.7%             -0.3%
 Mining                                                                        24             0.1%                51             0.2%                 45            0.2%              5.8%
 Manufacturing                                                              2,645            14.6%             2,532            11.5%              2,692           11.7%             -0.4%
 Electricity, Gas, Water Supply                                               149             0.8%               168             0.8%                207            0.9%              2.7%
 Construction                                                               1,273             7.0%             1,478             6.7%              1,297            5.6%             -0.4%
 Wholesale & Retail Trade, Accom, Cafes, Restaurants (1)                    3,987            22.0%             5,804            26.3%              6,386           27.8%              4.2%
 Transport & Storage                                                          704             3.9%               789             3.6%                950            4.1%              2.4%
 Communication Services                                                       164             0.9%               233             1.1%                189            0.8%              0.8%
 Finance, Insurance, Property & Business Services (2)                       1,441             7.9%             2,517            11.4%              2,039            8.9%              2.9%
 Government Admin & Defence                                                   703             3.9%               907             4.1%                822            3.6%              1.0%
 Health & Community Services (3)                                            3,246            17.9%             3,976            18.0%              4,543           19.8%              2.8%
 Cultural & Recreational Services (4)                                       1,175             6.5%               995             4.5%              1,114            4.8%             -1.1%
 Subtotal                                                                  18,135           100.0%            22,041           100.0%             22,983          100.0%
 Non-classifiable economic units                                               60                                259                                  54
 Not stated                                                                 1,461                                437                                 409
 Total                                                                     19,656                             22,737                              23,446                              1.8%
 Notes:
 Classifications have been adjusted to accommodate classification changes between 1991 and 1996/2001 as indicated below:
  1. 1991 Classification of wholesale and retail trade; 1996 & 2001 Classification of Wholesale Trade, Retail Trade + Accommodation, Cafes, Restaurants.
  2. 1991 Classifciation of Finance, Insurance, Property and Business Services; 1996 and 2001 Classification of Finance and Insurance, + Property and Business Services.
  3. 1991 Classification of Community Services; 1996 and 2001 Classification of Health and Community Services + Education.
 4. 1991 Classification of Recreational Services; 1996 and 2001 Classification of Cultural and Recreational Services, + Personal and Other Services.
 Sector employment % and average growth % normalized for not classifiable and not stated statistics. Normalised figures for calculating growth rates not shown in table.
 Source: ABS CData, 1991, 1996, 2001




04021 Rev 0                                                                                                                                                                               26
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
               ECONOMIC                                     Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
               ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



3.5      INDIGENOUS CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUES

The Department of Natural Resources in 200029 prepared a consultation framework which
recognised the significance of water resources including wells and springs in Indigenous
cultural heritage. The following is an extract from this document:

           ‘Water is an important resource of many Indigenous people, and is often
           fundamental to traditional connections to land, as a local economic resource
           and by providing for spiritual, cultural and recreational needs. Rivers,
           creeks, lakes, bay and estuary systems, springs and wells are often central to
           Indigenous people’s traditional country. Physical modifications of rivers,
           springs or water flows and allocation may affect the cultural heritage
           associated with the landscape.’

Research undertaken by Lilley and Ulm30 indicates that at the time of European settlement,
the study area would have been located within the country of the Gooreng Gooreng
speakers, which covered an area running south along the coast from Gladstone to the mouth
of the Gregory River near Woodgate, and inland beyond Monto.

Their research identifies sites on the coast near Bargara and further inland adjacent to the
Burnett River, but specific springs and wells of cultural and heritage significance were not
separately documented in this paper. The importance of groundwater to Indigenous peoples
is highlighted in observations made by the Department of Natural Resources and Mines in
200131 when referring to the Burnett River and its tributaries:

           ‘Given the variability of rainfall and stream flow throughout the region,
           wells, springs and soaks were considered to be an important element in the
           water management practices of indigenous people. The maintenance of
           these water sources was, and still is, considered of paramount importance by
           Aboriginal people to ensure the preservation of all living things.’

Knowledge of sites of significance would be vested with the Gooreng Gooreng peoples and
may not be in the public domain.




29
     Department of Natural Resources (2000) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Consultation Framework.
30
  Lilley, I., and Ulm, S (1999) ‘The Gooreng Gooreng Cultural Heritage Project: Preliminary Results of
Archaeological Research, 1993-1997’ in Queensland Archaeological Review, Vol.11.
31
  Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2001) Burnett River Catchment Appraisal Study Technical
Report, p. 3-5.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                  27
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                      Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



3.6    SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The population of the study area is approximately 65,000. Key socio-economic linkages to
groundwater are through irrigation farming and sugar milling. These enterprises provide an
economic base for the local economy. The direct contribution to employment of these
sectors is approximately 20 percent of total study area employment. However, their impact
on the economy would be much more pervasive through linkages to other sectors. Also,
groundwater is a major component of reticulated water supplies, and thus indirectly
underpins a high proportion of economic activity and employment in the study area.

The farming labourforce component is relatively small at less than 3,000 and has not grown
since 1991. The average age of farmers is about 53 years which is higher than the
population average of 40 years.

In recent years, the sugar industry has been depressed which has impacted on the study area
economy. Unemployment as at March 2004 was above 10 percent, compared to 6.5 percent
for the State average.

Demographic changes are occurring independently of the rural sector. There has been
strong population growth in the coastal areas, reflecting a growing demand by Australians
for coastal properties. The growth of coastal populations in the study area has had
important impacts on water management, and has placed greater pressure on the peak
demands for groundwater. Burnett Shire has implemented surface water programs to
reduce its dependency on groundwater. The projected population growth rate for the Shire
to 2016 is 3.2 percent per annum compared to 1.7 percent per annum for the Bundaberg
region (incorporating Bundaberg City, Burnett Shire and Isis Shire).

The variability of rainfall and streamflow were key factors raising the importance of wells,
soaks and springs for Indigenous water management. There may be specific sites of
significance for Indigenous culture and heritage. Knowledge of these sites would be vested
with the Gooreng Gooreng peoples, whose country included the study area at the time of
European settlement.




04021 Rev 0                                                                                                 28
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                      Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD




4 REFERENCES

ABARE (2004) Australian Commodities: Sugar Outlook, March 2004
http://www.abare.gov.au

AEC Group (2003) Bundaberg & The Coral Coast Facts & Figures, Ed.1 – March Quarter,
prepared for Bundaberg City Council.

ANZ (2003) Industry Brief: The world sugar market – focus on Brazil, 20 October.

Australian Bureau of Statistics CData, 1991, 1996, 2001.

Australian Bureau of Statistics Regional Population Growth 2001-02 Cat.No.3218.0, 3
April 2003.

Australian Bureau of Statistics Regional Population Growth 1991 to 2001 Cat.No.3218.0,
25 July 2002.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2002) Agriculture Census 2001 - All Commodities.

Australian Sugar Milling Council (2004) Annual Review 2004.

CANEGROWERS (2003) Annual Report 2003.

Fraser, A (2004) ‘EU dump ban sweetens sugar’ The Australian, 6 August.

Kemp, A. ‘Sugar: Outlook to 2004-05 and implications for policy reform’, in ABARE
Outlook 2000.

Lilley, I., Ulm, S. Ulm (1999) Rge Gooreng Gooreng Cultural Heritage Project:
Preliminary Results of Archaeological Research, 1993-1997 Queensland Archaeological
Research 11: 1-14.

Office of Economic and Statistical Research (2004) Gross state product at factor cost bu
industry    and     main     components,     Queensland,    1993-94      to    2003-03,
http://www/oesr.qld.gov.au/data/tables/compendium/table0040.htm

Queensland Department of Natural Resources (2000) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Consultation Framework, Brisbane.

Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2003) Burnett Basin Resource
Operations Plan, May.

04021 Rev 0                                                                                                 29
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
             ECONOMIC                                      Prepared for Department of Natural Resources & Mines
             ASSOCIATES PTY LTD



Queensland Department of Natural Resources (2003) Water Act 2000 Information
Brochure: Seasonal Water Assignments, June.

Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2001) Burnett River Catchment
Appraisal Study Technical Report, prepared for Queensland Department of Natural
Resources and Mines.

Queensland Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy (2004) Coastal Burnett
Groundwater Project: Conceptualisation Report.

Queensland Department of State Development (2000) Social and Economic Information for
Draft Water Allocation Scenarios – Draft Burnett Basin WAMP, 30 October.

Queensland Sugar Limited (2004) Daily Sugar Market Report, 25 June.

Sinclair Knight Merz (2000) The Efficiency of Water Use in the Burnett Region, prepared
for the Queensland Department of Natural Resources.

Skilton, J.A., Kingston, G., Aitken, R.L. (2000) ‘Bundaberg Groundwater: What are the
impacts of long term use?’, presented at the 3rd Queensland Environment Conference, 2000.

Windle, J., Rolfe, J. ‘Regional Perspectives on the Viability of Sugarcane Farming Systems
in Central Queensland’, paper submitted to Australasian Agribusiness Review.

World Bank (2003) Global Commodity Price Prospects, Development Prospects Group,
June 24.

World Bank (2001) Global Commodity Price Prospects, Development Prospects Group,
October 12.




04021 Rev 0                                                                                                 30
Economic and Social Assessment for Bundaberg Groundwater
February 2005
A APPENDICES – DATA


A.1          GROUNDWATER ENTITLEMENTS

Table 12 Groundwater entitlements by licence type: July 2004
Licence type                           Number             %      Allocation             %
                                                                       ML
Domestic1                            1,067 (13)       41.6%            1,255       1.9%
Stock only                                59 (2)       2.3%               91       0.1%
Stock and Domestic                       107 (2)       4.2%               158      0.2%
Garden only                              689 (7)      26.9%               842      1.3%
Subtotal                             1,922 (24)       74.9%            2,346       3.5%
Urban                                       4 (0)      0.2%            7,988      12.1%
Industrial2                               18 (0)       0.7%            1,187       1.8%
            3
Irrigation                             622 (18)       24.2%          54,671       82.6%
Subtotal                               644 (18)       25.1%          63,846       96.4%
Total                                2,566 (46)     100.0%           66,191       100%
1. includes licences for schools.
2. refer to Table 13 below.
3. includes licences for agriculture, dewatering and general farm only.
( ) Number of licences under ‘renewal’, transfer’ or ‘variation’.
Source: DNR&M (Bundaberg Office)

Table 13 Current Industrial licences by Industrial Groupings: July 2004
Sub category                           Number         Allocation ML                %
Aquaculture                                     1                   10          0.8%
Caravan Park/Country Club                       4                 43.0          3.6%
        1
Depot                                           3                   5.5         0.5%
Sand Mining/Quarry2                             8                 18.0          1.5%
Sugar Mill                                      2                1,110          93.6%
Total                                         18               1,186.5       100.0%
1.Includes 2 industrial licences held by Burnett Shire for their depots.
2. Includes 6 licences with a purpose of ‘mining’ to control sand mining excavations in
dunal sands that tap into aquifers. They are not ‘licensed to take water’ and do not have water allocations.
The remaining licences in this category are 1 ‘industrial (sand quarry)’and 1 ‘industrial, domestic’ (rock quarry).
Source: DNR&M (Bundaberg Office)
A.2      SUGAR CANE PRODUCTION DATA

Table 14 Sugar cane production: Bundaberg Sugar Company and Isis Central Mill Districts- 1980 to 2003
                                       sugar                      Cane       Cane/                  Qld raw     Value of
                 Cane        Sugar        per   Cane area    Production        area                   sugar       sugar
             produced     produced     tonne    harvested         Area    harvested      % CPA     price per   produced
  Season      (tonnes)     (tonnes)      (%)         (ha)          (ha)       (t/ha)   harvested      tonne        ($m)
      1980   3,121,979     438,087     14.0%        43,635       56,585        71.5       77.1%         376      $164.7
      1981   4,305,720     579,373     13.5%        49,909       58,621        86.3       85.1%         275      $159.3
      1982   3,981,018     571,352     14.4%        51,733       61,025        77.0       84.8%         223      $127.4
      1983   3,388,981     419,660     12.4%        47,196       61,468        71.8       76.8%         259      $108.7
      1984   3,704,039     490,200     13.2%        49,301       61,566        75.1       80.1%         226      $110.8
      1985   3,608,270     500,424     13.9%        49,386       61,504        73.1       80.3%         223      $111.6
      1986   3,309,252     436,015     13.2%        48,330       61,488        68.5       78.6%         275      $119.9
      1987   3,587,011     488,579     13.6%        48,892       61,425        73.4       79.6%         287      $140.2
      1988   3,300,119     425,203     12.9%        44,315       61,377        74.5       72.2%         333      $141.6
      1989   3,953,471     518,154     13.1%        49,872       61,537        79.3       81.0%         370      $191.7
      1990   3,348,376     458,972     13.7%        49,332       62,837        67.9       78.5%         341      $156.5
      1991   3,003,093     434,373     14.5%        47,982       63,551        62.6       75.5%         303      $131.6
      1992   3,554,107     506,016     14.2%        45,639       64,881        77.9       70.3%         301      $152.3
      1993   3,679,822     518,076     14.1%        44,056       65,362        83.5       67.4%         345      $178.7
      1994   4,147,942     628,284     15.1%        47,257       65,499        87.8       72.1%         382      $240.0
      1995   4,081,844     586,594     14.4%        47,929       66,339        85.2       72.2%         371      $217.6
      1996   4,186,305     601,354     14.4%        48,413       67,418        86.5       71.8%         335      $201.5
      1997   4,504,163     667,763     14.8%        49,215       71,039        91.5       69.3%         335      $223.7
      1998   4,073,339     537,657     13.2%        48,979       71,091        83.2       68.9%         351      $188.7
      1999   5,171,393     706,699     13.7%        51,070       72,124       101.3       70.8%         255      $180.2
      2000   4,018,653     574,375     14.3%        51,029       72,644        78.8       70.2%         253      $145.3
      2001   3,747,233     527,975     14.1%        50,789       72,913        73.8       69.7%         332      $175.3
      2002   3,112,951     437,255     14.0%        47,263       71,682        65.9       65.9%         275      $120.3
      2003   3,316,289     480,227     14.5%        44,338       71,432        74.8       62.1%         225      $108.1
Source: CANEGROWERS (Brisbane Office); Queensland Sugar
A.3       HORTICULTURE PRODUCTION DATA

Table 15 Bundaberg District: Horticulture - area of production (ha), 1997 to 2002
 CROP                                 1997          1998           1999          2000          2001             2002
 TREE CROPS
 AVOCADOS                               605           640           640            640           660             680
 BANANA                                 180           180           185            190           215             210
 CITRUS                                 350           350           350            350           325             325
 CITRUS (process)
 CUSTARD APPLE                           50            50            50             50            50              50
 LYCHEE                                  90            90            90             95            95             125
 MACADAMIA NUTS                       1,235         1,420         1,505          1,750         1,850           1,920
 MANGOS                                 470           480           480            490           460             460
 MANGOS (process)
 NECTARINE                               20            20            20             20            20              20
 PASSIONFRUIT                            25            25            25             25            30              50
 PEACH                                   15            15            15             30            30              40
 Tree crops                           3,040         3,270         3,360          3,640         3,735           3,880
 VEGETABLES
 BEANS                                   65            65            90             45            35              25
 BUTTON SQUASH                          330           250           295            220           180             200
 CAPSICUM (fresh)                       250           310           325            440           330             350
 CAPSICUM (process)                       7             5
 CHILLI                                  45            50            45            100            50              35
 CHERRY TOMATOES                         30            25            25             30            50              80
 CUCUMBER                                50            55            75             90           100             120
 EGG FRUIT                               70            75            85             80           100              80
 POTATOES                                                            40            130           145             110
 POTATOES (process)                     115           130           135            250           335             370
 PUMPKINS (large)                       360           330           400            230           300             620
 PUMPKINS (small)                        15            10            10              2             1               3
 ROCKMELON                              280           270           300            250           280             290
 SNOW PEAS                              160           300           320            405           230             320
 SWEET CORN                             110           150           215            190            95             120
 SWEET POTATOES                         180           230           215            340           350             490
 TOMATOES                               980           690           715            725           575             640
 WATERMELON                             400           480           390            360           300             680
 ZUCCHINI (fresh)                     1,000           850           935            970           900           1,060
 ZUCCHINI (process)
 PINEAPPLE (fresh)                                                  120
 PINEAPPLE (process)                    120           120                          120           260             300
 MISCELLANEOUS                          230           230                          160
 CROPS, NURSERIES,
 ORNAMENTALS ETC.
 Small crops                          4,797         4,625         4,735          5,137         4,616           5,893
 Total                                7,837         7,895         8,095          8,777         8,351           9,773
Note: the figures for citrus, passionfruit, some other fruits and potatoes are understated as not all figures are available.
Source: DPI&F (Kalkie Office)
Table 16 Bundaberg District: Horticulture - production (tonnes), 1997 to 2002
 CROP                                 1997          1998           1999          2000          2001          2002
 TREE CROPS
 AVOCADOS                           2,353.3       2,338.4       2,465.1       3,261.1        6,143.1       3,685.3
 BANANA                             1,880.1       1,065.2         968.1         692.5          586.4         577.9
 CITRUS                             3,381.3       1,426.5       4,218.9       4,491.2        5,112.0       5,694.4
 CITRUS (process)                      52.0          72.0           2.0         301.0        1,467.0       1,526.0
 CUSTARD APPLE                        205.2         256.3         195.2         248.0          290.7         218.1
 LYCHEE                               159.8         180.3          98.9         238.6          224.0         214.0
 MACADAMIA NUTS                     2,249.0       2,930.0       2,970.0       3,815.0        4,284.0       4,260.0
 MANGOS                             1,185.1       2,219.5         956.1         691.0        2,917.3       2,328.9
 MANGOS (process)                      70.0           6.0           3.0           3.0          439.0         428.0
 NECTARINE                             89.2         100.5         152.8         163.8          122.5         138.3
 PASSIONFRUIT                          80.6          66.7          95.7          86.7          330.8         386.5
 PEACH                                 22.9          24.4          43.0          39.5           25.1          37.6
 Subtotal tree crops               11,728.3      10,685.6      12,168.6      14,031.4       21,941.9      19,494.9
 Small Crops                            0.0
 BEANS                                560.3         553.9         776.0         362.7          298.0         133.9
 BUTTON SQUASH                      1,631.3       1,251.4       1,471.1       1,104.6          911.3         987.9
 CAPSICUM (fresh)                   8,909.1      11,159.4      11,707.0      15,751.9       11,849.8      11,209.5
 CAPSICUM (process)                   177.0          99.0
 CHILLI                               476.3         584.5         554.5       1,181.3          616.9         596.5
 CHERRY TOMATOES                      698.9         573.6         603.9         660.7        1,092.4       1,797.3
 CUCUMBER                           1,947.7       2,153.7       1,771.4       2,134.0        2,383.2       2,928.9
 EGG FRUIT                          1,385.0       1,576.9       1,746.1       1,658.6        2,094.4       1,850.2
 POTATOES                               0.0                       960.0       4,051.5        4,318.0       3,229.0
 POTATOES (process)                 3,450.0       4,000.0       4,000.0       7,500.0       10,000.0       9,200.0
 PUMPKINS (large)                   3,590.0       3,300.0       4,020.0       2,270.0        3,020.0       5,540.0
 PUMPKINS (small)                     171.4          83.2         104.8          27.8           11.8          81.2
 ROCKMELON                          9,408.7       8,988.8      10,203.6       8,405.7        9,605.0       9,952.3
 SNOW PEAS                            722.7       1,337.9       1,438.4       1,816.7        1,032.1       1,443.1
 SWEET CORN                         1,047.6       1,467.6       2,055.2       1,889.2          963.3       1,219.6
 SWEET POTATOES                     3,937.9       5,004.4       4,640.9       7,334.1        7,528.0      10,648.1
 TOMATOES                          43,138.3      35,049.1      37,161.3      38,263.3       32,337.3      37,371.3
 WATERMELON                         7,910.0       9,610.0       7,830.0       7,160.0        5,980.0      15,040.0
 ZUCCHINI (fresh)                   9,983.1       8,454.6       9,328.7       9,708.3        9,013.4      10,563.6
 ZUCCHINI (process)                     5.0
 PINEAPPLE (fresh)                  1,230.0       1,019.5       1,241.5       1,275.6       1,759.1        1,351.2
 PINEAPPLE (process)                2,897.0       3,893.0       5,115.0       4,890.0       4,468.0        5,746.0
 Subtotal small crops             103,277.2     100,160.4     106,729.3     117,445.8     109,281.9      130,889.5
 TOTAL                            115,005.5     110,846.0     118,898.0     131,477.3     131,223.7      150,384.4
Note: the figures for citrus, passionfruit, some other fruits and potatoes are understated as not all figures are available.
Source: DPI&F (Kalkie Office)
Table 17 Bundaberg District: Horticulture - value of production ($m), 1997 to 2002
 CROP                                     1997         1998           1999          2000         2001           2002
 FRUIT & NUTS
 AVOCADOS                                    5.0          5.7           5.2            6.8        13.1            9.5
 BANANA                                      2.2          1.0           1.3            0.7         0.8            0.9
 CITRUS                                      5.7          1.8           6.9            4.9         7.2            8.5
 CITRUS (process)                            0.0          0.0           0.0            0.0         0.2            0.2
 CUSTARD APPLE                               0.4          0.4           0.3            0.4         0.6            0.5
 LYCHEE                                      1.0          0.9           0.6            1.1         1.1            1.2
 MACADAMIA NUTS                              6.3          7.0           6.2            8.0        10.5           10.9
 MANGOS                                      2.1          3.2           2.8            1.2         5.3            4.3
 MANGOS (process)                            0.0          0.0           0.0            0.0         0.1            0.2
 NECTARINE                                   0.3          0.4           0.6            0.6         0.5            0.7
 PASSIONFRUIT                                0.2          0.2           0.4            0.3         1.2            1.4
 PEACH                                       0.1          0.1           0.1            0.1         0.1            0.2
 Subtotal tree crops                       23.4         20.7          24.5           24.1         40.7          38.4
 VEGETABLES
 BEANS                                       0.8         1.1            1.3           0.9          0.7            0.4
 BUTTON SQUASH                               3.4         3.5            3.8           3.3          2.6            3.3
 CAPSICUM (fresh)                           12.2        13.3           14.5          23.4         17.0           17.3
 CAPSICUM (process)                          0.1         0.1
 CHILLI                                      2.1         5.6            5.5           9.6          4.3            4.0
 CHERRY TOMATOES                             2.0         1.9            1.6           3.1          3.6            8.4
 CUCUMBER                                    3.5         4.1            3.1           3.8          5.4            6.8
 EGG FRUIT                                   2.1         2.8            2.8           3.3          4.1            3.6
 POTATOES                                                               0.4           1.5          2.0            1.5
 POTATOES (process)                          1.1         1.2            1.2           2.3          3.3            3.2
 PUMPKINS (large)                            1.0         1.8            1.2           0.8          1.3            2.6
 PUMPKINS (small)                            0.1         0.1            0.1           0.0          0.0            0.1
 ROCKMELON                                   7.2         7.7            7.0           7.0          7.9            8.3
 SNOW PEAS                                   4.0         7.1            4.7          11.6          6.4            8.8
 SWEET CORN                                  1.3         2.1            2.5           2.2          1.4            1.6
 SWEET POTATOES                              3.5         6.2            4.8           6.9          9.7           14.0
 TOMATOES                                   38.3        61.5           40.8          62.3         48.5           54.9
 WATERMELON                                  1.9         4.5            2.8           4.0          2.8            6.0
 ZUCCHINI (fresh)                           10.3        16.5           12.8          15.4         13.9           18.5
 ZUCCHINI (process)                          0.0
 PINEAPPLE (fresh)                           0.8         0.6            0.9           0.8          1.1           1.0
 PINEAPPLE (process)                         0.8         1.1            1.4           1.4          1.3           1.4
 Subtotal horticulture                      96.4       143.0          113.0         163.8        137.4         165.6
 MISCELLANEOUS                               8.6         9.1            3.7          10.9         11.5          12.1
 CROPS, NURSERIES,
 ORNAMENTALS ETC.
 TOTAL                                    128.4        172.7         141.2          198.8        189.6         216.1
Note: the figures for citrus, passionfruit, some other fruits and potatoes are understated as not all figures are available.
Source: DPI&F (Kalkie Office)

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:9
posted:11/10/2011
language:English
pages:41