Embed
Email

Queensland Fruit _ Vegetable Growers

Document Sample

Shared by: yunyi
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
15
posted:
11/14/2011
language:
English
pages:
68
Queensland Fruit & Vegetable Growers



Submission to the Productivity Commission study



“Industries in the Great Barrier Reef Catchment and measures to address



declining water quality”









Executive Summary









Introduction and background

Œ The Queensland fruit and vegetable industry

Œ The role of Queensland Fruit & Vegetable Growers









The economic and social importance of horticultural industries in the GBR

Catchment

Œ Economic and social profile of the fruit and veg industry in reef catchments and as

proportion of overall industry









Growth projections for horticultural industries in 2010 and 2020









The horticultural industry’s approach to water quality management

Œ Potential effects on water quality from fruit and vegetable production in reef

catchments

Œ The Queensland fruit and vegetable industry’s environmental code of practice

(Farmcare)

Œ Other water quality management initiatives in the Queensland fruit and vegetable

industry:

Œ Water for Profit

Œ Integrated Pest Management

Œ ChemCert, ChemCollect and DrumMuster

Œ Environmental Management Systems case studies

Œ Environmental management training course

Œ Riparian zone management

Œ Waste-water management









Future directions towards systematic and documented environmental management

Œ Beyond the Farmcare environmental code of practice









Appropriate policy options from a horticultural industry perspective









Attachments

1. QFVG policy statements regarding natural resource and water management

2. Farmcare practices relevant to water quality protection

3. Farmcare Code of Practice compliance checklist

4. Horticulture guidelines for the Johnstone River Catchment

5. Further information regarding the Water for Profit program

6. Queensland Horticulture Institute report on the adoption of Integrated Pest

Management (IPM) in the Wet Tropics banana industry

7. Flyer regarding the Wet Tropics banana industry EMS case study

8. QFF draft discussion paper regarding the development of a long term plan for

integrated natural resource management

9. Slides to illustrate the concept of the long term plan for integrated natural resource

management

Executive Summary





Members of the fruit and vegetable industry located in the catchments that drain to the

Great Barrier Reef take seriously their responsibilities to limit any environmental impacts

from their farming activities. Queensland Fruit & Vegetable Growers (QFVG) maintains a

number of programs to support its members to improve their environmental management.

QFVG’s policy regarding natural resource and environmental management is included at

the end of this summary.





QFVG believes that the state of water quality reaching the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) is an

indicator of the overall health and sustainability of the full suite of land uses in reef

catchments. Our comments in this submission, therefore, will take a broader view of the

issues and discuss future directions towards sustainable development, environmental

protection and sound natural resource management, rather than focus specifically on

water quality protection.





Also for these reasons, QFVG is seeking the development of an integrated sustainability

strategy for rural industries in Queensland that overhauls the current approach in which

single issues are being tackled through a series of disjointed planning processes.





Accordingly, QFVG does not support the development of a separate plan for protection of

water quality reaching the Great Barrier Reef. Good water quality should be an outcome

of an overarching and integrated initiative to drive sustainable natural resource

management in Queensland. Such an initiative can be achieved through a clearly defined

partnership approach between the three levels of government, regional natural resource

management boards and rural industries.





Queensland is Australia’s premier horticultural producing state, valued at $1.2 billion and

directly employing around 25 000 people. Horticulture is the second largest primary

industry in Queensland, behind the cattle industry.





Fruit and vegetable production in reef catchments was valued at $707.9 million at 30 June

2002 (Source: ABS Value of Agricultural Commodities Produced: Australia, States and

SD).

The horticulture sector plays a vital role in the regional economies and communities of

Queensland, often enhancing the economic diversification of small communities. It has a

strongly symbiotic relationship with the tourism sector as over 3000 holiday makers work in

the fruit and vegetable industry each year and spend much of their earnings on tourist

activities.





The industry is dominated by small enterprises operating as partnerships and sole

proprietors – mostly family farms. The market is extremely competitive. Business

managers have little or no capacity to absorb or to pass on increased costs of production

or lowered productivity due to demands for conservation or environmental management

that generate mostly public rather than private benefits. Growers are also unable to

continually take time away from their businesses to participate in the multitude of planning

processes under way to separately address natural resource management issues.





The industry is highly efficient in its use of natural resources, occupying only three per cent

of Queensland’s cropping land and using ten per cent of irrigation supplies to produce

almost 40 per cent of the value of all irrigated products.





The industry has made significant investments in improving the environmental

sustainability of its production systems. Our key successes have been in improved water

use efficiency, rapid uptake of integrated pest management systems and the adoption of a

comprehensive environmental code of practice. Strong partnerships with research

organisations, in particular the Queensland Horticulture Institute and Horticulture Australia,

support a growing portfolio of research into sustainable production systems.





QFVG and our members do recognise, however, that there is a need for further

improvement. The critical issue our industry faces regarding reef protection is minimising

the off-site movement of sediments, nutrients or pesticides from farms and pack houses in

reef catchments.





When supported by appropriate strategic agreements, institutional arrangements, financial

incentives and funding programs, organisations such as QFVG have demonstrated their

capacity to drive significant improvements in natural resource management within rural

industries.

QFVG, therefore, is developing a proposal for the delivery of a major program aimed at

supporting fruit and vegetable growers to take a more active, target-focussed, systematic

and documented approach to environmental management. The new program would be

modelled on the hugely successful rural water use efficiency initiative, which QFVG is

delivering on behalf of the Queensland Government.





The proposed program, however, must be embedded in, and offer the delivery arm of, an

overarching strategic plan for sustainable and integrated natural resource management in

Queensland. QFVG seeks the support of the Commonwealth and Queensland

Governments to work towards this goal.

QUEENSLAND FRUIT & VEGETABLE GROWERS

NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT POLICY STATEMENT





Queensland Fruit & Vegetable Growers supports its members goal to be responsible

custodians of natural resources and rural environments.



Good environmental management practices for the horticulture industry are described in

the Farmcare Code of Practice for Sustainable Fruit and Vegetable Production in

Queensland and include:

Œ Efficient and careful use of natural resources, particularly water and soils.

Œ Minimising environmental impacts caused by horticultural land use, particularly run-off

of sediments, fertilisers and pesticides into waterways.

Œ Minimising waste and pollution from horticultural land use.

Œ Careful use of pesticides.

Œ Minimising impacts on biodiversity.



The Farmcare Code has been endorsed by the Queensland Government as an approved

Code of Practice under Section 219 of the Environmental Protection Act 1994.



The Code constitutes an industry standard giving guidance to growers in meeting their

’General Environmental Duty’ under the Act.



QFVG supports the sustainable development of the horticulture industry in Queensland.

This requires horticultural enterprises to be profitable and socially viable as well as

environmentally safe. This ‘triple bottom line’ approach will be used to monitor and report

on the industry’s performance. The organisation will maintain an environment program

designed to assist its members to continually improve their environmental performance

and achieve ecological sustainability in the industry.



QFVG and its members aim to work in partnership with government, research

organisations, regional and catchment management organisations, the community and

other stakeholders to develop long-term solutions to natural resource and environmental

management issues. Through this approach, we aim to deliver workable and balanced

outcomes for the industry that also benefit the broader community.



QFVG seeks recognition and commitment from government and the community that the

industry requires support to achieve its goal of ecological sustainability. In particular, the

industry requires:



Œ Negotiated transition phases of an appropriate and agreed timeframe that allow

industry time to adapt or restructure to legislative or policy changes, implement

changes to practices or develop solutions to problems.

Œ Financial and other support for growers when the public benefits of environmental

management outweigh private benefits, and when the community’s expectations of

environmental management or biodiversity conservation restrict growers’ farm

management beyond current recommended practices.

Œ A range of financial and market-based incentives be explored and used as much as

possible to encourage the adoption of improved environmental management practices.

Œ Institutional, economic and other barriers to the adoption of sustainable management

practices be identified and addressed.

NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENDA ISSUES

Issues to be considered within the broader environment policy heading include:

Œ A 10-year plan for natural resource management in Queensland.

Œ Sustainability.

Œ Industry self-regulation where possible.

Œ Natural resource planning and management based on sound science.

Œ Vegetation Management/Tree clearing.

Œ Water quality.

Œ Salinity.

Œ Greenhouse and climate change.

Œ Chemical use.

Œ Biodiversity.

Œ Wildlife management.

Œ Great Barrier Reef.

Œ Acid-sulphate soils.

Œ Pest and weed management.

Œ Competing land use eg urban development in rural areas.

Œ Local government land use planning.

Œ Regional and catchment planning and management within an overarching framework.

Œ Property management planning.

Œ Natural resource access, allocation and trading (eg water, carbon credits).

Œ Organic food production.

Œ Genetically modified organisms.

Œ Environmental Management Systems in agriculture.







WATER POLICY STATEMENT





The importance of water to horticulture is unquestionable. Rural industries are facing

increasing competitive demands for Queensland’s finite water supply. The viability of

horticulture in Queensland depends upon the availability, price, and the way in which

available water resources and the integrity of catchments are managed.





With the use of water resources comes responsibility. Water issues have become

increasingly important throughout the community, and the focus is on using this resource

sustainably in the future.



Markets for water rights should be developed which enable the optimum distribution of

water in the market place between alternative users.

WATER AGENDA ISSUES

Issues to be considered within the broader water policy heading include:

Œ Availability and access.

Œ Efficiency of use, including extension of the Water for Profit Rural Water Use Efficiency

Initiative.

Œ Water pricing.

Œ New infrastructure.

Œ Water Resource Plans.

Œ Local management.

Œ Legislation and regulation including water property rights, pricing and the coordination

of property management plans.

Œ Water infrastructure including:

Œ State government approach.

Œ Water infrastructure projects.

Œ COAG water reform issues.

Œ Waste water policy issues.

Œ Review and monitoring of Water Resource Plans.

Œ Land and Water Management Plans.

Œ Water trading.

Œ Unallocated water.

Œ Penalty systems for unauthorised water use.

Œ Metering.

Introduction and background





Queensland Fruit & Vegetable Growers (QFVG) is the industry representative body for

horticulture in Queensland, representing a $1.2 billion industry comprising 6 500 growers

in 3 500 business enterprises producing over 120 types of produce for domestic and

international markets.









The Queensland fruit and vegetable industry



Horticulture contributes 16% towards the gross value of the State’s primary industries and

is Queensland’s second largest primary industry behind cattle. The fruit and vegetable

industry is growing, is presently valued at more than $1.2 billion and directly employs

around 25,000 people. A map showing the location of Queensland’s major growing

districts is presented in Figure 1.





Horticulture’s contribution to regional economies is significant both in economic and social

terms. Queensland, the most decentralised state in Australia, has only 46% of its

population living in the Brisbane Statistical Division. Nationwide, agriculture contributes

more than half of total employment in 28 per cent of small non-coastal towns (ABARE,

Country Australia, p38). A host of rural communities rely heavily on business created by

local horticulture enterprises for example:





Œ Primary industry input and service industries eg provision of fertilisers, chemicals,

petroleum products, mechanical repairs and road transport.

Œ Processing industries eg fruit processing and canning.

Œ Human services industries eg hospitals, schools.

Œ Infrastructure development and services eg water supply, road and street maintenance.

Œ Port services eg specialist commodity loading facilities.





By expanding into new areas eg citrus growing near Emerald and tropical fruits in North

Queensland, the horticulture industry is providing new inputs into regions and providing

diversified opportunities for both business development and job creation. The horticulture

industry also provides inputs into many urban-based value-adding activities, from service

industries to logistics.

Figure 1 Queensland’s fruit and vegetable growing districts





Atherton Tableland – mangoes, potatoes, Gympie – cucurbits, beans, mangoes

avocadoes, lychees, pawpaw, exotic fruit

Tully-Innisfail - bananas, lychees, pawpaws, Sunshine Coast – bananas, pineapples,

exotic fruits, melons avocados, strawberries, passionfruit, mangoes,

beans, pawpaws, chokos

Burdekin-Bowen – tomatoes, mangoes, Brisbane region – lettuce, potatoes, spring

capsicums, melons, cucumbers, eggplant onions, sweet potatoes

Yeppoon – pineapples, mangoes, exotic fruits Lockyer and Fassifern Valleys – lettuce,

potatoes, tomatoes, broccoli, carrots, onions,

cucurbits, cauliflower, cabbage, melons,

beetroot, capsicums, beans, leafy vegetables

Rockhampton – grapes, melons, pawpaws, Darling Downs – lettuce, broccoli, melons,

mangoes stone fruit, grapes

Emerald – citrus, grapes Mt Tamborine – avocadoes, kiwifruit

Bundaberg – tomatoes, capsicums, melons, Granite Belt – apples, stone fruit, grapes,

zucchini, cucumbers, lychees, mangoes, celery, cauliflower, tomatoes, lettuce, cabbage,

avocados, pineapples, bananas, citrus capsicums

Central Burnett – citrus, stone fruit, grapes St George – grapes, melons, capsicums

The industry is characterised by small businesses operating in a highly competitive market.

Partnerships and sole proprietors own approximately 85 percent of Queensland

horticultural farm businesses. The majority of these farm businesses are family farms.





The economic base of the industry is diverse and ranges across geographic and climatic

regions and crops – it is a diverse ‘investment portfolio’, employing large numbers of

permanent and seasonal workers.





Growers also employ participants in the Commonwealth Government’s working holiday-

maker scheme. Over 3,000 working holiday-makers from 12 countries (DEWRSB, 2002)

work in the Queensland industry each year to fund their travels. Most stay for 12 months,

and take up to three jobs, spending much of their income in the tourism sector.





Crops

Queensland growers produce more than 120 types of fruit and vegetables and hundreds

more in different varieties. Production ranges from temperate stone fruits and staple

vegetables to exotic tropical fruits and Asian vegetables.





Queensland's production accounts for 30 per cent of all fruit and vegetables grown in

Australia, including 80 per cent of Australia’s tropical fruit, making it the nation's premier

horticultural producing state.





The state enjoys the advantage of being able to supply export and domestic markets all

year, often for much earlier periods than horticultural regions interstate.





Queensland’s fruit and vegetable growers produce nearly 100 per cent of Australia’s

pineapples, 90 per cent of our beetroot crops, over 70 per cent of our mangoes, 80 per

cent of Australia’s banana and mandarin crops and 72 per cent of capsicum crops.





Queensland is a significant producer of melons, lettuce, strawberries, pumpkin, beans,

avocados, broccoli, tomatoes and shallots.





Queensland is also the major producer of exotic tropical fruits such as papaws, custard

apples, lychees, rambutans, pepinos, star fruit, carambola and durians.





The production of Asian vegetables is emerging as an important segment of the Australian

vegetable industry with increasing domestic and export sales.

Value Adding

Agriculture also represents a significant input into many other industries, particularly the

food processing industry, which had a turnover of $51.2 billion and a value added of $14.2

billion in 1999-2000. Food processing is the largest industry subdivision of total

manufacturing, both by value added, and by employment. The sector also provides over

$11 billion of exports (Source: ABS, Manufacturing Industry, Australia, (Cat no 8221.0)).





An increasing number of value-added products with a variety of flavours and combinations

are being produced in Queensland, including:





Œ Pre-packed and ready-to-serve coleslaws.

Œ Fruit salads.

Œ Shelf stable fruit and vegetables (packed in cans, glass or plastic).

Œ Jams, preserves and simmer sauces.

Œ Curried vegetables.

Œ Salad mixes.





Over the past few years, juice production has increased to become a significant industry.

Orange juice comprises the largest share of juice production with oranges grown

especially for their juice.





Other fruits and vegetables that are juiced include:





Œ Mandarins.

Œ Apples.

Œ Apricots.

Œ Mangoes.

Œ Pears.

Œ Pineapples.

Trends

Horticulture is a growing industry. It is not often recognised that Australian agriculture has

demonstrated significant increases in productivity over the past decade. Agricultural

productivity increased by 3.3 per cent per year between 1988 and 2000, well above the

average of 1.2 per cent and the second highest in the market sector (after

communications) (OECD, Economic Surveys – Australia 2000-01, p82). This fact in

particular should dispel the myth that the agricultural sector is “old economy”. Farmers

have been adopting new technologies and improving practices with enthusiasm.





Continued growth by the industry in Queensland is forecast, driven by the development of

new markets, better marketing and new technology. With the current downturn in some

agricultural sectors, particularly the sugar industry, it is likely that a significant number of

Queensland farmers will enter the comparatively lucrative horticulture industry. However,

these new entrants require capital for investment, training in best practice production

methods and marketing skills in order to succeed in the change from a single desk

marketing system (eg sugar and formerly dairy) to a free market trading system.





Queensland growers are seeing more export opportunities. Through the efforts of

individual producers and industry organisations such as QFVG and Horticulture Australia

Limited, overseas markets are set to expand in the medium term. This will provide

economic growth and social development opportunities in both rural and urban

communities.





Exports

In the trade arena, Queensland exports 13 per cent of Australia's total fruit exports and 17

per cent of Australia's total vegetable exports. While around 50 per cent of all Australian

food exports are destined for Asian markets, by comparison, more than 80 per cent of

Queensland's horticulture exports go to Asia, indicating that Queensland growers are

export ready and ahead of the trend.





The majority of Queensland vegetable exports are aimed at high quality, niche markets.





In 1999-00, the five key export markets for Queensland vegetables were New Zealand,

Singapore, Japan, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Together these five countries accounted for

81 per cent of Queensland’s total vegetable exports.

In 1999-00, the five key export markets for Queensland fruit were Japan, Hong Kong, New

Zealand, USA, and Singapore. Together these five countries accounted for 68 per cent of

Queensland’s total fruit export value.





The success of Queensland’s horticulture export industry relates to the:





Œ Availability of counter-seasonal products to Northern Hemisphere markets.

Œ Ability to offer a range of quality products because of diverse geographical and climatic

conditions.

Œ Maintenance of a clean and healthy environment, enhanced by HACCP (Hazard

Accident Critical Control Point) based quality assurance applications eg SQF 2000 and

Freshcare.

Œ Use of advanced infrastructure and post-harvest technology ranging from grading

technology, packing equipment, labelling equipment, cold storage and transport

technologies to prolong the life of fresh produce either in storage or during long

distance transport.





Marketing and Value Chains

The fresh fruit and vegetable trade is now a global industry driven by the demands of

international supermarket chains (and their customers) and vertically integrated produce

supply companies.





Producers need to be able to guarantee continuity and quality of supply in order to access

high value export markets. Many Queensland marketing groups have formed to take

advantage of this, by providing critical mass and a good reputation for quality.





Experience shows that by working together and considering strategic business alliances

with retail and food service sector buyers, farmers can lift profits and enhance long-term

viability. They can achieve this by moving further along the value chain, having a closer

relationship with food service sector buyers and consumers, and at the same time

monitoring trends and competitors.





Technology

The level of technology adopted by the horticultural industry is world class, having

changed significantly during the last two decades. These changes have been influenced

by the need to improve production efficiencies in the face of rising competition and input

costs, along with the need to ensure the sustainability of farming practices. R&D activities

have returned significant outcomes to the industry in terms of commercialised products

and methods. Examples include the introduction of more vigorous and high yielding root

stock, extensive planting of disease resistant varieties, better trellising techniques, more

efficient irrigation practices, integrated biological and chemical pest control, automated

planting, mechanical harvesting and improved human resource management and

workplace health and safety practices.





In addition, new packaging methods and improved post-harvest technology and handling

have improved the quality of the product reaching the consumer.





An important feature of technology applied to primary industries is that it is concerned with

embodying new knowledge and increased value in agricultural commodities. Agricultural

commodities are not part of “the old economy”. They make significant economic

contributions through the implementation of innovative technologies in production, quality,

consistency, the development of new varieties, water use efficiency, and pest and disease

management.





Strategic Advantages

The Queensland industry is recognised both domestically and internationally for:

Œ Its close proximity to key export markets.

Œ Its reputation for safe, high quality produce grown to ever-increasing levels of

sustainability.

Œ Professional producers and support from industry associations and government.

Œ A sophisticated supply chain.

Œ The competitive nature of the industry.





Natural Resource Management

Queensland’s fruit and vegetable industry is a leading example of using a little to achieve a

lot. It provides a textbook study in combining high value output, intensive farming

practices using advanced technology and minimal use of natural resources such as land

and water.





The industry occupies only three per cent of the State’s total land under crops. It accounts

for a mere 10 per cent of the State’s irrigation water, yet produces almost 40 per cent of

the value of all irrigated products.





As responsible custodians of our natural resources, growers are increasingly adopting

sustainable farm management practices and earning a strong reputation as safe food

producers. Our commitment to clean, green produce is recognised around the world. One

such example of how growers are achieving this is through tools such as the Farmcare

Code of Practice for Sustainable Fruit and Vegetable Production in Queensland which

assists growers with:





Œ Efficient and careful uses of natural resources, particularly water and soils.

Œ Minimising environmental impacts caused by horticultural land use, particularly run-off

of sediments, fertilisers and pesticides into waterways.

Œ Minimising waste and pollution from horticultural production systems.

Œ Careful use of pesticides.

Œ Minimising impacts on biodiversity.





Inhibitors and Threats to Industry Growth

Key inhibitors and threats to industry growth include:

Œ Lack of funds to develop new technologies to remain internationally competitive.

Œ A lack of research to ensure the industry has management plans prepared in case of

exotic pest and disease incursions.

Œ The availability of irrigation water for horticultural crops.

Œ Poor prices for commodities.

Œ The introduction of new legislation or policy change without adequate transitional or

adjustment arrangements and timeframes in place.

The role of Queensland Fruit & Vegetable Growers





Queensland Fruit & Vegetable Growers (QFVG) champions the interests of Queensland’s

6,500 commercial growers through a range of services. While the interests and needs of

growers are divergent, they all share a common bond – the call for strong and unified

action to assist them to succeed.





QFVG provides leadership, advice and support to growers to ensure their specific needs

are met. This encompasses the identification and management of key industry matters,

political lobbying, the development and coordination of industry development programs,

marketing and promotion services, and access to beneficial commercial opportunities.





QFVG is currently in a transitionary period. The organisation is removing the statutory

arrangements that have governed it since its establishment in 1923 and is working

towards becoming a voluntary, commercially focused organisation.





By June 2003, QFVG will provide members throughout the value chain with a service that

directly meets their ever-changing needs in this dynamic industry.





QFVG’s charter is to increase the economic and environmental sustainability of its

growers. Queensland Fruit & Vegetable Growers’ policies align with The Queensland Fruit

& Vegetable Industry Future Directions Plan, developed by the Horticulture Industry

Development Council (HIDC), a high level industry consultative forum established by the

Minister for Primary Industries and Rural Communities. The Plan defines the industry’s

preferred future positioning. The Plan’s key elements include, but are not limited to:





Œ Smart Marketing, for example:

À Utilising high levels of knowledge and skills within the industry.

À Removing impediments to accessing key markets.

À Developing associated opportunities based around fruit and vegetables.





Œ Achieving Business Success, for example:

À Focusing on best practice.

À Using current success to create new products and services for tomorrow.

À Stimulating achievement and a “can do” mindset.





Œ An environmentally sustainable industry, for example:

À Meeting the standards expected by discerning customers.

À Responding to community expectations of responsible industry behaviour.

À Applying innovative practices.





Œ Co-operating to Deliver, for example:

À Working collaboratively on projects.

À Being both focussed and flexible in pursuing solutions.

À Maximising effectiveness of research and development through relevant R&D

structures and systems and reliable funding streams.





Activities

QFVG responds directly and quickly to the changing needs of growers. The organisations’

activities fall under three main areas:





Œ Advocacy and policy – championing the needs of growers to politicians and business

and community leaders to ensure our growers’ voices are heard.

Œ Industry development services – helping individual growers, through industry-wide

programs and activities, to succeed in an ever-demanding market.

Œ Member services – providing practical commercial services and offering access to

special offers and discounts to give growers a leading edge.





Research and Development

In the field of research and development, QFVG is responsible for the coordination of $1.5

million dollars per annum of grower contributions towards relevant, innovative programs in

science, marketing, economics and business development critical to industry development.

These efforts are designed to build industries' focus and performance, and function at

national, regional, local and individual business levels, and through the demand chain.





Horticulture Australia Limited (HAL) is the industry’s premier research and development

organisation. The portfolio of HAL covers all established horticultural industries including

fresh fruits and vegetables, nuts, extractive crops, nursery products, cut flowers, turf and

foliage. The portfolio also includes processed products in chilled, frozen, dried, bottled,

packed, canned or preserved forms.





As the HAL research and development portfolio is half funded by the Australian community

through Commonwealth Government matching of industry funds, Horticulture Australia has

a responsibility to the Commonwealth Government to ensure the nation benefits from

outcomes of the R&D undertaken. Members of QFVG contribute to voluntary research

and development levies for their respective commodities. These funds are matched dollar

for dollar through HAL approved projects. QFVG is contracted to manage a significant

proportion of HAL approved projects.





Key industry issues addressed through research and development include:





Œ Efficient production systems

Œ Food quality

Œ Food safety

Œ Biotechnology

Œ Human Resources

Œ Economic research

Œ Trade, market access and quarantine

Œ Crop protection, integrated pest management and bio-control

Œ Water use efficiency and sustainable natural resource management





In June 2003, the compulsory levy collection system in the Queensland industry will cease

and it is expected that this will cause a significant impact on available private sector

funding and consequently the amount of matched funding provided by the Commonwealth

through HAL for R&D projects.





This change is occurring while demand for industry research and development is

increasing. There is also a growing awareness that while research efforts need to

maintain a focus on productivity and quality related issues increasingly, investment must

also be made in emerging needs such as:

Œ Demand chains,

Œ Factors influencing trade,

Œ Improving the capacity to identify, develop and supply export markets

Œ Addressing environmental issues and designing sustainable production systems.





There is a danger that the range of critical issues for the industry will receive smaller and

smaller shares of the available research funds.





It is also difficult for research committees to justify significant investment in projects that

cannot demonstrate a clear benefit to a business’ bottom line. Industry members expect

that research into environmental issues that will generate more public than private benefit

should attract significant alternative funds.

The economic and social importance of horticultural industries in

the GBR Catchment





The economic and social contribution of horticulture

Horticulture industries are widely located throughout Queensland. An extensive range of

fruit and vegetable (and amenity) horticulture activities are undertaken in the Great Barrier

Reef catchment, from the far north, along the eastern coastal regions and in many inland

locations, such as the Central Burnett and Central Highlands. Production output resulting

from primary industry activity is largely determined by the availability of resources (e.g.

irrigation water), marketing factors, incidences of pests and diseases, and weather

conditions.





Of the $1.2 billion in annual Queensland production, fruit and vegetable growing in the

Statistical Divisions of Wide Bay-Burnett, Fitzroy, Mackay, Northern and Far North

Queensland generates $707.9 million.





The figures listed in Table 1 below are confined to crops within the ambit of QFVG’s

industry representation. This, however, is by no means intended to diminish the $81.4

million contribution made by other horticultural industries to economic and social

development in the catchment (see Table 2).





Fruit, vegetables and other horticultural industries have been the foundation of many rural

communities that have grown to provide goods and services to producers and their

employees. These industries are also providing impetus to further development of

communities that were originally based on other industries. The rapid growth of a number

of industries (e.g. citrus growing near Emerald, tropical fruits in North Queensland) is

providing new opportunities for both business development and job creation in these

communities.





Owing to the large number of horticulture crops grown throughout the State, it is often

difficult to gather enough data to confidently estimate and forecast production of particular

crops. Indeed, it is considered that the erratic nature of some of the estimates produced

could, at times, relate more to problems with data collection than with variance in

production and value. However, the fruit and vegetable estimates discussed below should

provide adequate information for determining the economic contribution of horticulture in

the Great Barrier Reef Catchment.

Table 1 - Value of Horticultural Commodities Produced : Selected Qld SD’s, Year ending 30 June

2000

Wide Bay- Fitzroy Mackay Northern Far North Total - GBR

Burnett Catchment

Value ($) Value ($) Value ($) Value ($) Value ($) Value ($)





Apricots 0 18,930 0 0 0 18,930

Avocados 14,186,624 29,539 33,327 n.p. 9,416,685 23,666,175

Bananas 1,301,909 0 n.p. 190,346 209,042,914 210,535,169

Beetroot 0 0 0 0 n.p. 0

Broccoli n.p. 0 0 197,445 0 197,445

Cabbages n.p. 0 0 0 226,579 226,579

Capsicum,Chillies and Peppers 9,075,256 11,079 n.p. 32,588,795 n.p. 41,675,130



Carrots n.p. n.p. 0 0 n.p. 0

Celery 0 0 0 n.p. 0 0

Cucumbers 414,148 n.p. 0 925,902 112,819 1,452,869

Egg fruit 0 22,570 0 0 0 22,570

French and Runner beans 5,547,907 0 0 14,922,985 n.p. 20,470,892

Grapefruit 1,128,623 n.p. n.p. 0 n.p. 1,128,623

Grapes - Other uses 4,458,552 3,095,675 0 98,855 132,541 7,785,623

Grapes - Wine 496,260 54,900 0 5,760 4,680 561,600

Green peas for fresh market 206,350 0 0 0 n.p. 206,350

Lemons and limes 4,650,939 383,561 n.p. 35,235 460,698 5,530,433

Lettuce n.p. 0 0 n.p. 0 0

Mandarins 50,336,748 8,672,755 n.p. 5,247 226,761 59,241,511

Mangoes 3,081,197 4,229,805 n.p. 22,900,730 25,111,910 55,323,642

Marrows and Squashes 1,421,414 n.p. 0 0 n.p. 1,421,414

Melons nec 705,639 0 0 n.p. 0 705,639

Navel Oranges 8,227,507 78,937 n.p. n.p. n.p. 8,306,444

Valencia Oranges 2,443,239 n.p. n.p. 0 n.p. 2,443,239

Oranges excluding Navel and Valencia 33,462 n.p. 11,918 n.p. n.p. 45,380



Nectarines 428,428 22,142 0 n.p. n.p. 450,570

Onions - White and Brown n.p. n.p. 0 n.p. 262,864 262,864

Orchard fruit - Other 350,430 522,012 n.p. 249,272 4,887,799 6,009,513

Orchard fruit & nuts nec 24,437,181 4,781,356 72,710 23,173,153 42,252,350 94,716,750

Other fruit 370,784 0 0 663,117 2,885,345 3,919,246

Papaws 1,675,291 n.p. n.p. 26,330 3,114,248 4,815,869

Peaches 383,350 0 0 n.p. n.p. 383,350

Peaches for processing n.p. 0 0 n.p. n.p. 0

Peaches nec 381,772 0 0 0 n.p. 381,772

Pineapples 8,302,336 6,693,620 n.p. 719,797 n.p. 15,715,753

Plums n.p. 42,340 0 n.p. 0 42,340

Plums and Prunes n.p. 42,340 0 n.p. 0 42,340

Popcorn 384,361 0 0 0 0 384,361

Potatoes harvested before 30 June 2,822,439 n.p. 0 4,755,255 10,119,136 17,696,830



Pumpkins, Triamble, Trombone,etc 986,301 472,686 n.p. 7,816,637 2,004,315 11,279,939



Rock Melons and Cantaloupe 8,664,378 n.p. 0 14,841,192 n.p. 23,505,570

Small berry and tropical fruit 12,139,053 6,848,484 n.p. 1,599,590 215,181,696 235,768,823

Table 1 - Value of Horticultural Commodities Produced : Selected Qld SD’s, Year ending 30 June

2000

Wide Bay- Fitzroy Mackay Northern Far North Total - GBR

Burnett Catchment

Value ($) Value ($) Value ($) Value ($) Value ($) Value ($)





Snow peas 4,732,088 0 0 n.p. 0 4,732,088

Spring Onions and Shallots 992,374 0 0 n.p. n.p. 992,374

Stone fruit nec 376,093 110,861 n.p. 126,758 n.p. 613,712

Strawberries n.p. 0 0 0 0 0

Sweet Corn 271,477 n.p. 0 3,347,124 7,867 3,626,468

Tomatoes for fresh market 19,547,936 25,832 0 72,491,485 n.p. 92,065,253





Tomatoes for processing 0 0 0 18,575 0 18,575

Vegetables for human consumption nec 15,582,543 1,462,316 133,932 2,336,972 2,875,432 22,391,195



Vegetables for seed - Potatoes 0 0 0 259,338 60,616 319,954



Water Melons 3,667,539 3,443,642 0 3,881,419 959,758 11,952,358

Zucchinis 6,387,034 0 0 1,231,704 110,373 7,729,111

Total value of fruit 109,672,350 24,163,180 n.p. 25,191,938 259,433,773 418,461,241

Total value of vegetables 90,051,386 9,786,962 207,575 169,201,360 20,266,151 289,513,434

Total - horticultural production 199,723,736 33,950,142 207,575 194,393,298 279,699,924 707,974,675



n.p – not for publication

Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics 9941.0 2000 Agriculture Commodity Survey







Table 2 - Value of Selected Commodities Produced : Selected Qld SD’s, Year ending 30 June 2000



Wide Bay- Fitzroy Mackay Northern Far North Total - GBR

Burnett Catchment



Value ($) Value ($) Value ($) Value ($) Value ($) Value ($)





Tobacco - Value ($) 0 0 0 0 15,039,331 15,039,331

Nurseries, flowers & turf - Total value ($) 16,468,769 7,496,326 4,922,680 4,956,462 18,424,173 52,268,410



Asparagus - Value ($) 4,755,753 0 0 0 0 4,755,753

Mushrooms - Value ($) n.p. 0 0 n.p. 1,217,318 1,217,318

Parsley - Value ($) 166,013 0 0 0 n.p. 166,013

Olives - Value ($) n.p. 0 0 0 0 0

Macadamia nuts - Value ($) 6,648,920 0 0 0 n.p. 6,648,920

Pecan Value ($) n.p. 0 0 0 0 0

Honey and Beeswax - Total value ($) 1,035,631 197,170 7,918 26,726 95,186 1,362,631



Total 29,075,086 7,693,496 4,930,598 4,983,188 34,776,008 81,458,376

n.p – not for publication

Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics 9941.0 2000 Agriculture Commodity Survey

The Wet Tropics banana industry provides these additional statistics:

Œ The Wet Tropics banana industry is valued at $275 million per year and produces

around 80% of the nation’s banana crops.

Œ There are 100 000 ha of banana production.

Œ There are around 500 growers in the Wet Tropics banana industry.

Œ Approximately 3000 full time equivalent positions are employed within the industry, and

the industry is heavily reliant on the tourist-based transient workforce.





Further information is being sought regarding accurate estimates of the multiplier values of

the horticulture sector. This information will be forwarded separately.

Growth projections for horticultural industries in 2010 and 2020





Future Directions

The Queensland fruit and vegetable industry embarked on a conversation about its future

during 1999. This took the form of a ‘foresight’ process in which the industry used a range

of techniques, including analysis of a range of scenarios and broad consultations within the

industry, to develop a picture of its preferred future in the year 2010.





The Queensland Fruit & Vegetable Industry Future Directions Plan defines the industry’s

preferred future positioning. It provides a blueprint for the future development of the

industry. It was developed with the intention of providing individuals and organisations

involved in all sectors of the industry with a broad framework in which to develop their own

plans and actions.





Achievement of the outcomes envisaged in the plan will deliver significant benefits to the

industry. Many of these benefits align with the Queensland Government’s priorities – more

jobs, building regions, smart skilling, safer and more supportive communities, better quality

of life and valuing the environment – highlighting that the industry is an important

contributor to Queensland’s future.





Short Term Outlook

The following paragraphs contain information from the June 2002 publication of the

Queensland Department of Primary Industries’ Prospects for Queensland’s Primary

Industries, and summarise the current and short-term outlook for fruit and vegetable

production in Queensland, with discussion on major crops.





Fruit Forecasts

In 2001–02, the total gross value of Queensland’s fruit and nut production is estimated at

approximately $645 million, 17% above the ABS estimate for 2000–01.





In 2002–03, it is forecast that the State’s gross value of fruit and nut production will

increase by 3% on 2001–02 to $665 million.





Discussion

ABS has published gross value of production estimates for apples, grapes and all other

fruit and nuts together for 2000–01. Individual ABS estimates for Queensland’s major fruit

crops are not available for comparison with DPI estimates for 2001–02. However, based

on DPI 2000–01 estimates published in December 2001, gross value of bananas and

avocados in 2001–02 have increased. Also, the present DPI 2001–02 estimate of $65

million may represent a slight increase rather than a decrease.





The gross value of bananas in 2001–02 is expected to increase by approximately 10%

from the 2000–01 estimate to $260 million. This is due to an increase in production

outstripping a slight decrease in price. While the implementation of a treatment program

for the disease black sigatoka has temporarily reduced production in the Tully district, a

number of producers not affected throughout north Queensland have increased plantings.

This is expected to result in a net increase in total production of around 7%. The price of

bananas paid to producers is expected to fall slightly from the previous year. In 2002–03,

the area of bananas treated for black sigatoka will return to production and increased

plantings will further add to production. This is expected to result in an overall 8%

increase in production for the State. Industry commentators have indicated that they

expect the price to producers to decrease by around 3% during this year. The overall

effect of these factors is likely to be a 4% increase in gross value of banana production to

$270 million in 2002–03.





A slight increase in the gross value of mandarin production in 2001–02 to $65 million is

due to marginal increases in both production and price. As with other major fruit crops,

promotion campaigns appear to have maintained or increased demand for mandarins

while production has increased. It is forecast that the gross value of this fruit will increase

by 8% to $70 million in 2002–03. Again, price and production are expected to rise. The

main reason for the increase in production is additional trees are expected to come into

fruit, particularly in Central Queensland.





Mango gross value of production is forecast to reduce slightly to $65 million in 2001–02

and then increase by 8% in 2002–03 to $70 million. The increase in 2002–03 is due to an

expected rise in production of 10% overriding the effects of a price fall of approximately

2%.





The rise in production is due mainly to:





Œ A return to an average season following two relatively poor seasons.

Œ An additional number of trees coming into fruit.





In 2001–02, avocados are expected to increase in gross value to $45 million because of a

rise in price outstripping the effects of a decrease in production. The decline in production

was due mainly to the effects of heat and drought conditions throughout summer on trees

in a number of growing districts. A lack of good catch-up rain in growing districts during

winter 2002 may affect the gross value of avocados in 2002. Among the other factors that

may influence this increase in gross value are:





Œ Additional trees coming into commercial production.

Œ The continued increase in production of more popular varieties.

Œ Improved demand through media campaigns.





The gross value of pineapples is expected to decrease slightly in 2001–02 to $40 million

but increase to $50 million in 2002–03.





Apple gross value of production is estimated at $25 million for both 2001–02 and 2002–

03.





Gross value of production has not been estimated for other individual fruit.





Vegetables Forecasts

In 2001–02, it is forecast that Queensland’s gross value of vegetable production will

increase by almost 20% from the previous year to $715 million.





In 2002–03, Queensland’s gross value of vegetable production is anticipated to increase

slightly to $730 million.





Discussion

As with fruit, ABS has published preliminary 2000–01 gross value of vegetable production

estimates separately for only tomatoes and potatoes. Individual ABS estimates for a

number of Queensland’s major vegetable crops are not available for comparison with DPI

estimates for 2001–02. Also, based on information available from the main tomato

producing districts in Queensland, it would appear that ABS has underestimated the gross

value of Queensland tomatoes in 2000–01. The gross value of this vegetable has been

re-estimated for 2000–01 and is thought to be approximately $170 million. On the other

hand, ABS’s published 2000–01 preliminary gross value of production estimate for

potatoes appears to be high at $62 million. Data available to DPI indicates that

approximately $50 million would be closer to the actual figure for that year.





Tomato gross value of production for 2001–02 is expected to increase by 6% from the

previous year to $180 million. This is due mainly to an estimated 10% decrease in

production being offset by a rise in price of up to 20%. The decrease in production is

expected because of the shortage of water supply in some districts. In addition to the

shortage of production in Queensland, the effects of weather problems in Victoria on

tomatoes in that State are likely to push average prices up to the level expected.

In 2002–03, the gross value of tomato production is forecast to remain at approximately

$180 million. However, realisation of this estimate will largely depend on the availability of

irrigation water, particularly in the Bundaberg district.





Potato gross value of production for 2001–02 has been estimated at approximately $50

million. Production is forecast to decrease in this year due to a shortage of water supply in

the Lockyer Valley and a reduction of output on the Atherton Tableland. However, the

average price received by producers is expected to rise by about 15% due to both the

reduced supply in Queensland and the effects of adverse weather on potato production in

Victoria. In 2002– 03, it is forecast that the gross value of Queensland potato production

will remain at approximately $50 million.





Capsicum gross value of production is forecast at $75 million in 2001–02, which is

thought to be similar to, or slightly more than, the previous year. This is expected to

increase to around $80 million in 2002–03 due to small increases in both production and

price.





The estimated 2001–02 gross value of the more important ‘Other vegetables’ not listed in

detail are:

Œ Lettuce, $45 million.

Œ Rockmelons, $35 million.

Œ Watermelons, $35 million.

Œ Beans (french and runner), $30 million.





In 2002–03, it is forecast that the gross values of each of these vegetables will be similar

to those in 2001–02.





Long Term Outlook – 2010 and 2020

As evidenced by the previous paragraphs, performance in different commodity groups can

vary significantly between years. However, horticulture as a whole has seen relatively

steady growth over the past ten years. Using established figures as a baseline, it is

possible to make broad assumptions about future growth in the industry. QFVG is

developing these projections and this information will be forwarded shortly.

The horticultural industry’s approach to water quality

management









Potential effects on water quality from fruit and vegetable production in reef

catchments





Horticultural production systems in the catchments of the GBR include orchards,

plantations and bed cropping. Around 95% of the industry is irrigated.





Activities conducted within these production systems that may affect water quality include:

Œ Vegetation clearing and thinning of riparian vegetation.

Œ Soil cultivation potentially leading to soil structural decline or erosion.

Œ Over-irrigation leading to run-off or leaching of water and attached sediments, nutrients

or pesticides.

Œ Off-site movement of agricultural fertilisers and pesticides during flood events or if

applications are not adequately targeted or managed.

Œ Inappropriate storage or disposal of chemicals or chemical containers potentially

leading to pollution of waterways.

Œ Inappropriate management of waste-water from fruit or vegetable packing houses.





To minimise the risk of these impacts occurring, the industry has developed an

environmental code of practice and maintains a number of programs and activities to

address environmental issues including:

Œ Water for Profit water use efficiency program

Œ Pest management project

Œ ChemCert, ChemCollect and DrumMuster

Œ Environmental management systems case studies

Œ Environmental management training course





QFVG has also developed a natural resource and environmental management policy

statement, which is included in Attachment 1.

The Queensland fruit and vegetable industry’s environmental code of

practice





The Farmcare Code of Practice for Sustainable Fruit & Vegetable Production in

Queensland was launched in 1998 and distributed to all fruit and vegetable growers in the

state. A CD-ROM of the Code is included with this submission.





Farmcare was developed by QFVG through a three-year research and consultation project

with funds from HAL (then the Horticultural Research & Development Corporation or

HRDC). Over 500 growers and industry and environmental specialists contributed to the

collation of the practices outlined in the Code.





Farmcare was developed to provide growers with comprehensive guidelines for how to

meet their general environmental duty defined in the Environmental Protection Act (Qld)

1994. It offers detailed advice on management of land and soils, water, biodiversity, noise,

air and waste and integrated crop protection. The Farmcare Code has been endorsed by

the Queensland Government as an approved Code of Practice under Section 219 of the

Environmental Protection Act 1994.





The code continues to receive high praise from government and community stakeholders

as one of the best agricultural environmental management codes produced.





Practices that will assist growers to avoid causing impacts on water quality are suggested

throughout the Code. These practices are listed in Attachment 2.





Farmcare has been heavily promoted at industry forums and in industry journals since its

launch in 1998. A checklist designed to assist growers to audit their practices and identify

areas where they do not meet their industry environmental code accompanies Farmcare

(Attachment 3). Growers are encouraged to complete the checklist annually to monitor

and record their progress towards meeting the Code. Levels of adoption of the Farmcare

Code of Practice, however, are difficult to quantify, as formal reporting processes have not

been established.





This year, a new two-day training course on environmental management, designed

specifically for fruit and vegetable growers in Queensland is being rolled out by QFVG. A

major focus of the course is the Farmcare Code of Practice. An assessable item within the

course is the completion of the Farmcare checklist. Results from this will contribute to

QFVG understanding of the levels of adoption of the Code.

The impact of the code has been significant, with anecdotal evidence gathered from

discussions with growers, suggesting that Farmcare is highly valued as a resource book

and guideline. Without formal environmental monitoring programs in place in fruit and

vegetable production districts, however, any environmental improvements generated from

the adoption of Farmcare practices are difficult to assess.





In response to increasing regulation of on-farm environmental and natural resource

management, community concern for environmental issues, opportunities for verifiable

“clean & green” marketing and pressure to demonstrate progress towards sustainability,

the fruit and vegetable industry has been investigating “the step beyond Farmcare” since

2000.





The industry recognises that the environmental code of practice and other environmental

management tools and initiatives must be further developed. Future directions will involve

supporting growers to take an active, systematic and documented approach to

environmental management and monitoring.





Additional guidelines for growers in the Johnstone River Catchment were developed

through a 1995 Integrated Catchment Management initiative. These guidelines are

provided in Attachment 4.









Other water quality management initiatives in the Queensland fruit and

vegetable industry





Water for Profit

The Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative is a program funded by the Queensland

Department of Natural Resources & Mines. The program sets targets for industries to

achieve certain criteria to increase irrigation efficiency. QFVG delivers the program to the

horticultural sector on behalf of the Queensland Government under the banner of Water for

Profit. The program provides an excellent mechanism to facilitate the adoption of many

practices within the Farmcare Code.





The program consists of two components:

Œ A financial incentive scheme which provides growers with a rebate on investment in

monitoring equipment and irrigation system improvements

Œ A team of regionally-based irrigation specialists who assist growers to benchmark,

monitor and improve the efficiency of irrigation systems through on-farm trials,

workshops, field days and best practice manuals.

Over 95 per cent of the horticulture industry relies on irrigation, so targeting improvements

in irrigation has an effect through most of the industry. Water for Profit has been extremely

successful in achieving change in irrigation practices in the major horticultural regions

across the State. These improvements have been verified by both independent data and

data collected through the program. Irrigation efficiency improvements have flowed on to

delivering a broader range environmental improvements.





Irrigation efficiency gains made in horticulture though Water for Profit

Identifying the changes and gains made through the program has been made through four

methods:

Œ An independent survey

Œ Field Officer estimates of irrigation efficiency gains,

Œ Grower attendance at workshops and involvement in the BMP process, and

Œ Data from the RWUE Financial Incentive Scheme.





These indicated that:

Œ Over 80 per cent of horticultural growers in Queensland are aware of the program

Œ Just over 50 per cent of horticultural growers have made changes to increase the

efficiency of their irrigation system during the past 2 years. Of these growers, about

two thirds of the changes have been influenced in some way by the RWUE Initiative.

The program target is 40 per cent of growers to have made changes in management

practices.

Œ From grower self estimates obtained in the independent survey, there has been

approximately 10 per cent improvement on farm in water savings and productivity

gains, resulting from the changes made.

The program target is 11 per cent in Water Use Efficiency.

Œ As at the end of April 2002, field officers have estimated that the Water for Profit

program has achieved gains equivalent to $115 million. These gains are largely made

up from the opportunity returns of water savings (at $4900 per Megalitre saved), but

also from productivity gains.

The program target is $150 million of gains in Water Use Efficiency.

Œ There have been over 4600 attendances at Water for Profit workshops and functions,

which have targeted improving growers understanding of irrigation efficiency. Many

growers have attended more than one workshop, indicating a willingness to make

ongoing improvement.

Œ As at the end of April 2002, almost 30 per cent of horticultural growers had been

involved in workshops and the BMP process. It is estimated that this number will be

almost 50 per cent by June 2003.

The program target is 40 per cent of growers involved in the BMP process



Changes made through the Financial Incentive Scheme.

Œ The Financial Incentive Scheme (FIS) has been extremely successful in

complementing the activities of QFVG irrigation field officers. The FIS has both initiated

change for many growers as well as accelerating the rate of change in many cases.

Œ For each dollar that the Scheme has contributed, growers have contributed an

additional two dollars, with total expenditure by growers through the FIS exceeding $5

million to the end of April in approvals.

Œ At mid 2002, almost 30 per cent of horticultural growers had been approved to make

changes using the Financial Incentives Scheme to improve irrigation efficiency. It is

expected that further funding is available for at least another 10 per cent of horticultural

growers.

The horticultural program aims at having 40 per cent of growers making improvements,

as defined by the BMP process.







Environmental benefits delivered through Water for Profit

In addition to the achievements listed above, there have been other benefits gained from

the program, including environmental gains. Not only is irrigation water being used better,

the off-farm impacts of irrigation will ultimately be reduced through greater irrigation

efficiency.





Significant environmental benefits have been identified as part of the current program

activities including:

Œ reductions in deep drainage,

Œ reduced run-off of farm chemicals and nutrients,

Œ accessions to ground-water tables and saline seepage discharges and

Œ improving soil structural conditions.





Case studies monitoring the benefits associated with improved matching of irrigation

application volumes to soil water holding capacity and crop requirements has indicated

that substantial reductions in deep drainage (commonly in the order of 20-70%) can be

achieved through the implementation of soil water monitoring.

Field officers in the Burnett region have been asked to assist several growers whose

farming operations have been affected by saline seepages. Improvements in irrigation

scheduling and a reduction in application volumes typically resulted in these seepages

being substantially reduced or eliminated completely resulting in a reduction in saline

contributions to surface and riverine flows and enabling the crops in these areas to

recover.





Soil structural degradation has been identified by Water for Profit staff on a number of

farms from the Tablelands to the Burnett. Contributing causes included the use of

excessive cultivation, low organic matter additions, high sodium contents in the soils or the

use of water with low electrical conductivity. The addition of gypsum either directly to the

soil or, used to increase the electrical conductivity of the irrigation water, or increase in the

use of surface organic mulches, have now been used to rehabilitate a number of areas

and improve soil structure, infiltration and root penetration.





The Water for Profit program has also enhanced links between the fruit and vegetable

industry and other stakeholders in the natural resource management field including:

Œ the Queensland Department of Natural Resources & Mines,

Œ the Queensland Department of Primary Industries and the Queensland Horticulture

Institute,

Œ other irrigated industries,

Œ the University of Southern Queensland,

Œ irrigation suppliers and consultants,

Œ the Queensland Environmental Protection Agency,

Œ conservation groups,

Œ Landcare and Catchment groups, and

Œ the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality.





Success factors

The successes of the RWUE Initiative has been achieved through:

Œ Industry delivery of the program, which ensured it was marketed and delivered in a

way that tapped into growers’ areas of interest and allowed growers to retain

ownership of the changes being made.

Œ Financial incentive scheme, which provided support to growers to invest in system

improvements and monitoring equipment.

Œ The team of regionally-based extension staff who provide highly valued technical

advice on how to achieve production efficiencies and environmental improvements.

QFVG believes the RWUE initiative provides an excellent model for the delivery of

environmentally-focussed programs to the fruit and vegetable industry and recommends

that future programs aimed at addressing water quality protection and sustainable natural

resource management follow this model. Further details on the Water for Profit program

are provided in Attachment 5.









Integrated Pest Management

Significant efforts have been made to research and facilitate the use of integrated crop

management (ICM) and integrated pest management (IPM) systems in the Queensland

fruit and vegetable industry.





QFVG funds, with Horticulture Australia, a project “Implementing pest management

strategies for the Queensland fruit and vegetable industry”. Through this project, a full-

time QFVG Pest Management Officer is employed. The aim of the project is to support

fruit and vegetable growers to develop strategies for environmentally sustainable pest

management and facilitate further adoption of IPM.





The IPM approach involves the use of a wide range of pest control methods in such a

manner as to minimise pesticide use. It includes the use of monitoring for pest threshold

levels that crops can withstand before significant economic damage is caused; the

judicious use of pesticides; and the use of biological and cultural control options where

available.





The use of IPM techniques in the fruit and vegetable industry is growing. Adoption of IPM

is quite high in some commodities, in particular brassicas, bananas (the dominant

horticultural industry in the Wet Tropics) and citrus (significant horticultural commodities in

the Burnett and Fitzroy Basins). These commodities are considered major crops within

horticulture and have a considerable R&D budget to invest in IPM strategy development.

Smaller commodities in the vegetable and tropical / subtropical fruit industries have lesser

and varying degrees of IPM uptake.





A major IPM success story in horticulture is from the banana industry where a 93 per cent

reduction in pesticide use has been achieved since 1985 through introducing bell injection

of a highly targeted pesticide. A Queensland Department of Primary Industries report on

this is included in Attachment 6.





As a result of the growing adoption of IPM in the industry:

Œ An overall reduction in the amount of pesticides used by the industry has been

achieved.

Œ The pesticides that are used are generally less harsh and more targeted.

Œ Pesticide applications are more targeted and less likely to move offsite.

Œ The benefits of maintaining strong biodiversity are being realised and wildlife habitats

are increasingly preserved and enhanced to harbour beneficial insects and birds.





Rates of adoption of IPM depend heavily on access to a suite of suitable "soft" pesticides

that will not harm beneficial insects and which can be regularly alternated to prevent pests

and diseases from developing resistance. It also depends on the availability of specialist

services in crop monitoring and IPM advice and the extent to which industries can invest in

research into new chemistry and biological controls.





A negative implication of the growth of IPM adoption and research in the horticultural

industry is that as precision pesticide application methods and reduced volumes of

pesticides are applied, it becomes harder for the industry to maintain access to chemicals

through the national registration process.





This is because pesticides used on commodities that the National Registration Authority

classifies as a “major crop” must have their use included on the product label. Horticultural

chemical use is already very small compared with broad-acre crops but with increased IPM

adoption leading to decreased use of pesticides, its significance is even further reduced.

Increasingly, it is not in the interests of chemical companies to invest in adding a

horticultural use to their products’ labels.





The National Registration Authority has established the “minor use system” which permits

the off-label use of chemicals in smaller crops or for less significant pests. Many minor

crops still face significant difficulties, however, accessing a suitable array of chemicals to

manage pests and diseases using an IPM approach. Costly residue trials are often

required to support such uses and chemical registrants rarely provide the funding for

these. Accordingly, smaller industries are limited as to what new "target specific" and or

"soft" chemistry they can use by how much they can afford to spend on their development.

Their remaining option is to use the few older chemicals that are registered, but are

harsher on non-target beneficials. This also results in existing registered chemicals quickly

becoming ineffective due to a lack of options with which to alternate them, allowing pests

and diseases to build up resistance. This keeps the industry in a cycle of use of harsher

chemicals and limits the development of IPM by harming beneficials and building

resistance in the target pests.

These limitations need to be addressed in order to accelerate the adoption of IPM in the

horticultural sector.





ChemCert, ChemCollect and DrumMuster

A major driver of best practice management and application of pesticides in the industry is

the development of “ChemCert”. This program provides accredited training to growers in

the safe handling, application and storage of farm chemicals. DrumMuster and

ChemCollect are highly successful programs aimed at facilitating the safe disposal of

agricultural chemicals and containers. The Queensland Farmers Federation submission

details the achievements of these initiatives and the flow-on benefits they have generated

for water quality protection in Queensland.









Environmental Management Systems case studies

An environmental management system (EMS) is a tool that a business can use to improve

its environmental performance through a clearly defined process of planning,

implementation and review.





Through an EMS, a business sets environmental policies and targets; identifies, prioritises,

manages and monitors environmental impacts; documents environmental management

activities; and regularly reviews its performance.





Following a major consultation process with members, QFVG finalised an Environment

Strategy in 2000, which identified that the use of EMS should be trialed in the fruit and

vegetable industry. The EMS approach was identified as an effective tool to assist

growers to more actively address environmental issues, formalise their adoption of

Farmcare practices and seek market advantage and community recognition for their

efforts.





In line with the strategy, case studies have been established in the Wet Tropics banana

industry and the Lockyer Valley brassica industry. The banana case study aims to:

Œ Trial the use of ISO14001 standard EMSs in horticultural businesses (bananas).

Œ Identify the barriers to adoption of the EMS approach and the support fruit and

vegetable growers might need to implement and maintain an EMS.

Œ Recommend ways forward for the fruit and vegetable industry in general and the

banana industry in particular.

An overview of the case study is provided in Attachment 7.





Through the banana case study, information is being collated which details up-to-date

information on best practices and research findings relevant to banana production

particularly for soil health, stability and nutrient management. This information will be

packaged and provided for all members of the industry in addition to advice on how to

design and implement an EMS to the ISO14001 standard.





Should QFVG’s investigation of EMS show that it provides an effective model to drive

improvements in environmental management in the fruit and vegetable industry and offers

a manageable tool for growers that generates business benefits, products and services to

facilitate its adoption will be developed and offered to QFVG members.





Environmental management training course

QFVG, with funds from the Natural Heritage Trust, has also developed a two-day

environmental management training course specifically for fruit and vegetable growers.

The course has been piloted with three groups in Mareeba, Gatton and Childers and is

now being rolled out across Queensland.





The course aims to provide growers with knowledge and tools to improve their

environmental management performance and covers:

Œ Environmental issues important for the horticulture industry

Œ An overview of environmental terms and what they mean

Œ How to identify goals for environmental sustainability

Œ The Farmcare Code of Practice for Sustainable Fruit & Vegetable Production

Œ Environmental management systems (EMS) and certification

Œ Environmental legislation and what it means for growers

Œ How to identify priority issues using an environmental risk assessment process.





The roll out of the course is expected to be a first step in the second phase of Farmcare

where growers will be supported to more actively address environmental management

issues.





Riparian zone management

Riparian zone management has been identified as an aspect that requires attention within

the fruit and vegetable industry. QFVG has commenced work on reviewing scientific

information generated by the CRC – Coastal Zone, Estuary and Waterway Management

with a view to developing a detailed policy and advice regarding best practice

management of riparian vegetation.









Waste water management

Management of waste water from fruit or vegetable packing houses has emerged as an

issue in the industry over the last year. A pro-active approach has been taken to address

the issue. As a first step, a workshop between banana pack-house managers and the

Queensland Environmental Protection Agency was held in April 2002 to develop best

practice guidelines and an action plan to resolve concerns. An eco-efficiency study has

also been conducted in a vegetable pack-house to identify opportunities to improve

management processes. QFVG will extend this information to other pack-houses as

required.

Future directions towards systematic and documented

environmental management





Beyond the Farmcare Environmental Code of Practice





QFVG recognises that fruit and vegetable growers need more than a code of practice to

demonstrate their sound management of environmental issues. The industry also

recognises that a commitment to continuous improvement is needed to progressively

decrease any environmental impacts caused by fruit and vegetable production.





A model outlining how QFVG can support fruit and vegetable growers to take a more

active, holistic, systematic and documented approach to environmental management is

being developed within QFVG and in consultation with other QFF member organisations,

government staff and other stakeholders.





The model builds on Farmcare, the Water for Profit program and the EMS case studies

and is likely to include:

Œ Development of the Farmcare Code of Practice and the Water for Profit irrigation best

practice manual into an interactive workbook incorporating self assessment of the

extent of adoption of Farmcare and irrigation efficiency practices and risk assessment

to determine priority environmental risks generated by the enterprise.

Œ Templates and guidelines covering the key elements of an environmental management

system that can be integrated with established management systems for food safety,

quality, workplace safety or quarantine.

Œ Tools for benchmarking, monitoring and reporting environmental performance.

Œ Supplementary information on regionally-specific environmental management

priorities, targets and recommended practices.

Œ An outline of environmental legislation and what growers need to do to ensure

compliance.

Œ A team of extension staff based within growing districts to provide training and support

to growers to apply the tools available through the program

Œ Formal links to R&D providers so those research questions that emerge through the

implementation process can be addressed.

Œ Mechanisms for auditing and possibly certifying management practices or systems that

underpin “clean & green” marketing initiatives, industry environmental reporting, and

streamlined access to government services, licences or allocations (eg water).

Œ Incentives or financial support to assist growers to implement practices that deliver

public-benefit environmental outcomes and water quality protection.





QFVG believes that such a model offers a sound mechanism for delivering environmental

protection and natural resource management. The model could be delivered by QFVG as

a major new program with financial support from a range of stakeholders.





This model would, however, need to be one component of a broader strategic framework

for natural resource management reform in Queensland and nationally. QFVG, through

the Queensland Farmers Federation, is progressing this issue with the Queensland

Government.





QFVG does not support the development of a separate plan for protection of water quality

reaching the Great Barrier Reef as good water quality should be an outcome of an

overarching and integrated initiative to drive sustainable natural resource management in

Queensland. Such an initiative can be achieved through a clearly defined partnership

approach between the three levels of government, regional natural resource management

bodies and rural industries.

Appropriate policy options from a horticultural industry

perspective









QFVG is applying significant effort to develop future directions and strategies for how

ecological sustainability can be achieved within the fruit and vegetable industry which

delivers a “triple bottom line” outcome of economic profitability, environmental protection

and maintenance of vibrant communities. These directions fit within QFVG’s policy

statements on natural resource and water management as outlined in the executive

summary and Attachment 1.





QFVG does not believe that the current piecemeal and fragmented approach of

governments to the natural resource management reform process will deliver good triple

bottom line outcomes.





Currently, QFVG and the fruit and vegetable industry is splitting its efforts and resources

over a diverse and over-lapping range of environmental protection and natural resource

management processes which ultimately are all aimed at the achieving the same

outcomes. These include, but not limited to:

Œ The proposed development of a water quality protection plan for the Great Barrier Reef

Œ Water resource planing processes

Œ Regional vegetation management planing processes

Œ Regional coastal management planning processes

Œ Regional investment planning for the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water

Quality and the Natural Heritage Trust

Œ Regulation of intensification of agricultural land-use through Local Government

planning schemes under the Integrated Planning Act

Œ The Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative

Œ A review of wildlife regulations and ongoing flying fox management issues

Œ Issues emerging for the industry through the Commonwealth Environment Protection

and Biodiversity Conservation Act





Addressing these issues separately is completely inefficient and unsustainable and

furthermore does not deliver the environmental and sustainability outcomes sought.

QFVG would prefer that these matters be addressed through one overarching, integrated,

holistic, state-wide and long-term natural resource management vision and strategic

framework for sustainable development in Queensland.





The strategy should be negotiated between rural industries, Government, regional NRM

bodies and other stakeholders and identify a clear set of outcomes, implementation

strategies, delivery mechanisms, timeframes, resources and commitments.





The plan should provide clarity on how all of the statutory, semi-statutory and voluntary

regional NRM arrangements fit together. It should incorporate mechanisms to facilitate a

meshing of regional approaches to sustainable natural resource management planning

with state-level initiatives of industry organisations. It should also acknowledge and

address the broader institutional, economic and structural forces operating on rural

industries that constrain growers’ ability to achieve sustainability and address water quality

and other environmental concerns (there is an important body of research by Dr Steven

Dovers that addresses this issue).



QFVG has been working through the Queensland Farmers Federation to progress this

concept. The QFF discussion paper is included in Attachment 8 along with a series of

slides aimed at illustrating the concept.





QFVG suggests that the following principles and issues should be considered in preparing

policy options to support sustainable natural resource management and address water

quality protection for the GBR:

Œ The significant efforts and achievements made by primary producers to improve their

environmental management performance needs to be recognised and acknowledged

by governments and the broader community.

Œ Programs to support the achievement of sustainable natural resource management in

rural industries should be guided by strategic frameworks rather than the current

situation where the vagaries and politics of funding initiatives drive the process. The

extent to which programs can achieve strong outcomes is severely restricted by the

fact that “the tail continues to wag the dog”.

Œ Institutional arrangements to support improved environmental management in rural

Australia must include a mix of regional and industry-based approaches.

Œ The regulatory and policy arrangements should include consistent and reasonable

natural resource management regulations that provide a floor for performance

requirements but that the system encourages self-management and partnership

approaches aimed at achieving continual improvement in environmental management.

Œ Financial support arrangements are urgently needed to share the costs of

environmental protection across all beneficiaries and to provide incentives to growers

to maintain healthy waterways and preserve biodiversity. The costs to growers of

practices such as wetland preservation or restoring wide riparian buffers cannot be

recouped through the market system.

Œ Water and natural resource access and use rights and arrangements must be clearly

defined as a matter of urgency and mechanisms developed to provide compensation

where rights are diminished in order to achieve public good environmental protection

goals.

Œ Delivery arrangements for future natural resource management initiatives should follow

the model of the rural water use efficiency program, which demonstrates the powerful

outcomes that can be achieved when industry bodies manage the delivery of programs

on behalf of governments.

Œ Mechanisms to facilitate market recognition and reward for food and fibre produced in

sustainable production systems should be further developed. The limits to market-

based incentives and the extent to which the marketplace can provide adequate “pull-

through” for environmentally friendly-labelled products must, however, be recognised.

Attachment 1: QFVG policy statements on natural resource and

water management



Queensland Fruit & Vegetable Growers supports its members’ goal to be responsible

custodians of natural resources and rural environments.



Good environmental management practices for the horticulture industry are described in

the Farmcare Code of Practice for Sustainable Fruit and Vegetable Production in

Queensland and include:

Œ Efficient and careful use of natural resources, particularly water and soils.

Œ Minimising environmental impacts caused by horticultural land use, particularly run-off

of sediments, fertilisers and pesticides into waterways.

Œ Minimising waste and pollution from horticultural land use.

Œ Careful use of pesticides.

Œ Minimising impacts on biodiversity.



The Farmcare Code has been endorsed by the Queensland Government as an approved

Code of Practice under Section 219 of the Environmental Protection Act 1994.



The Code constitutes an industry standard giving guidance to growers in meeting their

'General Environmental Duty' under the Act.



QFVG supports the sustainable development of the horticulture industry in Queensland.

This requires horticultural enterprises to be profitable and socially viable as well as

environmentally safe. This ‘triple bottom line’ approach will be used to monitor and report

on the industry’s performance. The organisation will maintain an environment program

designed to assist its members to continually improve their environmental performance

and achieve ecological sustainability in the industry.



QFVG and its members aim to work in partnership with government, research

organisations, regional and catchment management organisations, the community and

other stakeholders to develop long-term solutions to natural resource and environmental

management issues. Through this approach, we aim to deliver workable and balanced

outcomes for the industry that also benefit the broader community.



QFVG seeks recognition and commitment from government and the community that the

industry requires support to achieve its goal of ecological sustainability. In particular, the

industry requires:



Œ Negotiated transition phases of an appropriate and agreed timeframe that allow

industry time to adapt or restructure to legislative or policy changes, implement

changes to practices or develop solutions to problems.

Œ Financial and other support for growers when the public benefits of environmental

management outweigh private benefits, and when the community’s expectations of

environmental management or biodiversity conservation restrict growers’ farm

management beyond current recommended practices.

Œ A range of financial and market-based incentives be explored and used as much as

possible to encourage the adoption of improved environmental management practices.

Œ Institutional, economic and other barriers to the adoption of sustainable management

practices be identified and addressed.

NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENDA ISSUES

Issues to be considered within the broader environment policy heading include:

Œ A 10-year plan for natural resource management in Queensland.

Œ Sustainability.

Œ Industry self-regulation where possible.

Œ Natural resource planning and management based on sound science.

Œ Vegetation Management/Tree clearing.

Œ Water quality.

Œ Salinity.

Œ Greenhouse and climate change.

Œ Chemical use.

Œ Biodiversity.

Œ Wildlife management.

Œ Great Barrier Reef.

Œ Acid-sulphate soils.

Œ Pest and weed management.

Œ Competing land use eg urban development in rural areas.

Œ Local government land use planning.

Œ Regional and catchment planning and management within an overarching framework.

Œ Property management planning.

Œ Natural resource access, allocation and trading (eg water, carbon credits).

Œ Organic food production.

Œ Genetically modified organisms.

Œ Environmental Management Systems in agriculture.







WATER POLICY STATEMENT





The importance of water to horticulture is unquestionable. Rural industries are facing

increasing competitive demands for Queensland’s finite water supply. The viability of

horticulture in Queensland depends upon the availability, price, and the way in which

available water resources and the integrity of catchments are managed.





With the use of water resources comes responsibility. Water issues have become

increasingly important throughout the community, and the focus is on using this resource

sustainably in the future.



Markets for water rights should be developed which enable the optimum distribution of

water in the market place between alternative users.

WATER AGENDA ISSUES

Issues to be considered within the broader water policy heading include:

Œ Availability and access.

Œ Efficiency of use, including extension of the Water for Profit Rural Water Use Efficiency

Initiative.

Œ Water pricing.

Œ New infrastructure.

Œ Water Resource Plans.

Œ Local management.

Œ Legislation and regulation including water property rights, pricing and the coordination

of property management plans.

Œ Water infrastructure including:

Œ State government approach.

Œ Water infrastructure projects.

Œ COAG water reform issues.

Œ Waste water policy issues.

Œ Review and monitoring of Water Resource Plans.

Œ Land and Water Management Plans.

Œ Water trading.

Œ Unallocated water.

Œ Penalty systems for unauthorised water use.

Œ Metering.

Attachment 2: Aspects of Farmcare relevant to water quality

protection



Land and soil management



Œ Minimise erosion of soil

Œ Consider the elements of planning a good farm layout

Œ Use windbreaks to minimise wind erosion where appropriate

Œ Minimise bare ground to reduce erosion from raindrop impact

Œ Rehabilitate areas of gully and landslip erosion



Œ Practice good fertiliser management

Œ Avoid too little or too much fertiliser application

Œ Use soil testing

Œ Apply fertiliser for efficient uptake

Œ Use soil testing and plant diagnostic techniques to help work out post planting

fertiliser requirements

Œ Apply post-plant fertiliser for efficient uptake

Œ Use irrigation to enable efficient fertiliser uptake when possible



Œ Minimise the degradation of soil structure

Œ Minimise harm from tillage and traffic

Œ Cultivate soils at the right moisture content and depth

Œ Green manures, rotations and organic matter add benefits





Water management



Œ If irrigating, use an efficient irrigation system



Œ If irrigating, schedule irrigations



Œ Minimise contamination of water

Œ Apply fertilisers and pesticides efficiently

Œ Reduce drainage past the root zone

Œ Manage soil erosion

Œ Protect riparian zones

Œ Handle, transport and store pesticides safely



Œ Manage drainage to minimise harm to the environment

Œ On farm drainage should take into account the local catchment

Œ Manage potential acid sulphate soils with care





Biodiversity management



Œ Manage vegetation on farm

Œ Plan for vegetation retention where possible

Œ If tree clearing, do so with consideration

Air management



Œ Minimise off-target chemical application

Œ Calibrate and maintain spray machinery

Œ Understand the effects of weather

Œ Use a suitable spraying height and direction

Œ Use buffer zones to reduce potential impacts of spray drift





Waste management



Œ Dispose of chemicals appropriately



Œ Dispose of chemical containers appropriately



Œ Dispose of waste oil appropriately





Integrated Crop Management



Œ Improve hygiene and cultural practices for pest management



Œ Monitor pests and spray when necessary



Œ Encourage beneficials by using “soft” options



Œ Introduce biological control agents



Œ Combine chemical disease, nematode and weed control with non-chemical

options where possible

Attachment 5: Further information on the Water for Profit Program



The Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative (RWUE) is funded by the Queensland

Department of Natural Resources and Mines with targets set for industry bodies to achieve

certain criteria to increase irrigation efficiency. In the horticulture industry, Queensland

Fruit & Vegetable Growers Ltd delivers the initiative.



The RWUE Initiative Horticulture program, which is known as Water for Profit, has been

extremely successful in achieving change in irrigation practices in the major horticultural

regions across the State. An independent survey has identified that over 80% of growers

are aware of the program



Over 95% of horticulture relies on irrigation, so targeting changes in irrigation can have an

effect through most of the industry. The RWUE Initiative has been a very successful for a

number of reasons but ultimately, growers have had ownership of the changes being

made, which has enhanced the activities of the program.





IRRIGATION EFFICIENCY GAINS MADE IN HORTICULTURE



Identifying the changes and gains made by the RWUE has been made through four

methods. These are:

♦ An independent survey

♦ Field Officer estimates of irrigation efficiency gains,

♦ Grower attendance at workshops and involvement in the BMP process, and

♦ Data from the RWUE Financial Incentive Scheme.



These indicated that:

♦ over 80% of horticultural growers are aware of the program

♦ Just over 50% of horticultural growers have made changes to their increase efficiency

of their irrigation system during the past 2 years. Of these growers, about two thirds of

the changes have been influenced in some way by the RWUE Initiative. The program

target is 40% of growers to have made changes in management practices.

♦ From grower self estimates obtained in the independent survey, there has been

approximately 10% improvement on farm in water savings and productivity gains,

resulting from the changes made. The program target is 11% in Water Use Efficiency.

♦ As at the end of April, 2002, field officers have estimated that the Horticulture RWUE

program has achieved gains equivalent to $115 million. These gains are largely made

up from the opportunity returns of water savings (at $4900 per Megalitre saved), but

also from productivity gains. The program target is $150 million of gains in Water Use

Efficiency.

♦ There have been over 4600 attendances at RWUE Initiative workshops and functions,

which have targeted improving growers understanding of irrigation efficiency. Many

growers have attended more than one workshop, indicating a willingness to make

ongoing improvement.

♦ As at the end of April, 2002, almost 30% of horticulture growers had been involved in

workshops and the BMP process. It is estimated that this number will be almost 50%

by June 2003. The program target is 40% of growers involved in the BMP process



CHANGES MADE THROUGH THE FINANCIAL INCENTIVE SCHEME.

♦ The FIS has been extremely successful in complementing the activities of QFVG

irrigation field officers. The FIS has both initiated change for many growers as well as

accelerating the rate of change in many cases.

♦ For each dollar that the Scheme has contributed, growers have contributed an

additional two dollars, with total expenditure by growers through the FIS exceeding $5

million to the end of April in approvals.

♦ At mid 2002, almost 30% of horticultural growers had been approved to make changes

using the Financial Incentives Scheme to improve irrigation efficiency. It is expected

that further funding is available for at least another 10% of Horticultural growers. The

horticultural program aims at having 40% of growers making improvements, as defined

by the BMP process.



OTHER BENEFITS

In addition to the achievements listed above, there have been other benefits gained from

the program, including environmental gains. Not only is irrigation water being used better,

but the off farm impacts of irrigation will ultimately be reduced through greater irrigation

efficiency. While the principal focus of the Water for Profit program has been on irrigation

practices to improve water use efficiency (eg. crop response, soil-water movement,

surface run-off) some significant environmental benefits including reductions in deep

drainage, reduced runoff of farm chemicals and nutrients, accessions to groundwater

tables and saline seepage discharges and improving soil structural conditions have been

identified as part of the current program activities.



Case studies monitoring the benefits associated with improved matching of irrigation

application volumes to the soil water holding and crop requirements has indicated that

substantial reductions in deep drainage (commonly in the order of 20-70%) can be

achieved through the implementation of soil water monitoring.



Field officers in the Burnett region have been asked to assist several growers whose

farming operations have been affected by saline seepages. Improvements in irrigation

scheduling and a reduction in application volumes typically resulted in these seepages

being substantially reduced or eliminated completely resulting in a reduction in saline

contributions to surface and riverine flows and enabling the crops in these areas to

recover.



Soil structural degradation has been identified by Water for Profit staff on a number of

farms from the Tablelands to the Burnett. Contributing causes included the use of

excessive cultivation, low organic matter additions, high sodium contents in the soils or the

use of water with low electrical conductivity. The addition of gypsum either directly to the

soil or, used to increase the electrical conductivity of the irrigation water, or increase in the

use of surface organic mulches, have now been used to rehabilitate a number of areas

and improve soil structure, infiltration and root penetration.





Links to stakeholders: Primarily NR&M; Key – DPI/QHI, QFF, other irrigation industries,

University of South Qld; other links – irrigation suppliers and consultants, EPA,

conservation groups, Landcare, Catchment groups, NAPSWQ, MDBC. The Water for

Profit program is central to the focus of Farmcare.



In addition, the program has been able to offer assistance in times of severe drought in

many regions. The program is a source of technical information. It has also been used by

many growers to assist in the transition process of shifting from low input irrigation crops

into Horticulture.



SUMMARY



The Water for Profit program has made positive contributions to increasing irrigation

efficiency in Queensland. Both independent data and data collected through the

Horticulture RWUE Initiative support this. As a result of increased efficiency, other benefits

have resulted from the program with numerous benefits to the environment.

Ultimately the RWUE Initiative has heightened the importance of irrigation efficiency on

Horticultural farms, with growers making changes where they otherwise would not have.







FURTHER BACKGROUND INFORMATION



REGIONAL PLANS

Each Irrigation Officer has developed their own regional plan to develop the program

objectives within their region. Regional reports give many of the objectives relating to the

program.



In summary, these are:



• Development of regional and crop plans

• Provision of high quality technical support to growers

• Development WUE benchmarks

• Development of effective communication plans

• Establishment of an Award for Irrigation Efficiency

• Development of links to R & D program

• Development of links to other extension and community programs

• Using demonstration sited as tools to improving WUE







GAINS FROM THE PROGRAM



With the multitude of crops and irrigation systems across geographically different regions,

assessing the gains in the horticulture program was always going to be a challenge. Add to

this seasonal differences in weather, markets and factors such as disease, it could be a

complex task.



A simple but effective approach was developed which was based on using known data

sources and extrapolating this data across each field officers’ region. With good record

keeping and a number of sources of data, this has given a good indicative figures for gains

made by the program. Assessments were made of water savings and productivity gains.



Field Officers assessed their region by allocating growers into four groups, based on the

level of contact the program has had with them. These were:

♦ Direct measurement – where the field officer had reliable information on changes made

on growers’ farms. This was usually were trials and demonstrations had been done by

the field officer, or he had been working closely with the grower.

♦ High level – this was where the field officer has had good contact with the grower and

had obtained data which would be reasonable accurate. However, as the field officer

may not have been involved directly in generating the data, it may not be as accurate

as the direct measurement. In some cases, data from workshops and the Financial

Incentive Scheme was used to support this category.

♦ Moderate level – this is where there has been contact between the program and

growers, but limited. Growers who had attended workshops or been approved under

the Financial Incentive Scheme were in this category. Also grower who the field officer

knew had made changes but did not know the exact details were in this category.

♦ None – this group included growers who had little or no contact with the field officers. It

also included growers that had applied for the FIS but not yet been approved. It was

assumed that growers in this group had made little or no change due to the program.

Reliability factors were put to each level. The greater the contact, the greater the reliability.

Field officers calculated the gains by two methods: by grower number; by area. The results

were generally similar, though some variations did occur. Generally speaking, the

calculation by area would be slightly more accurate.



From the field officer assessments, the Water for Profit program has generated gains of

approximately $115 million.







COMMUNICATION



The Horticulture RWUEI has made a concerted effort to utilise various forms of

communication, with a strong emphasis during the second half of the year to produce

quality articles for the mass media.



WORKSHOPS, FIELD DAYS

The use of face to face methods of communication is fundamentally important to the Water

for Profit program and is the basis of the success of the program to date. Field officers

regularly conduct workshops and field days to assist growers to improve irrigation

efficiency and will continue to do this during 2002/2003.



Written Media

There has been a concerted effort to take advantage of editorial opportunities in the written

media. This has been quite successful and a summary is given below.



State and regional Newspapers

Numerous articles have been made in regional and State newspapers. Many of these have

generated inquiries from growers.



FACT SHEETS

Water for Profit has produced fact sheets that cover a large range of topics associated with

irrigation efficiency. More detail about these is in the Technical Report. The range of fact

sheets will continue to be expanded during 2002/2003. Importantly, these fact sheets will

remain as a legacy of the program beyond its current life.



QFVG FRUIT & VEGETABLE NEWS

QFVG publishes a monthly magazine called the Fruit and Vegetable News. This is a useful

vehicle to deliver messages to a large audience. For the past year, there has been a

concerted effort to highlight the Water for Profit program with two full colour pages of each

edition dedicated to Water for Profit. These articles are well received by growers and are

being used to reference information.



ELECTRONIC MEDIA

The program has made good use of radio during the last year, with interviews on the FIS,

Field Days and other activities. Information from the program is accessible electronically

from the NR&M and QFVG Web sites. In addition, the program has contributed articles to

national electronic media such as Prime Notes, produced by the DPI.



Importantly, Water for Profit team has developed the Irrigation Resource CD, initially

designed for use by the field officers, but is being developed as a valuable tool for growers.

Refer to the Technical Report for more details.

ASSOCIATIONS AND CONFERENCES

Team members of Water for Profit have participated in, talked at or run a number of

seminars and conferences at the professional level, targeting groups of people that can

influence irrigation efficiency other than growers. This includes equipment suppliers,

agricultural advisers, government agencies, consultants, media personnel and other

persons.



BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FRAMEWORK AND ISSUES BOOKLET



The Water for Profit program encourages horticultural irrigators to monitor their

performance and identify appropriate management practices to improve their profitability

and sustainability within a continual improvement framework. The grower is encouraged to

maintain “ownership” of the process through the implementation of continual improvement

processes which incorporate self monitoring, benchmarking and identification of best

management practices.



Best management practices associated with specific farms vary widely depending on a

wide range of factors including, but not restricted to, crop type, soil type, irrigation

application system, irrigation infrastructure, irrigation supply constraints and water quality.

Against this background, BMP is regarded as the “implementation of a process that

enables individual irrigators to identify their own farm specific best management practices

within a framework of benchmarking and continual improvement”.



To assist growers to embark on the irrigation BMP process, the Water for Profit program

has developed the “Issues in Irrigation Management for Horticultural Producers” self

evaluation and explanatory notes booklets. These provide a framework for growers to

evaluate the appropriateness of their current irrigation activities and identify opportunities

to improve their profitability and sustainability.







GROWER WORKSHOPS AND TRAINING

A major component of the Water for Profit program involves the use of field days and

workshops to raise the awareness and understanding of the factors influencing irrigation

performance and the identification of strategies to improve profitability and sustainability.

A brief outline of the Water for Profit workshop program is provided below.

Overview of the QFVG Water for Profit field day and workshop program



Component Awareness/Introduction Understanding Process

Soil and Field days; information “Soils in Irrigation”

Water for sheets Workshop;

Irrigation Information sheets

Irrigation Mass media; field days; “Irrigation

management shed meetings; industry Management” Continual

& scheduling meetings; agribusiness Workshop; improvement

promotion; information Information sheets leading to best

sheets management

System Mass media; field days; “Irrigation practice

evaluation industry meetings; shed Performance

meetings agribusiness Evaluation”

promotion; information Workshop;

sheets Information sheets

Issues in Mass media; industry “Irrigation: Planning

irrigation meetings; information for Profits” Workshop;

planning for sheets Information sheets

profit





TECHNICAL SUPPORT RESOURCES



The Water for Profit program has prepared a range of resources and undertaken a variety

of activities, which underpin the promotion of the irrigation BMP process within each

horticultural sector. A range of other resource materials is continuing to be prepared and

activities being undertaken which support the other aspects of the BMP continuous

improvement process. Activities undertaken which encourage change include: the

formation and participation in grower driven focus groups; on-farm demonstration field

days; training workshops; one to one on-farm performance evaluations and group

extension activities.



Information Sheets



A total of 57 information sheets have already been developed in areas covering crop

benchmarking, monitoring tools, system evaluation, soils, scheduling, system economics,

system maintenance and sustainability. Examples of these sheets are shown in figure 3.

These sheets have been well received with over 6000 copies already being distributed at

workshops and field events. The sheets have also been available for download via the

RWUE and QFVG web sites throughout the year and have proven to be popular. An

additional 20 information sheets are expected to be added to the range currently available

before the end of the program.





TRIALS SUPPORTING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Water for Profit staff are involved in trials to improve the sustainability of irrigation

practices. An applied research trial is currently being conducted in the Mary River

catchment to evaluate the benefits and limitations of using an organic mulch cover rather

than plastic mulch in vegetable crop production. The validation of this technology would

have the benefit of reducing the impact associated with the disposal of the traditional

plastic mulches, increase the potential to utilise in-season rainfall (and hence, reduce

water demands) and use of a renewable resource.

Erosion and surface run-off are not common problems within the irrigated horticultural

industry due to the large proportion of micro-irrigation application systems. However,

Water for Profit field officers have substantially reduced surface run-off under spray

systems due to better matching of application rates to infiltration rates and surface

detention strategies.





LOCAL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETINGS

During 2001/2002, all regions held Local Management Committee meetings. The purpose

of these was to review and plan the progress of the Horticulture RWUE Initiative. Actions

were developed from these meetings and incorporated into the regional plans. The Water

Program Manager attended a number of these meetings. Most of these meetings were

held specifically to review the Water for Profit program. This is an important step in the

review and planning process for the program to ensure that it has relevance and

ownership with growers.





INDEPENDENT SURVEY



The independent survey has complemented and backed up much of the information that

has been generated from other sources, including data collected within the Water for Profit

program. This gives credibility to the data that field officers have generated.



The survey does support the claim that the program has been successful. Fifty percent of

growers have made changes to their irrigation with two thirds of these being influences by

the program in some way. Collectively, growers estimate that they have made 10% gains

by making the changes in respect to water savings, productivity and quality gains. Though

only one fifth of growers are currently using scheduling equipment, about half of the area

of horticulture has used or is currently using scheduling equipment. This is significant as it

implies that growers have gained an understanding on scheduling technics. It doesn’t,

however, determine if there is room for improvement.



Thus, 70% of growers feel they can still make some improvement with 10% believing they

still have a lot of room for improvement. It is noted that growers do need support to make

these changes, citing financial considerations as being the most important.



Over 80% of growers are aware of the program with more than a quarter attending specific

Water for Profit activities.

Attachment 6: Queensland Horticulture Institute report on

chemical use in the banana industry





Queensland banana industry - farm chemical use survey

Donna Campagnolo and Stewart Lindsay

Queensland Horticulture Institute

Centre for Wet Tropics Agriculture, South Johnstone



Introduction

This document reports on a survey of Queensland banana producers conducted in

1998/99 to identify and record current usage patterns for agricultural chemicals. The

specific aims of the survey were:

Œ To identify which chemicals producers are currently using

Œ To identify how and when producers are using these chemicals

Œ To determine how well producers understand the concept of integrated pest

management (IPM)

Œ To compare chemical use between the early 1980’s and 1999, and report any changes

in patterns of usage



The survey was conducted as personal interviews with a sample of producers and industry

services people from coastal north Queensland, Bundaberg/Wide Bay and Sunshine

Coast/Caboolture regions. Producers surveyed ranged in experience from 3 years to over

20 years in the industry. Producers who had been present in the industry in the early 80’s

(15 years or more experience) were asked to recall the typical pest and disease

management practices for that era. This historical information was then used to compare

progress in pest and disease management, particularly in reducing the use of agricultural

chemicals.







Changes in the pattern of chemical use



Insecticide use in the early 80’s

Pest control practices in north Queensland in the early 1980’s were geared around the

management of the banana scab moth (Nacoleia octasema). Insecticide applications were

based on a blanket approach, with application of broad-spectrum insecticides made

regularly to the plantation, and producer perception was that extensive coverage and

volume of product were the keys to effective control. The majority of insecticides used

during this period were organochlorines.

Control of banana scab moth involved blanket applications of insecticide to the whole

plantation, either aerially or with a tractor-drawn spray rig. Lorsban and Azodrin (aerial

application only) were sprayed weekly to control scab moth at rates of up to 2 litre/ha.

Additionally, bunches were treated with DDT/BHC dust up to 5 times from emergence to

harvest for control of banana scab moth and banana rust thrips (Chaetanaphothrips

signipennis). These bunch treatments were applied with backpack dusters. The use of

blanket insecticide applications killed many non-target species, including natural predators,

which left growers with serious spider mite infestations. Heavy infield misting of Kelthane

and Tedion were then required to control the mite problems.

The control of soil dwelling and corm pests was mostly achieved by using Dieldrin. It was

boomed sprayed annually onto the soil surface in the row area to control banana rust

thrips and banana weevil borer (Cosmpolites sordidus). Continuous use and the long

residual life of Dieldrin led to resistance to this chemical developing in banana weevil

borer populations.

In the northern industry, as insects became harder to control because of the blanket use of

chemicals, cocktails of miticide and insecticide were frequently mixed and misted through

plantations.

In southeast Queensland the major insect pest was banana weevil borer, with banana

flower thrips (Thrips hawaiiensis) the main bunch pest. Because banana scab moth does

not occur south of the Ingham/Cardwell area, growers in the southern industry did not use

blanket insecticide sprays, and therefore had a reduced need for the chemical armoury

used by growers in the north. Banana weevil borer control was similar in the southern

industry to that used in north Queensland, with mostly Dieldrin used as an annual spray.

Consequently southern growers also experienced the development of resistance in this

pest for the same reasons as the northern industry. For bunch pest control DDT/BHC dust

was also used, applied with a backpack duster.



Insecticide use in 1999

By the end of the 90’s the industry had come a long way from blanket aerial and mister

applications to a more specific targeted application approach. In north Queensland the

introduction of bell injection totally rationalised the use of insecticides in the banana

industry. Bell injection involves the application of small amounts of insecticide into the

emerging bunch for the control of banana scab moth, banana flower thrips and banana

rust thrips. With the removal of blanket broad-spectrum insecticide applications, viable

populations of predators, particularly Stethorous spp, were maintained leading to biological

control of spider mites. Additionally, some of the chemicals commonly used in the early

80’s, particularly the organochlorines, were deregistered for environmental and health

reasons.

Overall these changes led to a significant decrease in the volume of insecticides applied to

bananas in north Queensland. Insecticide applications in 1999 are targeted to particular

parts of the plant, with targeted applications made to the bunch once at emergence, and

once again 2-4 weeks later. These initial changes to targeted insecticide applications have

meant the banana industry has adopted a form of IPM almost by default.



Fungicide use in the early 80’s

In the north Queensland industry, the major use of fungicides was for the control of yellow

Sigatoka or leaf spot (Mycosphaerella musicola), a situation that remains the same in

1999. In the early 80’s leaf spot was controlled with a regimental program of deleafing, and

regular application of fungicides. The fungicides available at the time mainly had a

protectant mode of action, such as Dithane or copper oxychloride, while Benlate also

had some limited systemic and ‘kickback’ activity. Deleafing was a regular and regimental

practice in plantations and was considered a necessity to control leaf spot. Unfortunately

applications of Benlate became more routine rather than strategic because it was

thought to have a miticidal effect and was used to help manage the serious mite

infestations caused by blanket applications of broad-spectrum insecticides. This overuse

led to an increasing lack of sensitivity to this product within the leaf spot population, and

has greatly reduced the effectiveness of Benlate as a leaf spot control.

For southern growers leaf speckle (Mycosphaerella musae) and leaf spot were problems

at times, dependant on seasonal conditions, and deleafing and regular fungicide sprays

were used for control. In the steep hillside country of the southeast application was often

done manually with backpack misters, although aerial application was available.

Fungicide use in 1999

Patterns of fungicide use in bananas have not changed as much as for insecticides over

the same time period. The two biggest changes in leaf disease management have been

the registration of fungicides with improved systemic activity, and the start of commercial

leaf spot monitoring services offered by consultants.

By the mid 80’s the systemic fungicide Tilt was registered, giving producers access to a

systemic product with some curative action. This allowed producers some limited control

against recent infections, and meant that maintaining a constant spray cover with

protectant fungicides was not as crucial. Additionally, producers also began to pay less

attention to regular deleafing, relying instead on the curative action of Tilt to control

previous infections. This has led to high populations of diseased leaf, and hence extremely

high spore populations remaining in the paddock, a situation which has led to increased

difficulty in controlling leaf spot, and an increased risk of resistance to Tilt developing in

the leaf spot population.

In the mid 90’s the over-reliance and occasional use of incorrect rates of the systemic

fungicides has led to a lack of sensitivity in leaf spot to Benlate and Tilt on some farms.

This has led the industry to adopt an anti-resistance strategy where the DMI systemic

fungicides (Tilt, Folicur and Bumper) are supposedly used only up to 6 times in any

season. The importance of deleafing in a leaf spot control program is also starting to be

recognised again.

The development of industry consultants in the mid 90’s offering leaf spot monitoring

services was a major change for the banana industry. The consultants monitor leaf spot

development and provide regular reports on infection status and recommended control

measures to be undertaken. The introduction of monitoring services for growers has led to

a greater degree of control for those growers who employ them, and has had a major

impact on the returning emphasis on regular deleafing as an integral part of leaf spot

control. Thus monitoring, regular deleafing, the regular use of preventive fungicides, and

the strategic use of systemic fungicides have created an IPM system for yellow Sigatoka.



Workplace health and safety

Workplace health and safety considerations, in respect to agricultural chemical use, are

another area where substantial change has occurred in the banana industry. Over 60% of

the surveyed producers have chemical accreditation or employees who are responsible for

handling chemicals with chemical accreditation. This is continuing to grow every year with

the increased availability of chemical accreditation courses. Growers also demonstrated an

understanding of the importance of safe chemical storage, with more than 75% having a

lockable enclosure separate from the packing area, and education of workers in the use of

chemicals and protective gear. Growers generally adhered to labels and recommended

rates although they were always on the lookout for new chemicals, often looking to other

crops for new chemicals that could potentially be registered in bananas.





Understanding the concept of IPM

Implementation of IPM has been a major research and development focus for horticultural

industries for the past 15 years. While new and improved techniques for managing pest

and diseases have been developed, an understanding by producers of the principles of

IPM is important if the industry is perceived to be practising it.

Over 80% of the producers surveyed understood the principles of IPM, being able to

identify the different activities involved in the management of an integrated program. The

use of cultural practices such as fallows, cutting up pseudostems after harvest, deleafing,

regular bagging and the use of clean planting material were all mentioned as important

pest and disease management practices.

Monitoring is an integral part of IPM with the need for chemical applications decided by

investigation of blocks and plantations. Over 60% of producers surveyed conduct

monitoring themselves, or employ a consultant to monitor for pests and diseases such as

banana weevil borer, burrowing nematode (Radophilis similis), banana rust thrips and leaf

spot. The threshold and lifecycle information that makes the monitoring of these pests and

diseases possible has mostly been developed through industry-funded research projects.

The selection of appropriate chemicals and application techniques is also an integral part

of IPM in bananas. The modern banana industry has a wider range of products in more

chemical groups from which to select than in the early 80’s. This increased range of

products coupled with pest and disease monitoring, allows for improved control, and the

ability to implement chemical rotation strategies to manage the risk of resistance

developing in pest and disease populations.

The surveyed producers identified the development of targeted pesticide application

techniques, and the adoption of them by the whole industry, as key developments in the

integrated management of insect and mite pests. Since the development of bell injection

producers perceive spider mites to be a minor pest that only needs monitoring under

certain climatic conditions and rarely needs control. This has led to miticides no longer

being a part of the regular chemical strategy within the plantation.





Pesticide use comparison

The practices recorded from the survey have been used to generate a comparison of

pesticide use in bananas between the early 1980’s and 1999. The table below is an

example of the volumes of active ingredient typically used on a one-hectare paddock in

both the 1980’s and in 1999. For this exercise we have assumed the paddock is a ratoon

block with a planting density of 1700 plants per hectare. The figures are calculated on the

prescribed label rates for the chemicals.



Change from

1980’s 1990’s

early 80’s to

Area of

Active Volume per Active Volume per late 90’s

action

Ingredient hectare Ingredient hectare (%)

Bunch pests DDT (OC) 850 g Omethoate (OP) 652 ml 84.9 %

decrease in

BHC (OC) 110 g Chlorpyrifos 85g

total

(OP)

Chlorpyrifos (OP) 6,000 ml insecticide

applied to fruit

Corm/root 1,400 ml 297% increase

pests Dieldrin (OC) 471.2 g Prothiofos(OP) in applied

insecticide

Mites 100%

decrease in

total applied

Dicofol (OC) 3,200 ml miticide

(some use still

occurs in some

years)

Leaf pests Mancozeb (Y) 20,000 ml 35.6%

decrease in

Mancozeb (Y) 31,700 g Propiconazole 400 ml

applied

(C)

fungicide

Changes in chemical use in

the banana industry 1980-1999



1980

Broadacre application of

insecticides (aerial )



Limited number of chemical

groups

® Organophosphates

Tilt registered Organochlorines





DDT/BHC,

Dieldrin banned Deleafing prominent

Bell injection adopted

by industry









1990





Rust thrips monitoring Greater number of chemical

developed groups-

Synthetic pyrethroids

Antiresistance strategy Phenylpyrazoles

for systemic fungicides Carbamates etc





Nematode resistant Greater targeting of

fallow crops identified. specific pests



Ongoing research into

alternative/organic strategies Agricultural consultancies

and products established



Chemical products mentioned by respondents in the survey

Products being used in the 1990’s

Insecticides Active group

Lorsban WP chlorpyrifos organophosphate

Folimat 800 omethoate organophosphate

Tokuthion prothiofos organophosphate

Talstar bifenthrin synthetic pyrethroid

Regent fipronil phenylpyrazole

Ficam D bendiocarb carbamate

Diazinon diazinon organophosphate





Nematicides Active Group

Vydate L oxamyl carbamate

Nemacur fenamiphos organophosphate

Rugby cadusafos organophosphate

Hunter terbufos organophosphate

Counter terbufos organophosphate

Mocap ethoprophos organophosphate





Miticide Active Group

Omite propargite organosulphur

Torque fenbutatin oxide organotin

Apollo clofentezine tetrazine





Fungicide Active Group∗

Dithane M45 mancozeb Y

Dithane OC mancozeb+ Y

petroleum oil

Dithane DF mancozeb Y

Pencozeb mancozeb + petroleum Y

oil

Tilt propiconazole C

Folicur tebuconazole C

Benlate benomyl A

∗See Appendix B





Post Harvest Active Group∗

Octave prochloraz C

Sportak prochloraz C

chlorine chlorine

∗See Appendix B

Herbicides Active Group∗

Surflan oryzalin D

Simazine simazine C

Diuron diuron C

Gesatop simazine C

Stomp pendimthalin D

Basta glufosinate-ammonium N

Gramoxone paraquat L

Round-up glyphosate M

Arzine sodium arsenite arsenical

Fusilade fluazifop A

Sprayseed paraquat/diquat L

Touchdown glyphosate-trimesium M

∗ See Appendix A





Chemicals used in the early 1980’s

Insecticides Active Group

DDT/BHC dust DDT/BHC organochlorine

Dieldrin dieldrin organochlorine

Azodrin monocrotophos organophosphate

Lorsban chlorpyrifos organophosphate

Rogor dimethoate organophosphate

Thiodan endosulfan organochlorine

Lannate methomyl carbamate

Diazinon diazinon organophosphate





Miticides Active Group

Kelthane dicofol organochlorine

Tedion tetradifon organochlorine





Fungicide Active Group∗

Dithane mancozeb C

Benlate benomyl A

Cuprox copper oxychloride Y

∗See Appendix B

Herbicide Active Group∗

Gramoxone paraquat L

Arsenic +caustic arsenic arsenical

soda

∗See Appendix A

APPENDIX A: HERBICIDE GROUPS



A Inhibitors of acetyl Aryloxyphenoxy-propionate (’Fops’)

coA carboxylase Cyclohexanedione(’Dims’)

B Inhibitors of Sulfonylurea

acetolactate Imidazolinone

synthase Sulfonamide

C Inhibitors of photosynthesis Triazine

at photosystem II Triazinone

Urea

Nitrile

Benzothiadiazole

Acetamide

Pyridazinone

Phenyl-pyridazine

Uracil

D Inhibitors of tubulin formation Dinitroaniline

Benzoic acid

E Inhibitors of mitosis Thiocarbamate

Carbamate

Organophosphorus

F Inhibitors of carotenoid biosynthesis Nicotinanilide

Triazole

Pyridazinone

G Inhibitors of protoporphyrinogen Diphenyl ether

oxidase Oxadiazole

H Inhibitors of protein synthesis Thiocarbamate

I Disrupters of cell growth Phenoxy

Benzoic acid

Pyridine

J Inhibitors of fat synthesis Alkanoic acid

K Herbicides with Amide

diverse sites of Organoarsenic

action Carbamate

Amino propionate

Benzofuran

Phthalamate

Nitrile

L Inhibitors of photosynthesis at Bipyridyl

photosystem I

M Inhibitors of EPSP synthase Glycine

N Inhibitors of glutamine synthetase Glycine

Table extracted from Infopest CD-Rom March 1999.



APPENDIX B: FUNGICIDE GROUPS



A Benzimidazoles systemic

C DMI systemic

Y Dithiocarbamates protectants

APPENDIX 3: ADDITIONAL NEMATODE INFORMATION



John, this is just some snippets from both mine and Tony’s progression applications. It

really looks at the outcomes from 8 years (1994 to 2002) of R,D & E on burrowing

nematodes in bananas. Will have some better/more accurate figures on current area being

fallowed in a couple of weeks time.



• Regular monitoring of plantations to determine levels of burrowing nematode has

increased from nil in 1995 to 30% of production (3000 ha) in 1998. Nematode

monitoring allows consultants to offer a broader range of services to clients, and allows

producers to assess nematode damage for themselves. Although monitoring by

consultants costs $40 per hectare per year it can reduce nematicide costs by $2500 –

3000 per hectare per year.

• Safer product for consumers, less chemical in the environment, lower production costs

for producers, and safer work conditions for farm workers. Using suitable fallow crops

can eliminate the need for chemicals for 2-3 years after replanting, reducing chemical

applications from 18 to 10 in the life of a typical banana planting. In 2001, 200 hectares

of banana production were fallowed using systems developed through my project work.

• The development of an IPM system for nematodes in bananas means that the north

Queensland banana industry (80% of national production) can reduce chemical

applications by up to 50% over a normal plantation lifecycle.

• These new fallow options eliminate the need for nematicides to be applied for up to 3

years after fallowing, representing a reduction of 8 nematicide applications valued at

$15,000 per hectare.

Attachment 7: Overview of Environmental management systems

in horticulture: Wet Tropics banana industry case study





Queensland Fruit & Vegetable Growers is trialing the use of environmental management

systems (EMS) in the fruit and vegetable industry.



A case study has been established in the banana industry in Far North Queensland’s Wet

Tropics with funds from the Sustainable Industries Division of the Environmental Protection

Agency and support from the QFVG Banana Committee.





Aims of the case study



Trial the use of ISO14001 standard EMSs in horticultural businesses (bananas).



Identify the barriers to adoption of the EMS approach and the support fruit and vegetable

growers might need to implement and maintain an EMS.



Recommend ways forward for the fruit and vegetable industry in general and the banana

industry in particular.





Steps in the case study



Set the scene

A two-day training course on EMS and the ISO14001 standard, run by Australian EMS

specialist, Genevieve Carruthers, has been offered to interested growers. Around four

growers took part in the course in May 2001 and another 18 completed the course in April

2002.



Eco-efficiency studies have been conducted on 5 banana farms and packing sheds to

identify opportunities for improving environmental management. The site assessments

were completed in May 2001 and the final report delivered in December 2001.



Discuss critical environment issues and canvass ideas with key environmental

stakeholders in the Wet Tropics. A meeting was held in Tully in April 2002.



Form a group of banana growers to work on EMS

The group will meet regularly over a number of months to support each other in designing

and implementing their EMSs.



The group will be facilitated by David Hine (QFVG North Queensland Banana Liaison

Officer) and Jane Muller (QFVG Environment Program Manager).



Technical and process expertise will be accessed as needed.



Critical review of implemented EMSs

When the participating growers are satisfied with the EMSs they have implemented, a

review will be sought.



The EMSs will be assessed against the ISO14001 standard using a second party audit

process.

Interested parties within the region will be invited to review the EMSs and provide

feedback.



Evaluation

Evaluation will form a critical part of the case study, and evaluation processes will be built

into each step.



If the case study shows that EMS provides a useful and practical mechanism to drive

improved environmental management on fruit and vegetable farms, a program will be

designed to facilitate widespread adoption of EMS across the industry. Learnings from

the evaluation process will be central to designing effective guidelines and support

programs.



The banana industry will use the case study and evaluation process to develop specific

advice for growers on environmentally sound practices and management processes.





Timeframes



The case study commenced in May 2001 with the eco-efficiency studies and work started

in earnest in April 2002. The EMS design and implementation steps are expected to take

around 6-12 months and results from the case study should be available early in 2003.





What is EMS and ISO14001 anyway?



An EMS is a management tool that a business can use to improve its environmental

performance through a clearly defined process of planning, implementation and review.

Through an EMS, a business sets environmental policies and targets; identifies, prioritises,

manages and monitors environmental impacts; and documents environmental

management activities.



ISO14001 is the international process standard against which any business can have its

EMS audited and certified.





Getting involved & finding out more



If you would like to find out more about the case study or EMS in general or if you would

like to contribute to the case study, please contact QFVG



Jane Muller David Hine

Environment Program Manager NQ Banana Liaison Officer

Queensland Fruit & Vegetable Growers Queensland Fruit & Vegetable Growers

Phone 07 3213 2483 Phone 07 4068 2255

Email jmuller@qfvg.org.au Email dhine@qfvg.org.au

Attachment 8: QFF Draft objectives for a long term strategy for

integrated natural resource management





QFF seeks a partnership with the Queensland Government to develop a long-term

strategy to address integrated natural resource management reform. QFF is seeking to

address six strategic areas of interest:



Œ Integration of natural resource management reforms within policy and planning

frameworks

Œ Revised policy to address farmers’ rights of access to natural resources together with

their obligations regarding the use of these resources.

Œ Development and implementation of programs to progressively improve the science

underpinning reforms.

Œ Development and implementation of regional natural resource management plans

Œ Delivery of a farm based best management practice programs in stages by rural

industry as an alternative to compliance with regulatory requirements.

Œ Development of strategic and farm level strategies to address ongoing development

and use of resources.

Attachment 9: Slides to illustrate the concept of the long term

plan for integrated natural resource management



Related docs
Other docs by yunyi
2.2 Virtueller Adressraum
Views: 3  |  Downloads: 0
HIGHLINE TAPPED TO PRODUCE INAUG
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
Heteroflexibility
Views: 8  |  Downloads: 0
Lynn Jones 5 Grade Lesson Plan F
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
SPONSOR SHIP AND TABLE HOSTING OPPOR TUNITIES
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
NJTinside2
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
The Vegetarian Food Pyramid J
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Anti-Spam Measures for End Users
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Slide 1 - UCL
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!