Chapter 7 Agricultural Priority Scenario Cattle Sunrise I know of no pursuit in which more real and important services can be rendered to any country than by improving its agriculture George Washington ~ 196 ~ CHAPTER 7 AGRICULTURAL PRIORITY SCENARIO The previous scenarios have both had a considerable impact upon agricultural land uses throughout the region. Large areas of sugar cane became urbanised in the minimal constraints scenarios. Orchards were similarly affected when environmental constraints were imposed. A proportionally large loss of area available to a primary industry on a local scale, such as seen in these scenarios, has the capacity to adversely affect local employment, family incomes and community cohesion as well as reduce the viability of some inter-dependent industries and services. The Agricultural Priority scenario presented in this chapter builds upon the minimal constraints scenario, encompassing the restrictions to urban development that were introduced in Chapter 5. In addition this scenario focuses on a landscape design aimed at sustaining specific areas that are recognised as having a high value for agricultural production or have an established significance for agricultural purposes at a state or regional level. 7.1 ORCHARDS Since the 1980‟s the area around Lismore through to Ballina and Byron Bay has seen large areas of hillsides, previously used for grazing pasture, reallocated to macadamia and avocado orchards. In the previous ~ 197 ~ scenarios it was apparent that the growth of these orchard industries will compete for space directly with urban development. Whilst orchards produce high value products, market economies are likely to favour conversion to residential development (Murphy 2002). For the agricultural priority scenarios, the growth of orchards is projected from the trends of 1980-2004 and given priority over urban development by removing potential future orchard areas from potential urbanisation. 7.1.1 ORCHARD EXPANSION CALCULATIONS Whilst the growth of orchards within the region has been rapid and now incorporates a large area, it is expected that the future growth of this industry will be at a considerably slower rate than what has previously transpired (DIPNR 2007). Calculating projections for this growth was completed in a similar method to population growth (Chapter 4) by producing a linear trend of the historical (1980-2004) values up to the year 2030. As the rate of growth was expected to decrease over time, the value of for each time period was produced by adding 50% of the projected growth to the previous decades value, expressed in the equation: Vt = Vt-1 + (0.5 * Vt(trend)) ~ 198 ~ Where Vt is the value at that time period, Vt-1 the value of the previous time period and Vt(trend) the value of the trend function for that time period. As orchards are only present in zones 4 and 5, calculations were only made for this area and are shown in Table 7.1. TABLE 7.1: GROWTH OF ORCHARDS (25 X 25M CELLS) Orchards 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 zone 4 0 28241 65685 81339 97761 114182 zone 5 0 25065 49422 61837 74192 86548 7.1.2 BUILDABLE AREA For the placement algorithm, areas in zone 4 and 5 that have the potential for development of orchards are the forest, coastal complex, pasture and sugar cane classes of the 2004 LULC map. Removal of other classes produced the buildable area shown in Figure 7.1 ~ 199 ~ FIGURE 7.1: BUILDABLE AREA FOR GROWTH OF ORCHARDS ~ 200 ~ 7.1.3 RESULTS Placement of new orchards and merging them into the 2004 LULC produced the map shown as Figure 7.2 and land use changes tabulated in Table 7.2. FIGURE 7.2: PROJECTED ORCHARDS MERGED WITH LULC 2004 ~ 201 ~ TABLE 7.2: LAND USE CHANGE FOR PROJECTED ORCHARDS Land Use / Population 2004 Orchards Total ha Total (Ha) Change (ha) % change Coastal Complex 67563 67556 -6 0.01% Forests 1205414 1202063 -3352 0.28% Pasture/Crops 713725 704737 -8988 1.26% Orchards 8730 21120 12390 141.94% Sugar Cane 56069 56025 -44 0.08% Overall, the orchard expansion scenario produced a 141.94% growth in the area of orchards LULC class. This predominately occurred through the conversion of pasture and crops. 7.2 CONSTRAINTS The new orchards have been removed from potential urban development. Additionally spatial data was supplied by the NSW Planning Department which specified the agricultural areas that are protected as significant agricultural holdings under the „The Northern Rivers Farmland Protection Project‟ (DIPNR 2005). At the time of the current research only properties for priority agricultural land in the northern part of the study area had been identified and mapped under this scheme. The spatial data supplied by NSW Planning Department included the proposed areas for protection within the southern part of the study area; therefore, the combined areas were included as a constraint to the agricultural scenario model. The combined areas are shown in Figure 7.3. ~ 202 ~ FIGURE 7.3: PROTECTED AGRICULTURAL LAND CONSTRAINT ~ 203 ~ 7.3 POPULATION This agricultural priority scenario used the same zoning, population growth and urban settlement density as the minimum constraints scenario. The levels of growth and the number of cells to be added for each zone by the placement algorithm were presented in Tables 5.1, 5.4, 5.7 and 5.10 in Chapter 5. 7.4 RESULTS The new urbanised areas for each population level were compared then merged with the 2004 Land Use Land Cover Map and are shown with extracts of the Far North Coast area in Figures 7.4-7.10 respectively. In comparison to the minimal constraints scenario, there is little difference at the population 403839 level and the most noticeable change is some increased urbanisation around Ballina and Byron Bay. At higher population levels, protection of the sugar cane belt that extends from Murwillumbah to Tweed Heads has seen increased urban development to the north and south of this area. Together with the protection of orchards and other areas to the immediate south, the new area of urban sprawl has significantly increased in its extent in a westerly direction north of Byron Bay. ~ 204 ~ As the orchards were only located in zone 4 and 5, their exclusion has not had an impact on other parts of the region. Protection of various agricultural lands to the south has had little impact elsewhere. FIGURE 7.4: AGRICULTURAL PRIORITY SCENARIO FOR POPULATION 403839 ~ 205 ~ FIGURE 7.5: AGRICULTURAL PRIORITY SCENARIO FOR POPULATION 403839, FAR NORTH COAST PORTION ~ 206 ~ FIGURE 7.6: AGRICULTURAL PRIORITY SCENARIO FOR POPULATION 558911 ~ 207 ~ FIGURE 7.7: AGRICULTURAL PRIORITY SCENARIO FOR POPULATION 558911, FAR NORTH COAST PORTION ~ 208 ~ FIGURE 7.8: AGRICULTURAL PRIORITY SCENARIO FOR POPULATION 727657 ~ 209 ~ FIGURE 7.9: AGRICULTURAL PRIORITY SCENARIO FOR POPULATION 727657, FAR NORTH COAST PORTION ~ 210 ~ FIGURE 7.10: AGRICULTURAL PRIORITY SCENARIO FOR POPULATION 955497 ~ 211 ~ FIGURE 7.11: AGRICULTURAL PRIORITY SCENARIO FOR POPULATION 955497, FAR NORTH COAST PORTION ~ 212 ~ 7.4.1 CHANGE TABLES The change in land use for each population level is presented below in Table 7.3 TABLE 7.3: LAND USE CHANGE FOR AGRICULTURAL PRIORITY SCENARIO Land Use / Population 2004 Population 403839 Population 558911 Population 727657 Population 955497 Total ha Total ha Change (ha) % Change Total ha Change (ha) % Change Total ha Change (ha) % Change Total ha Change (ha) % Change Coastal Complex 67563 61969 -5593 -8.28% 58182 -9380 -13.88% 55378 -12185 -18.03% 53000 -14562 -21.55% Forests 1205414 1195922 -9493 -0.79% 1190492 -14923 -1.24% 1182902 -22512 -1.87% 1169836 -35578 -2.95% Pasture/ Crops 713725 688519 -25206 -3.53% 680713 -33013 -4.63% 672652 -41073 -5.75% 662882 -50843 -7.12% Orchards 8730 21120 12391 141.94% 21120 12391 141.94% 21120 12391 141.94% 21120 12391 141.94% Sugar Cane 56069 54661 -1408 -2.51% 53510 -2559 -4.56% 52314 -3754 -6.70% 50987 -5082 -9.06% Urban 20148 49488 29340 145.63% 67670 47522 335.87% 87333 67185 433.46% 113917 93769 565.41% ~ 213 ~ The area attributed to urban settlement in the agricultural priority scenario is the same as in the minimal constraints scenario reaching a total area of 113917 hectares. As orchards expansion was projected and then protected from urban development, orchards have grown considerably and are a factor in the land use change for other classes. The amount of sugar cane production was reduced by 9.06% (5082 hectares) which is less than a third of the reduction in area under the minimal constraints scenario, and 2.42% less than the environmental priority scenario. The pasture and crops class lost 50843 hectares which was an increase in area lost compared to the minimal constraints scenario (43809 hectares). However, the difference of 7034 hectares is less than half of the increase in orchards which displaced almost 9000 hectares of pasture and crop land in their allocation. Overall, forests were reduced by 35578 hectares which was almost double the projected loss in the minimal constraints scenario. Most of the loss occurred in the area around Murwillumbah. Additionally the amount of coastal complex was reduced by a further 1680 hectares compared to the area lost under more the minimal constraints scenarios. Combined, a total of just over 50000 hectares of native vegetation was converted to urban development or to orchards in the population 955497 scenario. A breakdown by ecosystem type is presented in Table 7.4. ~ 214 ~ TABLE 7.4: LAND USE CHANGE BY ECOSYSTEM TYPE FOR AGRICULTURAL PRIORITY SCENARIOS Population 403839 Population 558911 Population 727657 Population 955497 ECOSYSTEM STATUS_A LULC 2004 Total (ha) Change (ha) % Change Total (ha) Change (ha) % Change Total (ha) Change (ha) % Change Total (ha) Change (ha) % Change unclassified 151111 145398 -5713 -3.78% 141796 -9315 -6.16% 137917 -13194 -8.73% 132461 -18650 -12.34% Baileys Stringybark 31076 30879 -197 -0.63% 30757 -320 -1.03% 30607 -469 -1.51% 30429 -647 -2.08% Banksia Rare 1336 1190 -146 - 10.91% 1078 -258 - 19.31% 1003 -333 -24.94% 883 -454 -33.95% Casuarina Woodland Rare 21 11 -10 - 48.66% 5 -16 - 74.78% 5 -16 -74.78% 5 -16 -74.78% Central Mid Elevation Sydney Blue Gum 3278 3278 0 -0.01% 3277 -1 -0.03% 3277 -1 -0.03% 3277 -1 -0.04% Clarence Lowland Needlebark Stringybark 10322 10266 -56 -0.54% 10219 -103 -1.00% 10146 -176 -1.71% 10036 -286 -2.77% Lowlands Grey Box Vulnerable 14455 14424 -31 -0.21% 14417 -37 -0.26% 14404 -51 -0.35% 14387 -67 -0.46% Coast Cypress Pine Rare 67 63 -4 -5.63% 63 -4 -5.82% 63 -4 -5.82% 62 -5 -6.94% Coast Range Bloodwood- Mahogany 5177 5153 -24 -0.46% 5129 -48 -0.94% 5102 -75 -1.45% 5060 -117 -2.26% Clarence Lowlands Spotted Gum 128339 128031 -308 -0.24% 127813 -526 -0.41% 127504 -835 -0.65% 126923 -1416 -1.10% Coast Range Spotted Gum- Blackbutt Rare 625 625 -1 -0.12% 622 -3 -0.53% 617 -8 -1.35% 600 -26 -4.14% Coastal Flooded Gum 8039 8038 0 0.00% 8033 -5 -0.07% 8020 -19 -0.23% 7925 -114 -1.42% Coastal Sands Blackbutt 2821 2798 -22 -0.79% 2784 -37 -1.31% 2770 -51 -1.82% 2760 -61 -2.17% Dry Foothills Blackbutt- Turpentine 2704 2695 -9 -0.32% 2688 -16 -0.59% 2676 -28 -1.02% 2669 -35 -1.29% Dry Foothills Spotted Gum 73800 73797 -3 0.00% 73794 -6 -0.01% 73789 -11 -0.01% 73783 -17 -0.02% ~ 215 ~ Dry Grassy Blackbutt- Tallowwood 5353 5324 -28 -0.53% 5300 -53 -0.98% 5264 -89 -1.66% 5219 -134 -2.50% Dry Grassy Tallowwood-Grey Gum 2167 2146 -22 -1.00% 2125 -42 -1.95% 2104 -63 -2.90% 2067 -100 -4.62% Dry Heathy Blackbutt- Bloodwood 42039 41744 -295 -0.70% 41529 -510 -1.21% 41243 -796 -1.89% 40807 -1232 -2.93% Dry Heathy Sandstone Blackbutt 16634 16575 -59 -0.35% 16536 -98 -0.59% 16488 -146 -0.88% 16426 -208 -1.25% Dry open Redgum-Broad Leaved Apple 1129 1129 0 0.00% 1129 0 0.00% 1129 0 0.00% 1129 0 0.00% Dunns White Gum Rare 291 291 0 0.00% 291 0 0.00% 291 0 0.00% 291 0 0.00% Eastern Red Gums Vulnerable 1774 1774 0 0.00% 1774 0 0.00% 1774 0 0.00% 1774 0 0.00% Escarpment Redgum 15211 15208 -3 -0.02% 15208 -3 -0.02% 15206 -5 -0.03% 15202 -8 -0.05% Escarpment Scribbly Gum- Apple 3583 3581 -2 -0.05% 3581 -2 -0.07% 3578 -5 -0.14% 3578 -5 -0.15% Wet Bangalow-Brushbox Vulnerable 8312 8248 -64 -0.77% 8126 -185 -2.23% 7890 -422 -5.07% 7494 -817 -9.83% Foothill Grey Gum-Ironbark- Spotted Gum 39837 39723 -114 -0.28% 39615 -221 -0.56% 39464 -372 -0.93% 39233 -604 -1.52% Foothills Grey Gum-Spotted Gum 5947 5922 -25 -0.43% 5903 -44 -0.74% 5876 -71 -1.20% 5833 -115 -1.93% Gorge Grey Gum 697 697 0 0.00% 697 0 0.00% 697 0 0.00% 697 0 -0.02% Gorge Ironbark-Grey Gum 22685 22684 -1 0.00% 22684 -1 -0.01% 22683 -2 -0.01% 22678 -7 -0.03% Heath Vulnerable 8138 7975 -164 -2.01% 7828 -310 -3.81% 7741 -398 -4.89% 7640 -498 -6.12% Heathy Scribbly Gum 7235 7183 -52 -0.71% 7141 -94 -1.29% 7064 -170 -2.36% 6988 -246 -3.41% Herbfield and Fjaeldmark Rare 25 22 -3 - 13.22% 21 -4 - 17.21% 20 -6 -22.19% 18 -8 -30.17% High Elevation Open Spotted 42550 42535 -15 -0.04% 42524 -26 -0.06% 42515 -36 -0.08% 42499 -52 -0.12% ~ 216 ~ Gum Ironbark 5467 5446 -21 -0.38% 5440 -27 -0.49% 5432 -35 -0.64% 5423 -44 -0.80% Low Relief Coastal Blackbutt Rare 310 183 -494 - 40.94% 626 -937 - 101.83 % 1209 -1519 - 289.43 % 1827 -2137 -488.66% Lowland Red Gum 43876 43817 -59 -0.14% 43748 -128 -0.29% 43647 -229 -0.52% 43512 -364 -0.83% Lowlands Scribbly Gum Vulnerable 3204 3188 -15 -0.48% 3181 -23 -0.71% 3171 -33 -1.03% 3159 -45 -1.40% Lowlands Spotted Gum-Box 15578 15552 -26 -0.17% 15529 -49 -0.31% 15504 -74 -0.47% 15493 -85 -0.54% Coastal Mallee Vulnerable 1240 1211 -29 -2.35% 1183 -57 -4.62% 1171 -69 -5.60% 1170 -70 -5.66% Mangrove Rare 395 395 0 0.00% 395 0 0.00% 395 0 0.00% 395 0 0.00% Moist Foothills Spotted Gum 30780 30775 -5 -0.02% 30770 -10 -0.03% 30760 -20 -0.06% 30741 -39 -0.13% Northern Moist Blackbutt 8700 8665 -35 -0.40% 8571 -128 -1.47% 8352 -347 -3.99% 7663 -1037 -11.92% Natural Grassland Rare 270 269 -1 -0.37% 268 -2 -0.79% 266 -4 -1.34% 265 -5 -1.71% Needlebark Stringybark-Large Fruited Blackbutt 9547 9484 -64 -0.67% 9435 -113 -1.18% 9376 -171 -1.79% 9277 -271 -2.83% New England Stringybark- Blakelys Red Gum 1067 1066 0 -0.04% 1066 -1 -0.07% 1065 -1 -0.13% 1064 -2 -0.21% Northern Grassy Sydney Blue Gum Vulnerable 2856 2856 0 0.00% 2855 -1 -0.04% 2855 -1 -0.04% 2854 -3 -0.09% Northern Open Grassy Blackbutt 18876 18781 -95 -0.50% 18684 -192 -1.02% 18469 -407 -2.16% 18152 -724 -3.83% Northern Ranges Dry Tallowwood 19608 19603 -6 -0.03% 19593 -16 -0.08% 19571 -38 -0.19% 19466 -142 -0.73% Northern Wet Brushbox 10532 10532 0 0.00% 10532 -1 0.00% 10531 -1 -0.01% 10506 -26 -0.25% Northern Wet Tallowwood- Blue Gum 14647 14646 0 0.00% 14646 0 0.00% 14646 0 0.00% 14633 -13 -0.09% ~ 217 ~ Open Coastal Brushbox 3440 3419 -21 -0.62% 3398 -43 -1.24% 3366 -74 -2.15% 3305 -135 -3.93% Open Shrubby Brushbox- Tallowwood 9663 9662 -1 -0.01% 9662 -1 -0.01% 9662 -1 -0.01% 9662 -1 -0.01% Paperbark Vulnerable 22405 21587 -818 -3.65% 20654 -1751 -7.81% 20016 -2389 -10.66% 19265 -3140 -14.01% Red Bloodwood Rare 207 206 -1 -0.63% 205 -2 -1.12% 203 -4 -1.96% 201 -6 -2.96% Red Mahogany 1251 1248 -2 -0.19% 1248 -3 -0.21% 1245 -5 -0.43% 1244 -7 -0.57% Richmond Range Spotted Gum 16415 16407 -9 -0.05% 16406 -9 -0.06% 16398 -18 -0.11% 16380 -35 -0.21% Richmond Range Spotted Gum-Box 17197 17196 -1 -0.01% 17196 -1 -0.01% 17195 -2 -0.01% 17195 -2 -0.01% River Oak Vulnerable 824 823 -1 -0.07% 822 -2 -0.24% 820 -4 -0.45% 819 -5 -0.63% Rough-barked Apples Vulnerable 1396 1396 -1 -0.04% 1396 -1 -0.05% 1395 -2 -0.11% 1391 -5 -0.36% Saltbush Rare 9 9 -1 -7.95% 8 -2 - 18.54% 7 -2 -25.17% 6 -3 -31.79% Sandstone Spotted Gum- Blackbutt 3870 3861 -9 -0.23% 3857 -13 -0.33% 3849 -20 -0.52% 3841 -29 -0.74% Sherwood Needlebark Stringybark 8249 8206 -43 -0.52% 8146 -103 -1.25% 8089 -159 -1.93% 8020 -228 -2.77% South Coast Tallowwood-Blue Gum 2569 2568 -1 -0.04% 2566 -3 -0.10% 2564 -5 -0.19% 2564 -5 -0.21% Stringybark-Apple 5044 5042 -2 -0.03% 5042 -2 -0.04% 5042 -3 -0.05% 5041 -3 -0.06% Swamp Endangered 11569 10872 -698 -6.03% 10387 -1183 - 10.22% 10133 -1437 -12.42% 10039 -1530 -13.23% Swamp Mahogany Rare 351 304 -46 - 13.21% 266 -84 - 24.05% 238 -113 -32.26% 226 -125 -35.65% Swamp Oak Rare 1946 1765 -181 -9.30% 1669 -277 - 14.23% 1579 -367 -18.87% 1530 -416 -21.37% ~ 218 ~ Sydney Peppermint- Stringybark Rare 205 205 0 0.00% 205 0 0.00% 205 0 0.00% 203 -2 -0.98% Tallowwood 3563 3562 -1 -0.03% 3561 -2 -0.05% 3561 -2 -0.05% 3561 -2 -0.05% Turpentine 2470 2400 -70 -2.82% 2277 -193 -7.83% 2096 -374 -15.13% 1813 -657 -26.60% Very Wet New England Blackbutt-Tallowwood 434 434 0 -0.03% 434 0 -0.03% 434 0 -0.03% 434 0 -0.03% Wattle 783 767 -17 -2.11% 747 -36 -4.57% 704 -79 -10.14% 635 -148 -18.87% Wet Bloodwood-Tallowwood 25677 25618 -58 -0.23% 25481 -196 -0.76% 25239 -437 -1.70% 24623 -1053 -4.10% Wet Coastal Tallowwood- Brushbox 1526 1516 -10 -0.64% 1500 -26 -1.70% 1490 -37 -2.40% 1474 -53 -3.44% Wet Flooded Gum- Tallowwood 5399 5316 -83 -1.54% 5136 -263 -4.86% 4797 -602 -11.15% 4170 -1229 -22.76% Wet Foothills Blackbutt- Turpentine 1014 1014 0 0.00% 1014 0 0.00% 1014 0 0.00% 1013 -1 -0.10% Yellow Box-Blakely's Red Gum Vulnerable 38 38 0 0.00% 38 0 0.00% 38 0 0.00% 38 0 0.00% Forestry Plantations 10325 10294 -30 -0.29% 10224 -101 -0.98% 10194 -131 -1.27% 10153 -172 -1.66% Improved Pasture and Cropland 507 507 -1 -0.14% 507 -1 -0.14% 507 -1 -0.14% 507 -1 -0.14% Introduced Scrub 989 989 0 0.00% 988 -1 -0.09% 984 -6 -0.56% 978 -11 -1.15% Rainforest Endangered 111641 111352 -288 -0.26% 110996 -645 -0.58% 110460 -1180 -1.06% 109324 -2317 -2.07% Scrub Vulnerable 4202 4060 -142 -3.38% 3873 -329 -7.83% 3683 -520 -12.36% 3508 -694 -16.52% Cleared-Partially Cleared 3118 3096 -22 -0.70% 3088 -30 -0.97% 3082 -37 -1.17% 3071 -48 -1.53% Camphor Laurel 6159 5858 -301 -4.89% 5480 -679 - 11.03% 5015 -1144 -18.57% 4151 -2008 -32.60% ~ 219 ~ In many cases the effect on native vegetation ecosystem areas has been more detrimental than the minimal constraints scenario. For example, at a population of 955497, the greatest change was experienced by Casuarina woodlands which lost 74.78% of its area, and swamp mahogany which lost 35.65% of the 2004 levels. While this is similar to the minimal constraints situation, the reduction in area for banksias was 33.95%, camphor laurel 32.6%, saltbush 31.79% and the herbfield and fjaeldmark class lost 30.17% of its 2004 extent. The loss in area for the latter classes is considerably greater than the loss projected in previous scenarios. With the exception of the non native camphor laurel, these ecosystems are all classified as rare and form part of the 12394 hectares of endangered, rare and threatened species that was converted to urban development or growth in orchards. This is approximately 3000 hectares more than minimal constraints scenarios and more than three times the loss expected in the environmental priority scenario. 7.5 SUMMARY The agricultural priority scenario provided protection to areas of sugar cane production and provided for expansion of orchards within the region. While the protection of pasture and crop lands was less strong, some of the loss within this class was in conversion to a “higher value” ~ 220 ~ agricultural land use, that of orchards. The constraints did protect what is considered the most important agricultural land within the region ensuring that these holdings were not lost from production. However the protection of agriculture has been at the expense of native vegetation. In particular, areas of rare and endangered species within the region were converted to urban settlement. The next chapter attempts to draw together protection of both, the environmental and agricultural areas through design constraints aimed at providing a better balance between the priorities of these land uses.