Agriculture

<html><body>
The price of leasing irrigation water this season continues to rise, causing plenty of headaches for the Mildura local horticultural community, according to the latest Herron Todd White (HTW) rural report. 
"In mid-August, temporary water was trading for around $625 per megalitre which was well above prices we have seen in recent years and reflected concerns that the supply of water would be tight this season," the valuation firm said. 
"The largest supply of leased water generally comes from New South Wales Murray General Security Licence holders and by mid- August it was clear that this class of entitlement was likely to have a zero allocation for the second year in a row."
The report suggests an allocation of even 5% or 10% would have brought a significant volume of water onto the market and eased prices, however that is not going to happen this season.
Over the past two months the position has worsened, with the realisation that Victorian licence holders are now unlikely to get a 100% allocation and the cost of leasing water has risen another 30%, to now be around $800 per megalitre, HTW said.
"It is normal for the Victorian resource manager to open the season on 1 July with a low allocation, which then increases as the extent of winter and spring rainfall becomes evident," it said.
"Inflows to the main storage dams (Dartmouth, Hume and Eildon) have been dismal this season and holders of Victorian Murray licences are now faced with the very real possibility that allocations might only reach 50%. They have gradually crept up to 40% at the time of writing.
"This creates the double whammy of putting many normally secure irrigators into a position of having to lease water, as well as significantly reducing the supply available from licence holders who would otherwise be in a position to lease out all or part of their entitlement."
The Murray Darling Basin Authority publishes a weekly report showing inflows to the Murray River system and the latest chart highlights the current predicament.
"Our region has faced this position before, most recently during the millennium drought, when irrigators endured two consecutive years when allocations for Victorian Murray licences reached 43% and 35% respectively. That event was brutal and forced many irrigators to abandon their plantings and cease farming," the valuation firm said. 
The key difference this time around is that commodity prices are much better than they were in 2007 and 2008 and local irrigators can now justify spending the exorbitant sums required to maintain production from their citrus, vines and almond trees, the report noted. 
"Of course, this only increases demand, which in turn increases the cost and helps explain the current predicament," the report said.
"The only thing which will prevent the cost increasing to $1,000 per megalitre by mid-summer would be above average rainfall in north-eastern Victoria over the coming summer, which at present seems very unlikely.
"On a more positive note, we are seeing some diversification in our farming base with the establishment of a large scale medicinal cannabis facility just outside Mildura."
The development is being undertaken by Cann Group Limited, who has purchased a modern juice processing facility that was originally developed to process carrot juice and started construction of a three-hectare glasshouse facility.
They are well underway in their plan to create a vertically integrated business that can tap into the growing global demand for medicinal cannabis.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Rising irrigation water prices causing headaches for the Mildura horticultural community: HTW rural

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION 
The plight of Australia’s dairy farmers is on the political agenda this week, after One Nation leader Pauline Hanson narrowly failed in her Senate bid for a minimum milk price. But getting fair payment for their goods is far from the only challenge dairy farmers face.
Pressure has been mounting on the industry for the past decade. Existing milk alternatives are growing their market share, helped by a rise in veganism and public concern around animal welfare. The agriculture sector is under pressure to reduce its contribution to climate change, and technology advances mean milk may one day be produced without cows at all.
All this has been compounded by devastating and prolonged drought. So here’s the full story of the hurdles farmers face, now and in the future, to get milk into your fridge.
Fluctuating farm gate price
The rate at which processors pay farmers for milk is known as the <a href="https://www.dairyaustralia.com.au/industry/prices/farmgate-milk-price" target="_blank">farm gate price</a>. The prices are not regulated and are set by market forces.
In 2016 <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/FlagPost/2016/June/Dairy_industry_developments" target="_blank">the milk price crashed</a> when Australia’s two largest dairy processors, Murray Goulburn and Fonterra, lowered the price they would pay from about 48 cents a litre to as low as 40 cents.
This dramatically cut the incomes of milk suppliers. The number of dairy farmers in Australia fell by 600, or 9% <a href="https://www.dairyaustralia.com.au/industry/farm-facts/cows-and-farms" target="_blank">over four years</a>. This exit has been <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/food/2019/feb/24/drought-and-low-milk-prices-push-dairy-farmers-to-the-brink" target="_blank">exacerbated by drought</a>.
Since then, the farm gate milk price has increased and in 2019–20 is <a href="http://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/research-topics/agricultural-commodities/sep-2019/dairy" target="_blank">expected to be 51 cents per litre</a>, due to a weaker Australian dollar and demand from export markets. But forecast global prices for butter, cheese and whole milk powder this financial year remain below that of previous years.
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2019/11/13/dairy%20milk.jpg" alt="">
Methane, and milk alternatives
Methane and other livestock emissions <a href="http://www.agriculture.gov.au/ag-farm-food/climatechange/australias-farming-future/livestock-emissions" target="_blank">comprise about 10%</a> of Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions.
As the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change made clear in its <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl-report-download-page/" target="_blank">land use report in August</a>, changes must be made across the food production chain if the world is to keep global warming below the critical 1.5℃ threshold. For beef and dairy livestock, this means changes such as land and manure management, higher-quality feed and genetic improvements. Meeting this challenge cost-effectively, while improving productivity, is no small task.
Technology may help in curbing greenhouse gas emissions from cows, but it also threatens to replace the dairy industry altogether. Advances in biotech may enable liquid analogous to milk to be <a href="https://theconversation.com/lab-grown-dairy-the-next-food-frontier-117963" target="_blank">produced through bioculture systems</a>, <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/10/141022-lab-grown-milk-biotechnology-gmo-food-climate/" target="_blank">without a cow in sight</a>.
Elsewhere, the rise of plant-based alternatives derived from soybeans, almonds, oats and other sources threatens traditional milk products. This can partly be attributed to increasing numbers of people adopting a vegan diet. 
Taking calves away from cows
For a mammal to produce milk, it must usually become pregnant and produce offspring. Female calves generally go into a farm’s pool of replacement animals, while male dairy calves are sold.
Pure-breed male dairy calves do not naturally lay down a lot of muscle and so do not generally make good beef livestock. Many are sent to the abattoir for slaughter, typically between 5 and 30 days of age. This practice has prompted welfare concerns and means the industry must carefully manage the handling and transport of vulnerable young calves.
Potential solutions include artificial insemination of cows using only semen that will produce female calves. The use of this technology is limited because it reduces conception rates.
There is also growing public concern about the separation of cows and calves not sent to the abbatoir. The calves are typically taken within the first 12-24 hours and reared together in a shed, where they are fed milk or milk replacer. This is thought to maximise the amount of saleable milk and minimise disease transfer from cow to calf, <a href="https://www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/what-we-do/endemic-disease/johnes-disease/jd-and-dairy-cattle/three-step-calf-rearing-plan/" target="_blank">particularly Johne’s Disease</a>. However, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030219304175" target="_blank">recent research</a> has found <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030219304369" target="_blank">little evidence</a> to support these practices.
<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030219304369" target="_blank">Research has shown</a> that calf-cow separation in the first day of life causes lower distress than abrupt separation at a few weeks of age or older, when the bond is stronger. This is not to say that early separation is not a concern. Rather, in the face of consumer demands for certain ethical standards, simple fixes may be hard to implement.
The message for consumers
Challenges to the dairy industry will take time and effort to address. Some, such as drought, are out of farmers’ control. Dry conditions and high cost of water, fodder and electricity have <a href="http://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/research-topics/agricultural-commodities/jun-2019/dairy" target="_blank">forced farmers to cull less productive dairy cows</a>, leading to a decline in production.
The pressures, and associated debt, create intense stress for farmers, increase family tensions, and have negative flow-on effects throughout rural communities.
Putting aside the political push for a regulated milk price, the key message for dairy consumers is clear. If we want our milk produced in a certain way, we must pay a fair market-based price to cover the costs to farmers of fulfilling our wants.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/124290/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Andrew Fisher, Professor of Cattle &amp; Sheep Production Medicine, University of Melbourne.
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-milk-the-whole-milk-and-nothing-but-the-milk-the-story-behind-our-dairy-woes-124290" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

The milk, the whole milk and nothing but the milk: the story behind our dairy woes

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Australia has made a global commitment to “sustainable agriculture”, an endeavour seen as increasingly crucial to ending world poverty, halting biodiversity loss, and combating climate change.
A recent report from the UN found land use – including food production – is responsible for around <a href="https://theconversation.com/un-climate-change-report-land-clearing-and-farming-contribute-a-third-of-the-worlds-greenhouse-gases-121551" target="_blank">one-third of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions</a>.
Unfortunately, Australia has something of a sustainable agriculture policy vacuum, after years of a fragmented, stop-start approach.
To honour our international obligations and respond to growing sustainability markets, Australia urgently needs a contemporary definition of sustainable agriculture, including agreed on-farm metrics.
Good policy abandoned
Australia spent more than a decade developing promising policies that defined sustainable agriculture with broad indicators for measuring progress.
In 1997 Australia passed <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/cth/consol_act/nhtoaa1997371/" target="_blank">federal legislation</a> defining “sustainable agriculture” as:
"Agricultural practices and systems that maintain or improve […] the economic viability of agricultural production; the social viability and well-being of rural communities; […] biodiversity; the natural resource base [and] ecosystems that are influenced by agricultural activities."
The following year, the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Resource Management published a <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/8552310?selectedversion=NBD44018881" target="_blank">broad set indicators</a>.
During the early 2000s a <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/3572009" target="_blank">national framework</a> of Environmental Management Systems was developed, and <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/5717700" target="_blank">national pilots</a> were conducted across Australia up until 2006.
Between <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4624.0Main+Features12004-05?OpenDocument" target="_blank">2004</a> and <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/4620.0" target="_blank">2006</a> the Australian Bureau of Statistics recorded farmers’ investment in natural resource management. However these surveys have not been replicated in more than a decade.
In 2005, the states and territories formed a joint working group to create a national approach to property management systems. This group met with industry representatives and regional land managers throughout 2006, and in 2007 the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry planned a pathway for a national policy. There was much hope and enthusiasm it would soon become a reality.
However, since 2008 there has been no progress and little, if any, explanation for why this important sustainable agriculture policy initiative was shelved.
Current policy vacuum
It is concerning that Australia’s first progress report on implementing the <a href="https://dfat.gov.au/aid/topics/development-issues/2030-agenda/Documents/sdg-voluntary-national-review.pdf" target="_blank">sustainable development goals</a> contains the words “sustainable agriculture” only once in 130 pages, as part of the heading for the goal of ending hunger.
The definition arrived at in 1997 is far too broad and simplistic, and can’t be used at the farm level.
When contacted for comment, a spokesperson for the Department of Agriculture reiterated their commitment to improving sustainable food production, and said:
"Australia is involved in global discussions about how best to measure sustainable agriculture performance […] However a globally agreed methodology has not been set for [agricultural sustainability]."
Australia’s only substantial sustainable agriculture policy mechanism at the moment appears to be grants available through the <a href="http://www.nrm.gov.au/" target="_blank">National Landcare Program</a>. This is reiterated by searching through key Coalition <a href="https://www.liberal.org.au/our-plan" target="_blank">policy documents</a> and the recent budget.
The budget allocation to the overall National Landcare Program is around A$1 billion from 2017 to 2023. New programs announced in the 2019 budget that build on this commitment include:
<ul>
<li>A$100 million over four years for the <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/environment-restoration-fund" target="_blank">environment restoration fund</a>,</li>
<li>A$34 million over four years for a new biodiversity stewardship program,</li>
<li>A$28.3 million for a new communities environment program for 2019-20, and</li>
<li>A$2 billion over 15 years for the <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/government/climate-solutions-fund" target="_blank">climate solutions fund</a>.</li>
</ul>
These programs combined equate to some A$354 million per year. But a coherent sustainable agriculture policy cannot be delivered through grants alone.
And even though these grants are substantial, past ABS surveys found that farmers invest at least A$3 billion a year in natural resource management. The Indigenous on-country contribution is currently unknown, but likely to be substantial.
Caring for country fund
Around 10% of Australia’s population lives in rural or remote areas. These comparatively small communities – largely farmers and Indigenous land managers – currently steward most of the country.
A review released in late July on how <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/information-for/farmers/agriculture-review" target="_blank">conservation laws affect the agriculture sector</a> has recommended the federal government create a A$1 billion fund for farmers who deliver environment benefits from their land.
This mirrors calls from farmers for an <a href="https://mk0australianfa1qtvu.kinstacdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/NFF_2019-Federal-Election-Platform_2_Growing-Sustainably.pdf" target="_blank">ecosystem services fund</a>.
If our <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/Media-centre/Media-releases/2016-17-Tax-Stats-released/" target="_blank">13.9 million</a> taxpayers contributed some A$60 each per year in a “caring for country” levy, urban and rural Australians could more fairly share the costs – as well as the advantages – of sustainable land management.
We could start with revisiting the good work undertaken more than a decade ago in developing a national framework for property management systems.
Underpinning such a system, we need an independent and trusted source of metrics for farmers, land managers and agricultural industries. To this end, the University of New England is <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/property-observer" target="_blank">establishing a research hub</a> to help develop just such a harmonised approach.
There are many good news stories of sustainable agriculture around Australia, however our ongoing biodiversity crisis requires transformative policy change and federal leadership.
One bold first step would be addressing the current paradox of sustainable agriculture in Australia.

<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/120597/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">

Jacqueline Williams, Senior Research Fellow &amp; Lecturer, School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England.
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-urgently-needs-real-sustainable-agriculture-policy-120597" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Australia urgently needs real sustainable agriculture policy

<html><body>
Agri-logistics is emerging as a growth sector of the Australian real estate market, with more than $1.5 billion worth of assets changing hands over the past two years. 
CBRE Director of Agri-Logistics, Stephen Caffery, said the sector was attracting greater institutional investment, underpinned by the strength of Australia’s industrial, logistics and agricultural markets.  
“On the back of a buoyant industrial &amp; logistics sector, recent free trade agreements, Asia’s investment appetite and capacity for Australia’s agriculture industry to produce high value food and fibre products, there has been a sharp upturn in investment in the sector,” Caffery said.
“Agri-logistics has all the ingredients to become the standout investment class in Australia over the next decade. The sector is the backbone that supports Australia’s $60 billion farm gate production industry each year.
“All of Australia’s agricultural products, at some point, will need to be processed, value-added, stored and transported for either domestic consumption or export markets.
“Investing in these supply chains represents an enormous opportunity for investors looking for long term secure cashflows in assets that are defensive in economic downturns.” 
Highlighting the increased investment in the sector, CBRE is marketing two high quality food manufacturing facilities located in one of Melbourne’s premium South Eastern locations, Braeside.  
The properties located at 91-97 Woodlands Drive (pictured above) and 223-225 Governor Road (pictured below) provide a lettable area of 15,450 square metres.
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2019/6/18/Flavour%20Makers%20_%20223-225%20Governor%20Road.jpg" alt="">
They are leased to leading food developer and manufacturer Flavour Makers for 12 years, generating a triple net income of $1,830,000 per annum (with fixed annual increases of 3.0%).  
CBRE’s Ben Hegerty said the Flavour Makers facilities offered a complete end-to-end food development and manufacturing solution with state-of-the-art dry blending facility, liquid processing plant and a meals plant capable of processing both liquid and solid ingredients.
“These facilities are regulatory approved and extensively audited by both domestic and international customers,” Hegerty said. 
“Flavour Makers is experiencing a period of sustained growth and is investing both in increasing existing capability and capacity, as well as investing in new food technologies.
“As a result, they provide a high degree of underlying security for long term, passive investments outside core industrial locations.”
This follows several major transactions in the sector over the past two years including Charter Hall’s $207 million acquisition of the Ingham’s portfolio, comprising 27 poultry supply chain assets in December 2019, and Qualitas’ $388 million sale and leaseback of Allied Pinnacle’s portfolio of 10 grain handling and food processing facilities in March 2018. 
Caffery said agri-logistics assets located outside of traditional industrial heartlands would continue to present attractive opportunities for investors. 
“Agri-logistics assets that are strategically located to maximise supply chain efficiencies represent an outstanding opportunity for investors.
“Taking beef feedlots for example, to operate an efficient supply chain, it makes economical sense to construct feedlots close to reliable grain growing regions, rather than processing facilities to reduce transport costs.”
</body></html>

Agri-logistics emerging as Australia’s next property growth sector

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
If you’ve eaten fresh strawberries recently, they likely came from one of Australia’s city foodbowls. Around <a href="https://minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au/bitstream/handle/11343/121776/Melbourne%27s%20Food%20Future%20planning%20a%20resilient%20city%20food%20bowl%20%287.1mb%29.pdf?sequence=1&amp;isAllowed=y" target="_blank">40% of the nation’s strawberries are produced on Melbourne’s fringe and 28% on Brisbane’s fringe</a>. All of Australia’s state capitals have city foodbowls that are an important source of fresh food, particularly fruit and vegetables.
These foodbowls also <a href="https://theconversation.com/when-climate-change-hits-our-food-supply-city-foodbowls-could-come-to-the-rescue-51406" target="_blank">increase the resilience to pressures on city food supplies from climate change</a>, particularly drought. But Australia’s cities are growing rapidly and their foodbowls are under threat as farmland gives way to housing.
The <a href="https://research.unimelb.edu.au/foodprint-melbourne" target="_blank">Foodprint Melbourne research project</a> today released its <a href="https://research.unimelb.edu.au/foodprint-melbourne/publications/roadmap-resilient-sustainable-melbourne-foodbowl" target="_blank">final report</a> outlining a “roadmap” of recommended actions for protecting and investing in Melbourne’s foodbowl. And there are signs that state governments are waking up to the threat to fresh food supplies.
In 2017, the South Australian government took action to preserve Adelaide’s foodbowl. Legislated <a href="https://www.saplanningportal.sa.gov.au/planning_reforms/new_planning_tools/environment_and_food_production_areas" target="_blank">Environment and Food Production Areas</a> now protect significant areas of farmland on the city fringe from urban development. The Queensland Farmers Federation has <a href="https://www.queenslandcountrylife.com.au/story/5815518/protecting-brisbanes-foodbowl/" target="_blank">called for the Queensland government to take similar action</a> to protect Brisbane’s foodbowl.
In Victoria, the government recently began <a href="https://engage.vic.gov.au/protecting-melbournes-ag-land" target="_blank">public consultation on protecting Melbourne’s farmland</a>. The government has committed to <a href="https://www.danandrews.com.au/policies/protecting-melbournes-green-wedges-from-skyscraper-guy" target="_blank">permanently protect “strategic agricultural land”</a> on the city fringe.
This is an important step in preserving Melbourne’s foodbowl. Existing measures to protect this farmland – including the city’s <a href="https://vpa.vic.gov.au/greenfield/more-information/urban-growth-boundary-key-facts/" target="_blank">urban growth boundary</a> and “<a href="https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/policy-and-strategy/green-wedges" target="_blank">green wedges</a>” – have not prevented ongoing loss of farmland. Stronger measures are clearly needed.
What actions does the roadmap present?
Collaboration with stakeholders from local and state government, industry, civil society groups and farmers has informed the roadmap of actions to protect Melbourne’s foodbowl.
The report recommends permanently fixing the city’s <a href="https://vpa.vic.gov.au/greenfield/more-information/urban-growth-boundary-key-facts/" target="_blank">urban growth boundary</a> and introducing a “food production zone”. This could reduce speculative investment in farmland at risk of development. These measures would also create confidence to invest in farms and infrastructure in the foodbowl.
Protecting farmland is a critical first step in securing Australia’s city foodbowls, but this alone will not be enough.
If Australia’s city foodbowls are to continue to feed cities, farmland protection must be accompanied by other strategies. These would promote farm viability, water access, sustainable farming and <a href="https://research.unimelb.edu.au/foodprint-melbourne/publications/infographic-circular-food-systems-for-a-resilient-melbourne-foodbowl" target="_blank">recycling of nutrients essential to food production</a> (like phosphorous and nitrogen).
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265711/original/file-20190325-36264-1ctwssa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265711/original/file-20190325-36264-1ctwssa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Roadmap for a resilient and sustainable Melbourne foodbowl. Foodprint Melbourne
<a href="https://theconversation.com/feeding-cities-in-the-21st-century-why-urban-fringe-farming-is-vital-for-food-resilience-106162" target="_blank">Promoting the viability of farming</a> in city foodbowls and ensuring farmers have access to water are just as important as protecting farmland.
Foodbowls can recycle city waste
City foodbowls have access to large volumes of city wastewater and organic waste. This can increase these farms’ resilience to growing <a href="https://theconversation.com/our-food-system-is-at-risk-of-crossing-environmental-limits-heres-how-to-ease-the-pressure-104715" target="_blank">environmental pressures on food production</a>. City foodbowls offer opportunities to use natural resources more efficiently by creating <a href="https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/Cities-and-Circular-Economy-for-Food_Exec-Sum_240119.pdf" target="_blank">circular food systems</a> that “close the loop” on valuable resources from city waste by returning these to the soil.
City wastewater, such as <a href="https://theconversation.com/it-takes-a-lot-of-water-to-feed-us-but-recycled-water-could-help-55502" target="_blank">recycled water from water treatment plants</a> and treated stormwater, can provide a relatively secure source of water for food production in a <a href="http://www.bom.gov.au/state-of-the-climate/State-of-the-Climate-2018.pdf">drying climate</a>.
Composts and <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4614-5001-6_15" target="_blank">biofertilisers</a> made from city organic waste can improve soils on farm. This is a more sustainable alternative to conventional fertilisers based on non-renewable resources (like <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12571-015-0442-0" target="_blank">phosphate rock</a>).
Learning from other cities
Australia’s cities need to have flexible responses to increase the resilience of their food systems. This requires city planners to take a precautionary approach now to protecting their foodbowls. International leaders in protecting city fringe food production, <a href="https://minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au/bitstream/handle/11343/214114/Foodprint%20Melbourne%20Food%20for%20Thought%20July%202018.pdf?sequence=1&amp;isAllowed=y" target="_blank">such as Toronto and Vancouver in Canada</a>, offer valuable lessons in how to achieve this.
<a href="https://research.unimelb.edu.au/foodprint-melbourne/publications/roadmap-resilient-sustainable-melbourne-foodbowl">Our report</a> recommends that Melbourne follow Vancouver in developing an <a href="http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/regional-planning/PlanningPublications/RegionalFoodSystemStrategy.pdf" target="_blank">integrated food systems planning strategy</a>. This will support collaboration between government departments and other stakeholders in promoting farm viability, water access, nutrient recycling and sustainable farming in the city’s foodbowl.
The report also recommends that local governments on Melbourne’s fringe should form an alliance to develop a common vision and actions to strengthen the city’s foodbowl – as the <a href="http://www.foodandfarming.ca/about/" target="_blank">Golden Horseshoe Food and Farming Alliance</a> has done in Toronto. And it emphasises the importance of actively promoting city foodbowls to the public. The <a href="https://www.greenbelt.ca/foundation" target="_blank">Friends of the Greenbelt Foundation</a> in Ontario is a good example of this.
If Australia’s city foodbowls are to keep producing fresh local food for current and future generations, the public needs to be more aware of city fringe farmers’ role in feeding cities.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/114085/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Rachel Carey, Lecturer in Food Systems, University of Melbourne
Jennifer Sheridan, Researcher in sustainable food systems, University of Melbourne
Kirsten Larsen, Food Systems Research and Partnerships, University of Melbourne
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/to-protect-fresh-food-supplies-here-are-the-key-steps-to-secure-city-foodbowls-114085" target="_blank">original article</a>.
Main photo: Apple orchards are among the farmland that has been lost to urban growth. Matthew Carey/Foodprint Melbourne, <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY-NC-SA</a>
</body></html>

To protect fresh food supplies, here are the key steps to secure city foodbowls

<html><body>
Progress in agricultural technology is gathering pace, attracting investment from sources both inside and outside the industry, according to Savills.
Savills have listed seven innovations that will enable reduced use of resources (from labour to natural resources), better decision-making based on reliable data and improved transparency and traceability within the supply chain. 
1. Robotics and drones
Practical applications for drones are expanding fast. Armed with cameras, they are used to round up livestock, carry out stock and crop checks, apply nutrients and even take crop samples. Using drones for tasks such as these means using smaller machines, which reduces the possibility of damaging natural resources.
2. Sensors
Sensors can be used for myriad of tasks including monitoring temperature, nutrients, moisture, irrigation, environment composition, crop yields and enabling electronic identification (EID) to name but a few – and all in real-time, too. Soil management, crop storage, livestock identification and the supply chain can all benefit from the use of sensors.
3. SMART irrigation
Sustainable, Managed, Accountable, Responsible and Trusted (SMART) irrigation is focused on the efficient use of water and energy to apply irrigation, both for field and intensive cropping systems.
4. Next-generation farms
Vertical and indoor farming systems, which grow food without using soil or sunlight, are popping up in all sorts of locations from vast warehouses in the USA to disused underground stations in the UK. An opportunity to use SMART irrigation, these farming systems are said to use 95% less water to produce the same output and require just 1% of the land used for conventional farming.
5. Big data
The use of data analytics and predictive modelling can enable all parts of the food chain – from field to fork – to make decisions based on reliable data.
6. Artificial intelligence (AI)
Automating basic customer service tasks is just one example of how AI (intelligence demonstrated by machines) can be used to improve customer/user experience and satisfaction.
7. Blockchain
A shared digital record, which everyone can inspect but no single user controls, blockchain is already being used to log cattle ID. Blockchain makes it possible to record all aspects of an animal’s journey through the supply chain, providing complete traceability for the industry and consumers. The Foods Standards Agency has successfully completed a blockchain pilot, using the technology to ensure compliance in a cattle slaughterhouse.
 
</body></html>

The seven tech trends reshaping rural property: Savills

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/78100/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Australians were once world champion beef-eaters but now you’re much more likely to find chicken than steak on Australian dinner tables.
Total meat consumption per capita in Australia has been stable since the 1960s, at around 110 kilograms per person per year.
But the type of meat consumed has changed significantly, with chicken and pork both now far outstripping beef, mutton and lamb, according to historical data from researchers Wong et al and more recent data from the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (ABARES).
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/06/16/Screen%20Shot%202017-06-16%20at%201.32.34%20PM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/06/16/Screen%20Shot%202017-06-16%20at%201.32.34%20PM.png" alt="">
Source: <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264999315000656" target="_blank">Wong et al and ABARES</a> 
(The apparent spike in beef consumption in the late 1970s is linked to Australia’s beef export trade crash and much of this spike was thought to have gone to pet food and by-products rather than the dinner table).
Whereas chicken was once a rare meal, eaten on special occasions, today the Australian chicken industry produces around 600 million chickens a year. Most are consumed domestically.
The per-capita annual consumption of chicken meat in Australia increased ten-fold from 4.6 kilograms per person in 1965 to 47 kilograms in 2016. The industry projects growth to 49.2 kilograms a person by 2019–20.
From the 1960s on, public health messages steered people away from red meats. There was also a rapid proliferation of fast food franchises selling chicken - notably the entry of Kentucky Fried Chicken in 1969.
Similarly, pork consumption has been bolstered by re-marketing. Once considered a red meat, pork was reinvented as “the other white meat” through a marketing campaign categorising pork as lighter and healthier, alongside chicken (and due to changes in breeding, pork meat really has lightened in colour over recent decades). While not as steep an increase as chicken, pork consumption in Australia has nearly tripled since the 1980s.
However, a major driver of these changes has been price, linked to massive changes in production.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/06/16/Screen%20Shot%202017-06-16%20at%201.34.41%20PM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/06/16/Screen%20Shot%202017-06-16%20at%201.34.41%20PM.png" alt="">
Source: <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/6401.0Mar%202017?OpenDocument" target="_blank">ABS CPI TABLE 9. CPI: Group, Sub-group and Expenditure Class, Index Numbers by Capital City</a>
After adjusting for inflation, chicken per kilo costs less than a third of its price than it did in the early 1970s, while real prices for other meats have been comparatively static. The Australian Chicken Meat Federation, which represents chicken producers, reports that over the five years to 2014–15, chicken meat was on average 50% cheaper than pork, 59% cheaper than lamb and 65% cheaper than beef.
Since the 1960s, most Australian chicken and pork production has become rapidly industrialised and automated in large intensive indoors operations. Piggeries and broiler farms have typically become specialised, intensified, high technology factory farm complexes. Intensification of chicken production has increased efficiency, in turn steadily decreasing the retail price of chicken. Around 70% of chicken meat is supplied by two privately owned processing companies, the Australian Chicken Meat Federation says.
Chicken farms in Australia have increased markedly in size and intensity. Our research on planning disputes shows farms of the 1970s housed around 10,000 chickens. Now, while nearly 600 million broiler chickens were slaughtered in Australia in 2014-15, there were only around 750 broiler farms, a decline from the 1990s. The average chicken farm now has nearly 120,000 chickens at any one time and some run into millions. The number of pork farms has also dropped, consolidating into larger operations.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/06/16/Screen%20Shot%202017-06-16%20at%201.36.11%20PM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/06/16/Screen%20Shot%202017-06-16%20at%201.36.11%20PM.png" alt="">
Global meat consumption continues to rise rapidly as more countries – notably China – increase their consumption of meat and dairy products. Australia imports very little meat due to strict quarantine, but is a major exporter of beef, sheep and goats.
Sheep and cattle farms are more extensive, more common, and produce fewer animals than pork or chicken farms. There were over 66,000 cattle farms and around 39,000 sheep farms in Australia in 2015-16. Cattle farm numbers and the overall cattle herd declined slightly, although this belies the formation of two extremes: at one end large and export-focussed grazing, while other areas have seen a proliferation of sub-commercial, small-scale, scattered “hobby” grazing. The national sheep flock also declined, and is transitioning away from wool production to meat and dual-purpose breeds.
These transitions in production and consumption of meat result in some rural and semi-rural landscapes shifting to expansive, remotely-managed holdings in areas with declining population. Closer to cities, hobby farmers and amenity migrants sit in often uneasy proximity to industrial scale production.
As other countries take up Australia’s traditional fondness for meat, global as well as domestic forces continue to change the nature of farming and Australian rural landscapes. That, in turn, also affects the price and type of meat Australians consume.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/elizabeth-taylor-97922" target="_blank">Elizabeth Taylor </a>is Vice Chancellor's Post-Doctoral Research Fellow, RMIT University.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/andrew-butt-229215" target="_blank">Andrew Butt </a>is <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/andrew-butt-229215" target="_blank"></a>Senior Lecturer in Community Planning and Development, La Trobe University.
Both are authors for The Conversation.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Three charts on Australia's declining taste for beef and growing appetite for chicken

<html><body>
From learning a wide range of agri-sector business practices to practical experience on-farm, a previous recipient of the Agribusiness Australia Tertiary Education Scholarship is amazed at the opportunities that it has provided.
Molly Ashby, who is in half way through her Degree in Veterinary Science at Charles Sturt University, is grateful to Agribusiness Australia for assisting her financially over the last three years.
She said it has allowed her to focus on her studies and to maximise other opportunities, like travelling further abroad to learn about the sector that she is so passionate about.
“I have been able to get a fantastic insight into the agri-sector from a range of perspectives. I’ve spent a total of 12 weeks working in different businesses (beef, chicken, pig, sheep and dairy) - learning management practices and marketing as well as practical experience on-farm.
“It’s great to first learn the theory in class and then get out to really experience and appreciate it,” Molly said.
Outside of her Uni studies, Molly is also maximising her opportunities at University like working with a like-minded team, setting up a mental health based program for Veterinary students.
Not one to stand still, Molly is also on the organising committee for the 2018 Australian Veterinary Association student conference.
Each year Agribusiness Australia encourages final year high school students, like Molly to undertake studies in agriculture to ensure that the sector, worth more than $500 billion to the Australian economy, continues to prosper.
Agribusiness Australia, Chief Executive Officer, Tim Burrow, said with Agribusiness being such a critical pillar of the national’s economy it was a privilege as an association to support a student into the exciting sector.
Each year a recipient is selected from a different State or Territory, with the successful recipient receiving $1000 per year for three consecutive years of study, with continuous enrolment in a university related degree.
This year, the scholarship which opens in May, will be available to eligible students based in Western Australia.
Further information will be posted on Agribusiness Australia’s <a href="https://www.agribusiness.asn.au/" target="_blank">website</a>. 
</body></html>

Scholarship opportunities in the agri-sector

<html><body>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2016/10/14/leaderboard-domacom.gif" alt="">
Rural land used for agriculture purposes is a sub-class of property just as residential, leisure, commercial, industrial and retail are all sub-classes.
Agriculture broadly includes livestock, cropping and food production.
Unfortunately, rural property has been left behind the broader property asset classes, but should it be considered by investors?
The different asset classes that make up our economy perform at different stages according to geopolitical influences, that is, what is happening on the world stage of politics, power, and foreign policy, and thus affecting supply and demand for the world’s commodities.
Often investors work to an asset allocation strategy involving equities, property, fixed interest and cash, across both domestic and global markets, drilling down to sub-classes and finally to specific assets within those sub-classes.
Domacom offers fractional property investment.
You can download the <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2016/12/20/domacom/agriculture_ebook_Domacomv.pdf" target="_blank">eBook here</a>.
</body></html>

po-LsXgBTHBmX

New smart ways to invest in agriculture: DomaCom

<html><body>
Australia’s $6.5 billion sheep industry needs 22 million more sheep just to maintain its current share of global production, according to an agricultural research paper released by ANZ today.
The paper, titled The Sheep’s Back, paints a positive picture for sheep farming but reveals improved productivity gains – supported by the growth of the national flock number from its near record low – are critical to realising the 21 percent increase in global demand for meat and nine per cent rise for wool by 2040.
ANZ Head of Agribusiness Mark Bennett said economic growth in developing nations and consumption patterns give rise to optimism for sheep farming, with forecasts showing the total value of sheep meat produced could increase by 30 percent by 2040.
“But in order to be competitive and take advantage of this growth opportunity, sheep farmers will need to improve productivity through increased farm size, flock size and better on-farm processes," he said.
"Farm management efficiencies include better land use, improved lambing and weaning rates, reduced fattening times and more intensive management."
The Sheep’s back - key findings:
 Global demand for sheep meat could increase by 2.8 million cwt, or 21%, by 2040.  In comparison, global demand for beef is forecast to rise by 22 million cwt (33 percent), 25.6 million cwt (23 percent) for pork and 15.4 million cwt (15 percent) for poultry.  If current trends continue, the total value of sheep meat produced globally will increase by 30 percent by 2040 - compared to beef 34 percent, pork 27.5 percent for and chicken 9.8%.
Demand will grow most strongly in Asia (including the Middle East) and Africa, but will be relatively subdued in developed economies in Europe and America.
Growth in demand for wool is not likely to be as significant, but global demand is still expected to increase by 8.8 percent.
This is substantially less than increases in demand for cotton and synthetics. Regional demand for raw wool for processing is also likely to be concentrated in Asia and weakening in America and Europe.
Sheep farming in Australia is a low cost, low volatility and relatively high return on capital industry. Prices for wool and sheep meat are also less exposed to global markets than Australia’s other main agricultural exports.
The paper suggests that while demand for lamb and mutton is not expected to grow at the same volume and value as beef, the percentage growth in value of global demand for sheep meat is expected to outstrip both pork and poultry.
“The modelling in the report shows greater demand coming from Asia, the Middle East and Africa. Conversely, we’re expecting demand in other markets like America and Europe to cool,” Mr Bennett said.
Asia will also continue to be the number one destination for Australian wool, and with China transitioning towards a service-based economy it’s expected Vietnam and Indonesia will increase their processing capabilities.
“Overall demand for wool is only expected to increase slightly, but the value of global demand could also increase by as much as $1 billion by 2040,” Mr Bennett said. The report also highlights the role sheep production can play in risk management for mixed farm operations. Almost 30 per cent of farmers across the nation farm sheep, primarily as part of a mixed farming operation.
Mr Bennett says sheep farming is a low cost and low volatility enterprise, which is less exposed to an international price than cropping, beef or dairy.
“While we’re unlikely to reach the flock numbers and outputs of the 1970s, sheep and wool production still accounts for approximately 11 per cent of Australia’s agricultural production and 14 percent of agricultural exports. Therefore the opportunity for expansion is there for sheep farmers with a focus on efficiencies, innovation and value-adding.”
The report concludes that the sheep industry will continue to play an important role in the mix of Australian agriculture. “While we may not return to ‘riding on the sheep’s back’, Australia should take confidence from these future demand forecasts. The case for greater investment in the industry is strong,” Mr Bennett said. To download the report <a href="https://anz.co/A19L304mPxa" target="_blank">click here</a>. 
</body></html>

Agriculture

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Agriculture

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News