By 2050 Australian agriculture will be expected share the burden and opportunities that come with feeding an extra two billion people worldwide. We hear it time and time again from industry leaders and politicians about the importance of preserving and expanding our prime agricultural land and assets in anticipation for the predicted growth in our sector. But there is a disconnect between the rhetoric and actions when it comes to protecting high quality agricultural land in regional planning schemes and from developments that do to the exact opposite.
The misalignment of governments’ stated agricultural aspirations and the realities of the continued acquisition of prime cropping and grazing land to meet with the proposed expansion of the state’s gas fields in to new Basins; the planned Department of Defence expansion in north Queensland; and the planning issues associated large-scale solar photovoltaic facilities are just a few.
Examples of approved solar farms on ‘Class A’ agricultural land have included a 340ha solar farm at Clare in the Burdekin; a 5375ha solar farm at Bulli Creek near Millmerran; and a 180ha solar farm near Childers. The fact that the Clare solar is in an Important Agricultural Area and within the Burdekin Haughton Water Supply Scheme, which the Queensland Government has invested significantly in to support and expand agriculture in the region, amplifies this disconnect.
Most recently, the issue of incompatible neighbouring land uses on agricultural productivity has come to the fore through planning associated with large-scale solar photovoltaic facilities. These solar farms are currently assessed by local government under planning schemes, and do not trigger an assessment under the Regional Planning Interests Act 2014, even if in an area of regional interest such as a Priority Agricultural Area or Strategic Cropping Area.
The impact of solar farms on the productivity of the underlying agricultural land is not well understood. However, the long-term nature of solar farm infrastructure – typically 30 years – means the land is converted to a non-agricultural use for the life of the project. There has also been little consideration of the impacts to neighbouring agricultural land including sediment run-off, impacts from the ongoing removal of vegetation and the heat island effect.
Further complicating the issue and underpinning some of the disconnect, different agricultural land classifications are administered by different departments. There continues to be a misunderstanding about the quality of agricultural lands, with even productive grazing country so often perceived as low-value land by critical decision-makers. The ‘piecemeal’ approach to agricultural land classifications needs to be addressed to reduce confusion and realise better planning outcomes.
Increasing development in regional Queensland must remain a priority for governments at all levels though a mix of sectors to increases long term diversity and sustainability of communities and businesses. Large-scale renewable energy projects in regional areas benefit not just those communities, but communities globally as we seek to decarbonise the economy.
QFF is calling for a clear government commitment to sensible land-use planning, where highly productive agricultural areas are excluded from detrimental activities by establishing a framework that accurately assesses and, if necessary, challenges incompatible land-uses. Early identification and zoning of low-quality, non-agricultural land must be prioritised to ensure certainty for projects and land-owners. Only when we find a balance between these competing regional land uses will government be able to realise its agricultural aspirations into the future.
